Officer Report

Application No.: 14/00868/B Applicant: Mr Darren & Mrs Sarah Brogan Proposal: Alterations and erection of extension to dwelling Site Address: 26 Clybane Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 2LP Case Officer : Miss Melissa McKnight Photo Taken: 13.08.2014 Site Visit: 13.08.2014 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of No. 26 Clybane Road, a two storey semi-detached property sited on the south western side of Clybane Road in Braddan. - 1.2 No. 28 Clybane Road immediately neighbours the property on the north western elevation. No. 24 Clybane Road neighbours the application site to the south east. Clybane Road is made up of broadly similar dwellings with regards to form, layout and appearance. There are a number of differences however as some properties have extended above the garage.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 This current planning application seeks approval for the conversion of the existing garage to create a dining room, the erection of an extension over to create a master en-suite bedroom, and the erection of a single storey garage to the rear elevation. - 2.2 With regards to the conversion of the garage, it is proposed to remove the existing garage door and install three pane window that would match the existing windows on the front elevation of the dwelling. The remaining aperture would be blocked up and rendered. There would also be brick detailing underneath to match the existing brick detailing on the front elevation of the dwelling beneath the other windows. - 2.3 The extension above the garage would add just less than 2.2 metres to the existing garage and would be set 0.2 metres lower than the ridge height of the main dwelling. It is also proposed to extend the garage to be in line with the front building line. There would be no alterations made to the existing width of the garage. - 2.4 The first floor front elevation windows would match the existing front elevation windows and would also incorporate the brick detailing below. The extension would be finished in materials to match the main dwellinghouse. - 2.5 The rear extension would replace an existing conservatory. The new rear extension would project roughly 4.2 metres from the rear elevation and would have a width of approximately 4.4 metres; same as the existing conservatory. The new dining room extension would have an overall height of 3.3 metres which includes a roof lantern. The single storey extension would be finished in materials to match the main house.

2.6 The proposal also includes the replacement of all the existing timber windows with brown PVC windows. This element of the proposal can be undertaken without planning permission under the provisions of Class 24 of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 Previously, planning approval was granted for the erection of a replacement conservatory in 2008 under PA 08/01155/B. - 3.2 No. 28 Clybane Road was granted planning permission for the conversion and extension to garage and construction of a first floor extension over, to provide additional living accommodation in 2007 under PA 07/00422/B. - 3.3 No. 18 Clybane Road was granted planning approval for an extension to dwelling over garage in 2001 under PA 01/00063/B.

4.0 PLANNING POLICY - 4.1 In terms of development plan policy, the application site is zoned as Predominantly Residential under the Braddan Local Plan 1991. - 4.2 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 contains two policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application:

General Policy 2 states: "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:

• (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief;
• (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them;
• (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape;
• (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses;
• (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea;
• (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks;
• (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality;
• (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space;
• (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways;
• (j) can be provided with all necessary services;
• (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan;
• (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding;
• (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and
• (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."

Paragraph 8.12.1 states: "As a general policy, in built up areas not controlled by Conservation Area or Registered

Building policies, there will be a general presumption in favour of extensions to existing property where such extensions would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent property or the surrounding area in general."

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 The Department of Infrastructure Highway Services do not oppose the current planning application. - 5.2 A representation has been received from the owners and/or occupiers of 46 Farmhill Meadows on grounds which have been summarised below:

• - Overlooking/loss of privacy as a result of the proximity to No. 46 Farmhill Meadows
• - Noise generated from the usage of the sunroom;
• - Light pollution will be caused as a result of roof style, larger windows and location of the sunroom;
• - Layout and density of the building is possibly overdevelopment of the site, perhaps approaching 80% of ground space, the sunroom represents an unacceptably high density/over development of the site especially since it involves loss of garden;
• - The mass, bulk and proximity of the rear elevation would represent an overbearing and intrusive element to those neighbours particularly at the rear;
• - The aspect and size of the windows result in overlooking of the garden of No. 46 Farmhill Meadows;
• - The height of the roof and windows of the side extension would be imposing and dominant;
• - Government policy;
• - Previous planning decisions (including appeal decisions);
• - Impact of the development on the trees between the application site and No. 46 Farmhill Meadow with regards to bird habitats and tranquillity;
• - Any excavation work could have a serious impact on the stability of the land; and
• - The development impacts upon the human rights with regard to having the right to the quiet enjoyment of their garden.

