DEC Officer Report

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Application No.: 22/01123/B Applicant: Mrs Janet Quane Proposal: Variation of condition 3 of PA 08/02339/B to use ancillary accommodation as a dwelling (class 3.3) (Retrospective) Site Address: 13 Harcroft Avenue Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 1PF Senior Planning Officer: Mr Jason Singleton Photo Taken: 18.05.2023 Site Visit: 18.05.2023 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 06.06.2023 _________________________________________________________________ R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons Reasons for Refusal - R 1. Given the relationship of the house to surrounding properties (in terms of orientation, distance and relative levels) the lack of a clear, dedicated and usable garden and the lack of a pleasant outlook, it is considered that the proposal would result in an unsatisfactory standard of amenity for future occupiers and so it is considered to be contrary to General Policy 2g Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. - R 2. The size, shape and layout of the site together with the lack of suitable amenity space for occupiers indicate that the proposal is inappropriate back land development and overdevelopment of the site. As such it is considered contrary to policy GP2 parts b and c, and Environment Policy 42 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. - R 3. The proposal is contrary to General Policy 2 b in that it does not respect the site and its surroundings in terms of layout, form, design and the landscaping of the buildings and the spaces around them. The design and appearance would be seen as cramped development on this site. - R 4. By virtue of the siting, length and proximity of the new driveway in relation to the existing residential properties of No.11 and no.13, it is considered the likely noise and disturbances caused by the passage of cars up and down the driveway and manoeuvring into the parking area would adversely affect the living conditions of those residing at No.11 and No.13 and be contrary to Environment Policy 42 and General Policy g and H of the Isle of man Strategic Plan.

_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of an existing dwelling situated on the southern side of Harcroft Avenue on a wider residential estate. The property is a detached bungalow with a pitch tiled roof and an adjacent structure to the east of the neighbouring boundary with No.11. - 1.2 The character of the area are generally detached bungalows which are set back from the highway with gardens to the front and garages located towards one side and set back from the front building line of the property to allow for off road parking. The front of the properties here are generally open

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Proposed is the Variation of condition 3 of PA 08/02339/B to use ancillary accommodation as a dwelling (class 3.3) (Retrospective). - 2.2 The proposal does not involve any physical alterations to the dwelling house or outbuilding (ancillary accommodation) but seeks to remove the condition to allow the property to become separated from the main dwelling house as a standalone dwelling. - 2.3 The proposal is show to utilise the same access and driveway as per the existing and would see the removal of part of the front garden area of the dwelling to allow for additional parking.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY - 3.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is within an area recognised as being predominantly residential use on Map 4 "Douglas" under the Area Plan for the East. The site is not within a conservation area or within an area identified as being at flood risk. - 3.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this application; - 3.3 Strategic Policy 2 Strategic Policy 5 General Policy 2 Environment Policy 42 Housing Policy 4 - 3.4 Residential Design Guidance provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property.

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 4.1 The application site benefits from the following approvals; - 4.2 11/00836/B - Widening of driveway and access onto highway. Approved.

4.3 08/02339/B - Conversion and extension to garage to provide ancillary living accommodation (comprising an amendment to 08/00983/B). Approved.

• C.1 The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
• C.2 This permission relates to the conversion and extension of the garage to provide ancillary living accommodation as shown in drawing numbers 2339/1, 2339/2 and 05 Rev B date stamped 23rd December 2008.
• C.3 The approved converted garage and extension must remain ancillary to the use and enjoyment of the main dwellinghouse.
• C.4 No facing and roofing materials shall be used other than materials similar to those used on the existing building.

4.4 08/00983/B - Conversion and extension to garage to provide ancillary living accommodation. Approved;

• C.1 The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
• C.2 This approval relates to the conversion and extension to the existing garage to provide ancillary accommodation, 13 Harcroft Avenue, Douglas as shown by the plans and information 01, 02, 03, 04, 05 and 06 submitted and date stamped 13th May 2008.
• C.3 The approved converted garage must remain ancillary to the use and enjoyment of the property 13 Harcroft Avenue, Douglas
• C.4 The external finishes of the extension must match those of the existing garage in all respects.
• C.5 There must be no discharge of surface water to the main foul sewer.

- 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Douglas Borough Council (16/05/23) No Objection. - 5.2 Highways Services commented (14/05/23) No Objection.

6.0 ASSESSMENT The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are;

• - Principle of development (ST2)
• - Design and visual impact (STP5, GP2b&c , EP42)
• - Impact upon neighbouring amenity (GP2, g)
• - Highway Safety (GP2h&i)
• - Personal Circumstances PRINCIPLE

6.1 The site falls within the settlement boundary of Douglas and within an area zoned for residential development, which guides us to Strategic Policy 2 and Housing Policy 4 which seek that new housing will be located primarily within existing towns and villages. General Policy 2 indicates that development that accords with the land use zoning and other policies of the development plan will normally be permitted, provided that it meets certain criteria. Criterion (g) requires that it should not adversely affect the amenity of local residents. Criterion (h) requires that it should provide a satisfactory standard of amenity. - 6.2 However, Environment Policy 42 of the Strategic Plan provides that "… inappropriate back land development, and the removal of open or green spaces which contribute to the

