Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
18/00508/B Page 1 of 8
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 18/00508/B Applicant : Mr Mike & Mrs Carol Dee Proposal : Alterations, erection of extension, creation of bin store, and installation of replacement windows, fencing, solar panels, satellite dish, oil tank and replacement entrance canopy Site Address : Close-Y-Chairm 4 The Crofts Castletown Isle of Man IM9 1LY
Principal Planner: Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken : 21.06.2018 Site Visit : 21.06.2018 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 06.08.2018 __
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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 2. The replacement windows must be sliding sash and incorporate horns underneath the upper sash, to match those existing windows that have such details.
Reason: The original windows, if of this style, would have had horns and this is considered appropriate given the location of the property within a Conservation Area.
C 3.The oil tank and any surrounding fencing that may be required, may not be installed until such times as a drawing and supporting information which illustrates the position of the tank and any fencing has been approved by the Department. The drawing and information must demonstrate how the tank will be installed without immediate or consequent need to remove the existing vegetation which runs alongside the existing boundary with the garage and must identify clearly and accurately the position of any trees and their root spread which must be avoided in the installation of anything which requires excavation or where appropriate measures are taken to avoid damage to the tree(s). The oil tank and any fencing must be installed in accordance with this information.
Reason: The existing vegetation not only contributes to the character of the area but will also screen the proposed tank and should be retained if practicable.
==== PAGE 2 ====
18/00508/B Page 2 of 8
C 4. No new roof tiles may be installed until such times as the details of any new tiles have been approved by the Department and the tiles must be installed in accordance with these details. The tiles must appear as natural slates to match what would have been the original roof material of the property.
Reason: The property is within a Conservation Area and any materials should replicate the originals where practicable.
Plans/Drawings/Information:
This decision relates to drawings 1711-100, 1711-101 and 1711-102 all received on 15th May, 2018.
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):
Garey Voallit (Mrs R.A Whetstone and Dr. Sarah Whetstone) as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (July 2018).
It is recommended that the following organisation should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):
The Isle of Man Victorian Society as they do not own or occupy property that is within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy and they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (July 2018).
__
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE PROPOSALS
THE SITE 1.1 The site is the curtilage of an existing dwelling, 4, The Crofts which is half of a pair of semi- detached houses which sit on the north western side of The Crofts, towards its north eastern end. To the south west of the property is a modern, detached dwelling, Garey Voallit and to the north east is the other half of the pair, number 2. To the north east of that is another modern property, Croft Beg.
1.2 The pair of properties, numbers 2 and 4 are different from each other in many ways: number 4 is taller and wider and whilst number 2 is a relatively simple traditional cottage, number 4 has a heavy parapet wall which hides much of the roof, two sets of two storey
==== PAGE 3 ====
18/00508/B Page 3 of 8
projecting three sided, angled bays and a painted finish which covers over heavily pointed regular coursed stonework. The front door of the application property is a solid, panelled one with a rectangular fanlight above and shielded by a flat canopy supported by two metal brackets, painted black.
1.3 The application property has two first floor windows in the south western gable which is visible from the street, the gable being finished in unpainted stonework and with a striking profile of the double pitch with a matching chimney breast on each.
1.4 The rear of the property is not publicly visible and is plainer than the front, with two single storey annexes, one being built on the boundary with number 2 and number 2 having a similar annex on the other side of its rear garden.
1.5 The rear garden of number four is in two parts: there is a small yard and narrow walkway from the vehicular access, between the rear gardens of Garey Voallit and number 2. On the north western side of the vehicular parking area, which includes a double garage, there is a much larger garden which has trees and shrubs forming the boundary with the parking area and a pedestrian gate within the wall which separates the two areas. At some point, the rear garden immediately behind number 4 has been absorbed into the rear garden of number 2. Immediately behind the small rear yard, on the boundary with the rear garden of number 2 as it wraps around the rear of number 4, is a low wall and shrubs creating a screen between the two areas.
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is a series of alterations and extensions as follows:
i. removal of the two rear annexes and their replacement with a kitchen/dining room extension ii. installation of an oil tank in the rear garden iii. replacement of the existing timber framed windows with uPVC double glazed windows iv. installation of a satellite dish v. installation of a replacement entrance canopy vi. install a new timber gate in the front garden wall to create a bin store - no longer being pursued as part of this application vii. installation of photovoltaic tiles on the front roof pitch and viii. installation of new timber fencing at the rear.
Rear extension 2.2 The new extension is to be positioned abutting the boundary with number 2 and will utilise the existing wall. The extension will be the same length projecting out from the rear of the property. The existing boundary wall is 2.8m high: this will be lowered to 2.4m with a slated roof sloping upward away from the wall to a ridge which is 4.3m high and 3m from the boundary. The extension will have a rooflight on the rearward facing slope and a glazed, pitched roofed porch entrance on the elevation facing away from number 2 and towards Garey Voallit.
Oil tank 2.3 The oil tank will be located in the far rear garden which is some distance from the main house and will be surrounded by timber fencing which will sit 300mm higher than the boundary wall which is 1.1m high. The proposal as shown will inevitably interfere with existing vegetation alongside the wall and will need to be moved further from this unless this vegetation will be lost.