6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 There are three fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this current planning application which are; 1) the impact of the development on the residential amenity of No. 28 and 24 Clybane Road and No. 46 Farmhill Meadows; 2) impact of the proposal on the existing appearance of the dwelling; 3) the impact on the street scene of Clybane Road in general; and 4) impact upon parking and highway safety. - 6.2 RESIDENTIAL AMENITY

- 6.2.1 NO. 28 CLYBANE ROAD

• 6.2.1.1 As previously mentioned in this report, No. 28 Clybane Road immediately neighbours the application site on the northwest elevation. As such the element of the proposal that will most likely affect the residential amenity of the neighbouring property is the replacement of the existing conservatory with a new single storey extension.
• 6.2.1.2 No. 28 Clybane Road has a similar conservatory on the rear elevation which extends approximately 5 metres from its rear elevation. The extension proposed for No. 26 Clybane Road would be 0.6 metres less than the neighbouring conservatory. In addition to this, the rear garden of No. 28 Clybane Road is set roughly 0.5 metres above the application site. Therefore, the proposed extension would be 0.4 metres lower than the conservatory of No. 28 Clybane Road.

• 6.2.1.3 Overall, the erection of the extension to replace the existing conservatory is deemed to have a minimal impact upon the residential amenity of No. 28 Clybane Road.

- 6.2.2 NO. 24 CLYBANE ROAD

• 6.2.2.1 Given the siting of the dwellings and distance from the rear extension proposed, it is assumed that the side extension would be the only element of the development that may potentially impact upon the amenity of No. 24 Clybane Road.
• 6.2.2.2 The main considerations to look at with regards to the first floor extension are overlooking, overbearing and loss of light.
• 6.2.2.3 Given that the first floor window on the rear elevation of the side extension would have obscured glazing, it is judged that there would not be any further levels of overlooking as a result of a first floor window than what could be achieved from one simply using the garden.
• 6.2.2.4 The proposed extension would be just less than 3 metres from the timber fence boundary shared with No. 24 Clybane Road, and between 4 to 5 metres from the main dwelling itself. There is a single window on the western elevation of No. 24 Clybane Road which is thought to serve a bathroom or staircase given the size of the window. However, one cannot assume what this window serves and as such should be assessed accordingly with regards to outlook. At present there is not much of an outlook from this window given the position of the application site dwelling and proximity to the neighbouring property. At the moment the outlook from the window conservatory is of the garage roof and existing gable wall of the application site dwelling.
• 6.2.2.5 The development proposed would be no closer to No. 24 Clybane Road in terms of the current position of the garage; however the extension above the garage would result in the upper portion of No. 28 Clybane Road being closer.
• 6.2.2.6 What to consider is whether the outlook from the side window of rear No. 24 Clybane Road would be adversely impacted by the proposed works. On balance, it is considered that the extension, whilst being closer to the neighbouring dwelling than the existing gable end, would not impact upon the current outlook as viewed from No. 24 Clybane Road to a scale that would warrant refusal of the application.
• 6.2.2.7 With regards to impact upon light, given the orientation of the dwellings, the proposal is not considered to result in a high level of loss of light. There may be slightly less light received as the sun sets but not a significant amount more than what already occurs as a result of the two storey dwelling.

- 6.2.3 NO. 46 FARMHILL MEADOWS

• 6.2.3.1 A representation was received from the owners and/or occupiers of No. 46 Farmhill Meadows objecting to the planning application on a number of grounds. It is therefore essential to look at each objection separately.
• 6.2.3.2 With regards to concerns relating to overlooking. The sunroom extension would be roughly 4.5 metres from the rear boundary of the application site and just less than 6 metres from the northern boundary of No. 46 Farmhill Meadows and garden. Between the two dwellings is a substantial boundary treatment of hedging and mature trees. Photographs were taken from No. 46 Farmhill Meadows shows that show there are partial views from the rear garden of No. 46 Farmhill Meadows into the application site. Again, from the application site there are extremely limited views into the rear garden of No. 46 Farmhill Meadows. As such,