• visual amenity … of a particular area, will not be permitted". The narrative preceding EP42 gives further clarity on back land development at paragraph 7.34.1 of the Strategic Plan indicates that; "back land development which is development on the land at the back of properties) may also be acceptable in some circumstances, but only if satisfactory access can be achieved and if there is sufficient space to provide adequate amenity for both new and existing adjoining dwellings". Backland development is defined in the SP in Appendix 1 as; "Development on land at the back of existing properties, usually on what were the back gardens, and often without a separate road frontage".
• 6.3 The starting point here was the original permission for the conversion of the existing garage and to include a rear extension to the garage to form ancillary accommodation that is accessed through the gap between No.11 and No.13 Harcroft Avenue. The condition attached limiting the occupation, ensured the permission was carried out in what was advertised and that the use would be in conjunction with the main dwelling house. As such the creation of a separate dwelling was not the issue then and not assessed as such. This application is essentially creating a new dwelling to the rear of the existing dwelling with a shared access.
• 6.4 Given the above narrative of back land development, the principle of separating the two properties to create a separate form of independent planning unit would be read at odds with Ep42 and would not be supported. DESIGN AND VISUAL IMPACT
• 6.5 The proposed development would be consistent with the "predominantly residential" designation of this area in the Area plan for the East, Douglas'. Whilst there are no physical alterations to the building, the status quo of its visual appearance is minimal, but the application seeks to create a separate form of accommodation and as such will be assessed as such.
• 6.6 There are concerns regarding the size and layout of the property which would offer a total internal footprint off, approx. 42m2 (when scale of the submitted drawings). Whilst there is no specific guidance for sizes of residential accommodation in the strategic plan, we can refer to the Housing (Standards) Regulations 2017 whilst this refers to flats, we can attain an idea of acceptable standards of living. Here this list on on page 9 a Net floor are for permanent accommodation of 31sqm- 45sqm to have a maximum occupancy of 1 person.
• 6.7 The outlook from the internal principle rooms of the property are north facing and would not offer a clear and present outlook and would be inherently dark being the only windows to the property. Internally this could be oppressive for future occupants. Whilst this would be subjective, the department cannot support substandard forms of accommodation.
• 6.8 In terms of the character of the area, this size of accommodation would be read at odds with the surrounding larger properties that make up the residential context of the area and would be seen as an obtrusive, unnatural and completely out-of-place design on this site which would be contrary to STP5 and GP2(b) and (c). NEIGHBOURING AMENITY
• 6.9 In terms of any adverse impact upon the amenity standards upon No.13, No.11, and of the occupants of the converted garage that is subject to this application need to be assessed. Possible issues could be overlooking, loss of light, over bearing impact, privacy and visual amenity.
• 6.10 The proposal would through its severance would create two aspects of amenity and residential curtilage. The applicant has indicated what would be the curtilage of the application site, this would be 3m projecting out from the west elevation by 6m long and cut across back to the southernmost corner of the property where an access of approx. 1m wide gate would allow access to this area. This area would (assumed) be fenced off with a 1.8m high fence to

• offer a degree of privacy for both parties, which would create an oppressive position for both occupants and an unacceptable level of outlook for occupants of the new dwelling. The RDG and SP both highlight the importance of garden space and private outdoor areas for dwellings to which this proposal does not comply with, which further highlights the inappropriate nature of the severance of the two properties.
• 6.11 In terms of vehicle movements we have to consider that there are windows in the side elevations of No11 and 13 that currently face onto the driveway. This proposal would create additional use of the driveway that would pass close to the side elevation of the house that would create an uncomfortable situation which could have a detrimental impact upon the living conditions of both properties from the coming and goings. Although the Applicant currently owns No.13 and the converted garage, it is important to note that ownership of each of these properties could change; and that planning approval would run with the land.
• 6.12 In view of these factors, it is considered that the present proposal would constitute unacceptable back land development, as described in paragraph 7.34.1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016; and would be contrary to Environment Policy 42, and General Policy 2 (g) and of that plan. HIGHWAY SAFETY
• 6.13 Parking spaces would be provided for the proposed house and No.13 in accordance with the current parking standard, in this case the drawings show two spaces in tandem and the existing house would require part of the front garden to be converted from grass to a hard standing and a Section 109 agreement would be needed to widen the access onto the highway and planning consent. Highway Services have raised no objection to the proposed scheme, and in their remit of 'Manual for Manx Roads' the proposed development would be acceptable on road safety grounds. However, this would then be read at odds with the residential design guide where at para 6.3.9 it notes where more than 50% of the front length being given over to parking would not be supported to ensure the character of the streetscape is retained. As such this aspect would fail this part of the RDG which in turn would have an adverse visual impact upon the character of the area and would be contrary to GP2 STP5, GP2 and EP42. PERSONAL CIRCUMSTANCES.
• 6.14 Whist it is noted in the applicants supporting statement the special circumstances of the applicant finds themselves in is unfortunate. However, it is necessary to assess whether these personal circumstance are sufficient to outweigh the arguments against the proposed development. In planning terms there is no exceptional policy provision to meet such a personal need. Such needs, whist acute within the lifetime of those affected, are by nature transient when compared with the long-term effects of otherwise unwarranted permanent built development.

- 7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 The planning application would be an unacceptable form of development that has been would harm the use and enjoyment of neighbouring properties and have an adverse impact upon the character of the streetscene that would be contrary to Strategic Policy 5, General Policy 2 and Environmental Policy 42 and the principles of the Residential Design Guide. - 8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf);
• (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure;
• (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;

• (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and
• (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material. 8.2 The decision maker must determine:

• o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and
• o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status.

I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.

Decision Made : Refused Date: 13.06.2023 Determining officer

Signed : C BALMER Chris Balmer Principal Planner

Customer note This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.