Replacement windows 2.4 The existing front elevation windows are timber framed sliding sashes painted white. Some of the sliding sashes have horns, some not and even within the bays the inclusion of horns is inconsistent. The proposed sliding sashes appear to include horns.
==== PAGE 4 ====
18/00508/B Page 4 of 8
Satellite dish 2.5 The satellite dish is to be installed on the ridge of the main roof alongside the right hand side chimney as one looks at the front of the house. The dish is to be 600mm in diameter. The elevations show the dish attached to the right hand stack but the plans are annotated to offer an alternative to be attached to the rear of the other stack.
Replacement entrance canopy 2.6 The existing canopy is painted plywood fascias with a fibreglass perimeter top trim with metal brackets which appear to be hanging basket type, as described by the applicants' agent. They consider that it presently does not contribute to the character or appearance of the property and is not worth replicating exactly. They consider the proposed, which will install a similar, but not identical canopy built in timber or GPR, to be an improvement on the existing.
Solar tiles 2.7 The proposed front pitch is to be removed and replaced with solar tiles and an image of the type of tiles has been provided. The tiles proposed to be used - GB-Sol are thin and shinier than natural slate or the current roof finish.
Timber fencing at the rear 2.9 The fencing is to enclose the oil tank - see 2.3 above.
PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South (2013) as Residential and within the town's Conservation Area. As such, the development is expected to comply with the following Strategic Plan policies:
3.1.1 General Policy 2: "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:
(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; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."
3.1.2 Environment Policy 35: "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."
3.2 Planning Circular 1/98 provides the following advice for the replacement of windows within Conservation Areas:
"If the original windows are in place they should preferably be repaired. If repair is impracticable, replacement windows which would be readily visible from a public thoroughfare MUST HAVE THE SAME method of opening as the originals. Whatever the material used in their construction, the windows MUST HAVE THE SAME pattern and section of glazing bars and the same frame sections as the original windows.
Windows not readily visible from a public thoroughfare must have the same or similar pattern of glazing bars as the originals, but not necessarily the original method of opening, whatever the material used in the construction."
==== PAGE 5 ====
18/00508/B Page 5 of 8
3.3 In accordance with Section 19 (3) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999, Registered Building consent is required for any demolition within a Conservation Area. An application has been submitted - 18/00783/CON.
PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 No previous planning applications are recorded for this property.
REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 The Isle of Man Victorian Society are pleased to see an original pillar being repositioned on the front elevation and wish to ensure that if the existing windows have horns, so should the replacements. They seek confirmation that the existing front door is to remain and clarification of the design and detail of the replacement canopy which, they suggest should not be left to chance. They also query whether it needs to be replaced (29.05.18). They also advise that RB consent is required for the demolition. The provide further advice about the windows and conclude that, as only one of the existing windows had horns, none should be included in the replacements. In respect of the canopy, they advise that the existing one was added after the construction of the house and is flimsy and lacks the sturdiness of the rest of the facade. They have no knowledge of what was there before and would wonder whether a canopy is required. They would prefer to see details of this now rather than reserved for later consideration (08.07.18 and 09.07.18).
5.2 The owners of Garey Voallit, which sits immediately alongside the application site and shares a stone boundary wall, object to the application. The daughter of the owners of Garey Voallit has had an offer accepted on number 2, on the other side of the application property. They consider that the garden has been separated from the house, leaving inadequate recreation space for a family house of this size. They suggest that provision must be made to include the garden in perpetuity for this dwelling to ensure that there is no impact on the future environment or enjoyment of the property within the Conservation Area. They consider that the inclusion of an expanse of glass facing Garey Voallit would case light pollution and annoyance in the evening: the master bedroom of their property faces this element of the proposal. They consider that the height would cause further shadow and loss of light during the morning hours. They suggest that reducing the pitch of the roof and the amount of glass would bring it below the height of the boundary wall and would reduce light pollution. The extension would look directly into the rear garden of number 2 and no provision has been made for obscured glass or fencing to obscure the view out of the extension into the rear garden of number 2. They recommend that the bin store should be sited against the front wall of the house to reduce the visual impact and note that number 4 has access to the driveway where owners of adjacent properties leave their bins for collection without impact on The Crofts. They question why there is no explanation for the long oil feed to the house or how this will be secure and safe and no details of the existing party wall have been provided (10.06.18).
5.3 Highway Services have no objection, commenting on the outward opening of the gate which has now been removed from the proposal and the proposal would otherwise not affect parking or access (12.06.18).
ASSESSMENT 6.1 The issue is whether the proposed development would preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the proposed development, whether the development would be visually acceptable from the public domain and whether there would be any adverse impact on the living conditions of those living alongside, particularly those at Garey Voallit and 2, The Crofts, who have objected to the application.