• the extension is not considered to result in significant levels of overlooking to warrant a reason for refusal. As stated in Paragraph 6.2.2.3 of this report, the first floor window on the rear elevation of the side extension would have obscured glazing, it is judged that there would not be any further increased levels of overlooking as a result of this additional first floor window.
• 6.2.3.3 Concerns have also raised regarding increased noise levels as a result of the use extension in terms of the building being closer to No. 46 Farmhill Meadows. The render, block work finish of the extension would actually confine and contain noise more than a fully glazed conservatory. Notwithstanding this, greater noise is created from one simply using their garden. Besides, in the north western corner of No. 46 Farmhill Meadows appears to be a manmade raised garden feature which has been created directly on the boundary of the dwelling. It is more likely that more noise would be generated from one using the raised garden area of No. 46 Farmhill Meadows given its proximity to No. 28 and 26 Clybane Road and elevation than being within the extension. In conclusion, noise is not considered an issue with this proposal.
• 6.2.3.4 Another concern raised, was the impact of the roof style, additional windows and location of the sun room resulting in exacerbated light pollution. The design of the sun room has omitted a fully glazed structure. There would be two three pane windows on the southern elevation of the sunroom as opposed to a complete glazed elevation. The roof lantern will actually direct light upwards and will certainly not display as much light as the existing pitched fully glazed conservatory roof. Overall it is considered that there will be less light pollution than produced by the existing conservatory.
• 6.2.3.5 Further parts of the objection related to the overall size of the development proposed relating to the loss of the garden and the side extension appearing imposing and constituting over development of the site. The proposed rear extension measures just less than 19 square metres, the overall rear garden, as existing, has an area of approximately just less than 80sqm. As such, once erected and in comparison with the existing conservatory, there will be the loss of roughly 9sqm of garden space. The application site would have a garden area of around 71sqm after the extension which is considered acceptable. With regards to the extension above the garage, the rear elevation is stepped in slightly from the rear building line which assists in breaking up a continuous building line and reducing the overall impact of development. Overall, the development proposed is not considered to constitute overdevelopment of the site. In addition, the substantial boundary treatment reduces the visual impact of development.
• 6.2.3.6 Further concerns were raised regarding the impact of the development on trees and future loss of the trees. The proposal would not encroach onto any trees and the planning application states that no trees are to be lopped or felled as a result of the application.
• 6.2.3.7 On assessment, the development contained within this planning application is considered to have a minimal impact upon the residential amenity of No. 46 Farmhill Meadows given the substantial boundary treatment and distance of development.

- 6.3 EXISTING DWELLING

• 6.3.1 The two proposed extensions would be finished to match the main dwelling in terms of the windows, render and roof tiles and from a design point of view are judged to respect the design and proportions of the dwelling and are not considered to have an adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the existing dwelling.

6.4 STREET SCENE

• 6.4.1 In regards to the street scene of Clybane Road, No. 28 Clybane Road has had a similar

extension above the garage. Although the extension would not be stepped back from the front building line, it would be stepped down and would be a more or less mirror image of No. 28 Clybane Road that also brought the garage in line with the front building line and built above.

• 6.4.2 In addition to the above, the extension would be finished in materials and detailing that would match the main dwelling and therefore is deemed an acceptable form of development. The rear extension would not be visible from Clybane Road and as such this element of the proposal would have a limited, if any, impact upon the street scene of Clybane Road.

6.5 IMPACT UPON PARKING AND HIGHWAY SAFETY

• 6.5.1 With regards to the conversion of the garage, the dwelling has a driveway measuring roughly 6.1 metres wide and just less than 5 metres in length. The standard dimensions for an off-road residential parking space is 6 metres long and 3.25 metres wide. The average length of a medium sized car is around 5 metres. As such, it has been accepted that a relaxation of parking space measurement standards can be relaxed in this case as proposed the driveway would be able to accommodate the parking of two medium sized cars without prejudicing the safety of the highway or flow of traffic. It is also necessary to point out that the Highway Services do not oppose the current planning application and have been in discussion with the applicant at pre-application stage.

7.0 OTHER MATTERS - 7.1 Concerns were also raised from the owners and/or occupiers of No. 46 Farmhill Meadows regarding the impact of development on the boundary fence and the stability of the land. These issues are not considered material planning matters and therefore hold no weight in the determination of this planning application.

8.0 RECOMMENDATION - 8.1 Overall, it is concluded that the planning application is in accordance with General Policy 2 and Paragraph 8.12.1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007. - 8.2 It is recommended that the planning application be permitted.

9.0 PARTY STATUS - 9.1 In line with Article 6(4) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure)(No2) Order 2013, the following Persons are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application: the applicant or, if there is one, the applicant's agent; the owner and occupier of the land the subject of the application, Highway Services, and the Local Authority in whose district the land the subject of the application sits. - 9.2 In line with Article 6(3) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure)(No2) Order 2013 and paragraph 2(1) of Government Circular No. 01/13, the following persons who have made representation to the planning application are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application: The owners and/or occupiers of No. 46 Farmhill Meadows, neighbour to the application site.

Recommendation

Recommended Decision: Permitted

Date of Recommendation:

04.09.2014

Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal

C : Conditions for approval

• N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
• O : Notes attached to refusals

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

This approval relates to Location Plan, Site Plan, Sheet 1/1 and Sheet 1/1 Sketch's 2 date stamped as received on 18th July 2007.

I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control /Head of Development Management/ Senior Planning Officer.

Decision Made : Permitted Date : 05/09/14 Determining officer (delete as appropriate) Signed :…………………………………….. Chris Balmer Senior Planning Officer Signed :…………………………………….. Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer Signed : Michael Gallagher Michael Gallagher Director of Planning and Building Control Signed :…………………………………….. Jennifer Chance Head of Development Management