Officer Report

Application No.: 24/91338/B Applicant: Ms Patricia Ingram Proposal: Demolition of single storey rear extension and erection of a replacement single storey rear extension (in association with 24/91337/CON) Site Address: 15 Hatfield Grove Douglas Isle Of Man IM1 3HE Principal Planner: Chris Balmer Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 13.01.2025 _________________________________________________________________

Conditions and Notes for Approval

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions

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 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.

Overall, it is considered the proposal would comply with the relevant policies of the Isle Of Man Strategic Plan, Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999) and Section 19 of the 1999 Town and Country Planning Act.

Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawing all received on 26.11.2024.

_________________________________________________________________ Right to Appeal It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal: DOI Highways - no interest Douglas Council - No Objection.

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given the Right to Appeal as they have submitted an objection that meets the specified criteria:

17 Hatfield Grove, Douglas

_________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The site is 15 Hatfield Grove, Douglas, a mid-terrace house located on the south of Hatfield Grove. There is an attached mono-pitched-roof rear outrigger on the rear elevation which accommodates the kitchen and bathroom. The property also has an enclosed walled yard.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The application seeks full approval for the Demolition of single storey rear extension and erection of a replacement single storey rear extension (in association with 24/91337/CON), namely the works include; the demolition of rear single storey outrigger, which is then proposed to be replaced with a new single storey extension which is under consideration of planning application 24/91338/B. The rear wall/pedestrian gate are to be retained.

3.0 KEY DOCUMENTS - 3.1 Material Considerations Town and County Planning Act 1999 - 3.2 Section 10(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act states: "In dealing with an application for planning approval… the Department shall have regard to -

• (a) The provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application,
• (b) Any relevant statement of planning policy under section 3;
• (c) Such other considerations as may be specified for the purpose of this subsection in a development order or a development procedure order, so far as material to the application; and
• (d) All other material considerations."

3.3 Section 16(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999) states, "In considering (a) whether to grant planning approval for development which affects a registered building or its setting, or (b) whether to grant registered building consent for any works, the relevant Department shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses". - 3.4 Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999) states, "(4) Where any area is for the time being a conservation area, special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing its character or appearance in the exercise, with respect to any buildings or other land in the area, of any powers under this Act". - 3.5 In light of (a) above, it is considered that two key documents are:

• o Area Plan for the South; and
• o The Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016).

Area Plan for the East 2020

3.6 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the East as predominantly residential, and within a Conservation Area. The site is not in an area at risk of flooding. The Building is also a Registered Building Nr 210. Isle of Man Strategic Plan (adopted 2016)

3.7 In light of the above, it is considered the policies from the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (adopted 2016) set out below are relevant in the determination of this application. - 3.8 Strategic Policy 4 states: "Proposals for development must:

• (a) Protect or enhance the fabric and setting of Ancient Monuments, Registered Buildings (1), Conservation Areas (2), buildings and structures within National Heritage Areas and sites of archaeological interest;
• (b) protect or enhance the landscape quality and nature conservation value of urban as well as rural areas but especially in respect to development adjacent to Areas of Special Scientific Interest and other designations; and

• (c) not cause or lead to unacceptable environmental pollution or disturbance."

3.9 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."

3.10 Environment Policy 32 states: "Extensions or alterations to a Registered Building which would affect detrimentally its character as a building of special architectural or historic interest will not be permitted." - 3.11 Environment Policy 34 states: "In the maintenance, alteration or extension of pre1920 buildings, the use of traditional materials will be preferred." - 3.12 Environment Policy 35 states: "Within Conservation Areas, the Department will permit only development which would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Area, and will ensure that the special features contributing to the character and quality are protected against inappropriate development." - 3.13 Planning Policy Statement 1/01 - Conservation Of The Historic Environment Of The Isle Of Man - 3.14 Residential Design Guide 2021

- 4.0 PLANNING HISTORY

4.1 The following applications are considered relevant in the determination of this current application; - 4.2 Registered Building Consent for demolition aspects to PA 24/91338/B - 24/01337/CONPENDING CONSIDERATION - 4.3 Demolition of existing single storey extension and erection of a 2-storey extension to the rear of the property - 24/91039/B - REFUSED on the following ground; "R 1. The proposed two-storey rear extension would result in an overshadowing and overbearing impact on neighbouring properties to the detriment of their amenity. Therefore, the proposal is not considered to comply with General Policy 2 (g) of the Strategic Plan and Section 6 of the Residential Design Guide." - 4.4 Registered Building Consent for demolition aspects to 24/91039/B - 24/01072/CON APPROVED. - 4.5 Installation of replacement windows and doors and creation of double doors from an existing rear window - 24/91004/B- APPROVED - 4.6 Demolition of single-storey extension and erection of rear two-storey extension 24/00522/B - REFUSED on the following grounds; "R 1. The proposed two-storey rear extension worsens the existing overshadowing and overbearing impact on 17 Hatfield Grove. It is considered failing to comply with General Policy

• 2 (g) of the Strategic Plan and the Residential Design Guide."

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only. - 5.2 Douglas Borough Council make no objection (06.12.2024). - 5.3 Highway Services comment there is no highway interest (03.12.2024 & 16.12.2024). - 5.4 The owners/occupiers of 17 Hatfield Grove, Douglas have objected to the application which can be summarised (20.12.24); We have serious concerns over the demolishing of this building, linked with Asbestos and the implications for our property and how they intend to not only demolish this concerning the material aspect and the rebuilding of this, without access to our land, which we will never provide or agree to; planning policy, Strategic Policy 4, particular reference to (b) & (c) - respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them - we believe no consideration has been given with this particular point in respect of the impact to our property 17 Hatfield Grove; With regard to the overshadowing and the overbearing, aspect, the application does not explain the impact on the amenities to our property other than they state this is minimal. Once again, we remain that the application does not provide clear height for the apex of the roof, and this could have an impact regarding overbearing and overshadowing on our property; reiterates concerns of previous scheme.

6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 Main Issues

• o Statutory test (Town and County Planning Act 1999);
• o Potential impacts upon the Conservation Area and the visual amenities of the street scenes (StP 4, GP 2, EP 4, 30, 32, 34, 35 & 42 of the IOMSP); and
• o Potential impacts upon neighbouring amenities (GP2 & Residential Design Guide). Statutory test

6.2 Prior to the assessment elements of this application, it is necessary to apply the Conservation Area statutory test as referenced in section 3.4 of this assessment on whether the proposal would preserve or enhance the Conservation Area. - 6.3 It is note Registered Building Consent has already been approved for the same proposal, i.e. the demolition of the rear outrigger. This application has been resubmitted for the avoidance of doubt given the previously Registered Building Consent related to a refused planning application. - 6.4 The loss of the rear outrigger again is not considered to detract from the special character of the Conservation Area and therefore no objections to the proposal complying with the statutory test. There is also no concern with the demolition of the rear wall/pedestrian gate and rebuilt with a pedestrian gate. Impacts upon the Conservation Area and the visual amenities of the street scenes - 6.5 The Planning Department has a duty to determine whether such proposals are in keeping with not only the individual building, but the special character and quality of the area as a whole. With this in mind it is very relevant to consider Environment Policy 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (adopted June 2016). This policy indicates that development within Conservation Areas will only be permitted if they would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Area, and will ensure that the special features contributing to the character and quality are protected against inappropriate development. Further, Sections 18(3) and 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999) as mentioned above, also requires that the desirability of preserving or enhancing its character or appearance in the exercise. - 6.6 The single storey rear extension is of the same footprint as the existing and its proportion, form, finish and overall design would be in keeping with the property and the terrace. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to comply with GP2 and the Residential Design Guide. Potential impacts upon neighbouring amenities - 6.7 Concern of previous refused applications related to the first floor extension, rather than the single storey element. This current application overcomes that concern by omitting the first floor element. No refusal reasons related to the single storey element of the previous schemes (PA 24/91039/B & 24/00522/B), rather the concerns of the first floor element of the works and the impacts upon the neighbouring amenities, namely overshadowing and overbearing impacts. The new proposal is on the same footprint as the existing single storey rear outrigger. The proposed single storey extension is taller (roof ridge of new extension has height of 3.7m, set 1.5m away from boundary with Nr 17) compared to the existing single storey outrigger (has a maximum height of 3.4m). The new western wall of the extension (forms the new boundary wall between site and Nr 17) would also be taller in height by approximately 0.6m over the existing and therefore the mass of the extension is greater than what currently exists. - 6.8 It is noted that there are two windows (kitchen & bathroom) within the rear single storey outrigger of Nr 17 which directly face towards the proposal. Further there is a dining room window within the rear elevation of this neighbouring dwelling. The existing arrangement already results in a potential impacts upon residential amenities, as with the majority if not all the terraced properties of this type in the area. While the proposal which would increase the boundary wall height and therefore it cannot be argued that the impact would have a lesser impact compared to the existing situation; in this case, it is not considered this increase would be so adverse or significant to warrant a refusal, albeit accepting it would have a greater impact upon outlook and/or loss of light compared to the existing situation. Other Mattes

6.9 The Department did advise the applicants that the initial scheme appeared to overhang/project into the neighbouring property, namely Nr17 to the west of the site. The Department did advise that ownership is not a material planning matter and would not be a reason for the application to be refused, rather a civil matter between the relevant parties. However, it was recommend the applicants consider this. They subsequently amended the scheme to try address this. There are potentially some elements (gutter) that overhangs (similar to existing situation); however, as outline it is not a reason to refuse the scheme. - 6.10 In terms of matters of construction impacts and preventing entry onto land; namely while building the extension, again these are not material planning matters rather civil matters between the relevant parties.

7.0 CONCLUSION - 7.1 Overall, it is considered the proposal would comply with the relevant policies of the Isle Of Man Strategic Plan, Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999) and Section 19 of the 1999 Town and Country Planning Act and General Policy 2, Environmental Policy 35 of the IOM Strategic Plan and Residential Design Guide therefore it is recommended that the application be approved.

8.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE - 8.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted). - 8.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to:

• o applicant (in all cases);
• o a Local Authority; Government Department; Manx Utilities; and Manx National Heritage that submit a relevant objection; and
• o any other person who has made an objection that meets specified criteria.

8.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10. - 8.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required):

• o any appellant or potential appellant (which includes the applicant);
• o the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, the Department of Infrastructure and the local authority for the area;
• o any other person who has submitted written representations (this can include other Government Departments and Local Authorities); and
• o in the case of a petition, a single representative.

8.5 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given the Right to Appeal.

I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management 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, and/or rights to appeal.

Decision Made : Permitted Date : 21.01.2025 Determining Officer

Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management

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