6.2 The removal of the two rear annexes and their replacement with a kitchen/dining room extension 6.2.1 These works will not be publicly visible and as such will not have any effect on the character or appearance of the area. The extension is single storey and whilst the glazed
==== PAGE 6 ====
18/00508/B Page 6 of 8
entrance could draw attention from the view from the upper, gable windows in Garey Voallit, these, it is understood, serve a master bedroom and associated en-suite bathroom, with the bedroom also having a bow window on the front elevation. The gable windows are at a higher level than the front and rear windows serving these rooms.
6.2.2 As such, it is not considered that the extension, even including significant areas of glazing, will so adversely affect the living conditions of those in Garey Voallit as to warrant refusal of the application.
6.2.3 The extension will result in the reduction in height of the wall between the application property and number 2, however, there will be a taller structure further away. The nett impact is considered to be neutral in terms of the outlook and light to the rear of number 2.
6.2.4 The peculiar arrangement of the rear gardens of numbers 2 and 4 result in the proposed extension being very close to the boundary between the two and with the existing vegetation on this boundary, it is difficult to understand the function of the proposed window in the western facing elevation of the proposed extension. It appears to serve a kitchen where the sink is immediately below the window. If the boundary vegetation were not there, a clear view would be available from this window into the rear garden of number 2, however, were the extension and the vegetation not there, this view would be available from the rear yard of number 4.
6.2.5 Whilst concern has been expressed about the reduction in amenity space for the occupiers of number 4, the nett change in available space in the rear yard is around 2 sq m - an insignificant change. The property has the benefit of a very significant garden area to the west of the car parking area. It is not considered that the proposal will deprive the property of useful amenity space to warrant refusal of the application for this reason.
6.3 The installation of an oil tank in the rear garden 6.3.1 The oil tank in itself is not objectionable as, if it were positioned such that the existing vegetation were retained, it would not be visible to anyone other than the applicant using this garden. The plans do not show a position for the tank that would enable the vegetation to be retained but the applicant has indicated that they would be prepared to move the tank to accommodate the vegetation. As there is a tree close to the tank, it is important that the location is carefully chosen so that existing shrubs and trees may remain and continue to remain once the tank is installed. A condition should be attached to any approval requiring these details before the tank is installed.
6.4 The replacement of the existing timber framed windows with uPVC double glazed windows 6.4.1 The introduction of a more uniform pattern of glazing on the property would represent an enhancement and any detrimental impact of the windows having plastic frames (which are not discounted by Planning Circular 1/98) is outweighed by the uniformity of the fenestration. At least one of the existing windows has horns and others not. The Victorian Society recommend that when Georgian windows were replaced with the single pane windows installed in Victorian times, the additional weight of the panes of glass lead to a need to strengthen the corners of the window by the addition of horns. They go on to explain that people who modernised their Georgian properties sometimes replaced the multi-pane arrangement with a single pane of glass without replacing the frames which has led to some Victorian-looking windows having no horns as is the case here. It is the advice of the Conservation Officer that the original windows would have had horns and as such, the inclusion of horns should be required in the replacement windows.
6.5 The installation of a satellite dish 6.5.1 The dish, whilst a modern addition to the property, will replace one that is already there and which is visible from the bowling club, as is the television aerial and the electricity lines
==== PAGE 7 ====
18/00508/B Page 7 of 8
which run along the street. Also in that view is a floodlight associated with the bowling green. It is not considered that the satellite dish is unacceptable.
6.6 The installation of a replacement entrance canopy 6.6.1 The origin of the canopy is not clear in terms of what was on the property originally and if a canopy were there, exactly what it looked like or was made from. What is proposed will have a similar appearance and impact to the existing and in the absence of knowing what the original facade would have looked like, it is considered that what is proposed is an acceptable replacement for what exists.
6.7 The installation of photovoltaic tiles on the front roof pitch and 6.7.1 The concept of introducing the opportunity for renewable energy to be harnessed in this old property is very welcome, particularly as new technology enables this without significant change to the appearance and character of the building. There appears to be quite a difference in the appearance of the various tiles available and examples of this have been provided. The applicants' choice would be for tiles which a thinner and shinier than the existing or real slates. If installed, they would certainly be visible from the bowling green but unlikely to be particularly visible from The Crofts due to the existing parapet wall and the chimneys. Due to the fact that they would be publicly visible, albeit from the bowling green rather than the public highway, it is recommended that a condition be attached to ensure that the tiles are slate like and not something lighter and shinier which would be clearly different to those on number 2.
6.8 The installation of new timber fencing at the rear. 6.8.1 The fencing is associated with the oil tank and necessary only for screening it from the parking area. As the details of the position of the tank are proposed to be reserved for further consideration, it is recommended that this also applies to the fencing which may or may not be required.
CONCLUSION 7.1 The proposal comprises a number of different elements, all of which are considered acceptable and in accordance with General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 35 and Planning Policy Statement 1/01, provided that a number of conditions are attached in accordance with the above.
INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested; (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
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 in Article 6(4) who should be given Interested Person Status.
__
==== PAGE 8 ====
18/00508/B Page 8 of 8
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.
Decision Made : Permitted
Committee Meeting Date: 13.08.2018
Signed : S Corlett Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO
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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal