Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
20/00471/B Page 1 of 7
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 20/00471/B Applicant : Mr Matthew & Mrs Lara Elliott Proposal : Alterations and erection of three storey extension to create additional living space Site Address : Fairholme Athol Park Port Erin Isle Of Man IM9 6EX
Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken : 03.07.2020 Site Visit : 03.07.2020 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 19.08.2020 __
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.
C 2. The proposed opaque panel over parapet to provide 1.8m privacy screening on the roof terrace (depicted on Drw.20011/02 rev A) shall be installed prior to the use of the roof terrace then permanently retained as such.
Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjoining occupiers from overlooking and loss of privacy.
C 3. The proposed window for the first floor ensuite on the west elevation of the rear extension with views to side elevation of Norwood, the abutting dwelling on the west shall be glazed with obscure glass to Pilkington Level 5 or equivalent and permanently retained as such.
Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjoining occupiers from overlooking and loss of privacy
C 4. All installed windows shall match those of the existing building in respect of type, size, pattern and colour.
Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.
==== PAGE 2 ====
20/00471/B Page 2 of 7
Overall it is concluded that the planning application accords with the provisions set out in General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and the Residential Design Guide 2019.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This permission relates to the Site and Location Plan (Drw.20011/01) date stamped received 29th April 2020, additional Information provided by the applicant concerning the installation of privacy screen and obscured glazing for ensuite window received 4th June 2020, and Plans and Elevations (Drw.20011/02 rev A) date stamped and received 17 August 2020. __
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):
Norwood, Athol Park, Port Erin as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (July 2018). __
Officer’s Report
THE SITE 1.1 The site is the curtilage of an existing terraced building - Fairholme - which sits on the southern side of Athol Park facing the glen. The building is a three storey Victorian building with a projecting three storey bay, the same as its neighbours.
1.2 The building backs onto Athol Avenue which serves as rear access for the properties on the terrace to which the application site belongs as well as some detached and semi-detached properties on Athol Avenue. The neighbouring properties on the terrace to which the application site belongs have carried out some rear extensions evidenced in the varied depths of the rear projections of these dwellings, with the application site appearing to be one of the properties that have carried out the least extensions at the rear.
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The current planning application seeks approval for alterations and erection of three storey extension to create additional living space.
2.2 The proposed works on the property would include the following: 2.2.1 The demolition of the existing utility/boiler room to the rear of the property and creating a three storey extension that would stretch from the rear of the property towards the rear boundary and measure 5.4m x 3.9m. These works will enable the creation of additional living spaces at the three levels that would include bedrooms and an ensuite, utility room, toilet, with a roof terrace on the third floor. There would be internal alterations to accommodate extended family.
2.3 Other works would include infilling the lower part of the existing door on the ground floor of the side elevation to create a window, lowering the sill of the existing window at the ground floor of the rear elevation to create door opening, installing a roof light on the rear roof pane to serve the new en-suite.
2.4 The external walls of the extension would be rendered to match the existing walls, while the roof slates would match the existing roof slates on the building. The rainwater good are to be black PVCu to match existing. No details have been provided to show the type of windows and external doors to be installed on the extension.
==== PAGE 3 ====
20/00471/B Page 3 of 7
2.5 In response to a request for privacy screening on the on the section of the roof terrace abutting Norwood, the applicant have provided a revised plan which proposes to install an opaque panel on top of the parapet to provide 1800mm high privacy screen to adjacent property (Norwood).
PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site is within a wider area of residential use on the Area Plan for the South adopted in 2013 and within the village's proposed Conservation Area. As such, General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan is applicable as follows:
"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".
3.2 The Department has recently published the Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) which 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.
3.3 Section 3.1 states thus: 3.1.1 House extensions are one of the most common forms of development. Individually and cumulatively extensions can have a significant impact on the quality of the built environment. When altering or extending buildings in order to modernise, adapt, enlarge or extend them the overall character and form of the buildings and spaces around them are affected. Guidance is therefore required to provide advice as to what is acceptable in planning terms.
3.1.2 General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (IOMSP) indicates that generally house extensions and new houses within areas designated for development will be permitted, providing that they reflect and enhance the appearance of the existing property, adjoining properties, and their setting in terms of scale, design and materials. However, there are a substantial number of detailed issues that need to be taken into account in designing domestic extensions. This section provides general guidance on issues that are likely to apply to all forms of extensions, and then more detailed additional advice in relation to different potential types of extensions.
3.1.3 The main design elements that should be considered include:
o the relationship to the original part of the building - including materials, design and detailing (such as window materials and proportions); o the relationship with adjoining properties, including the building line, roof line, orientation, and the slope of the site; and o the pitch, shape and materials of the original roof, including the presence of original dormers and chimneys.
3.1.4 All extensions and alterations, particularly those incorporating modern design approaches, should be considered holistically with the original/main building and its setting in the landscape/townscape to avoid an awkward jarring of materials and forms. However, well- judged modern designs using contemporary and sustainable materials will be welcomed, as the Department does not wish to restrict creative designs where they can be integrated successfully into their context. Such approaches, where well designed, can serve to both
==== PAGE 4 ====
20/00471/B Page 4 of 7
improve the sustainability of buildings and significantly improve the appearance of buildings to the general benefit of the streetscene.
3.1.5 However, where inappropriately designed, located and finished, such approaches can be harmful to the character of a building and its surrounds, and become a local eyesore. Therefore, in some cases, modern design approaches will not be the most appropriate solution and the character and form of the building and its context may require a more traditional and reserved design approach.
3.1.6 It should also be accepted that in some instances it may not be possible to design an acceptable extension due to the sensitivity of the site, limited space, or the relationship with neighbouring dwellings.
3.4 Environment Policy 34 states: "In the maintenance, alteration or extension of pre-1920 buildings, the use of traditional materials will be preferred."
3.5 The draft Conservation Area Appraisal for this CA includes the following comments which are considered relevant to the determination of the current application:
"Positive buildings in the area should be used as exemplars for future design in the area, and any planning applications for their demolition should be carefully considered whilst being mindful of the current Planning Policy toward the retention of buildings of merit within a conservation area. Positive buildings identified within the Conservation Area Appraisal are...Athol Park and Glen View Terrace"
"Although the above details the removal of a number of early 1900s buildings from the conservation area, those in the western end of Athol Park and in Glen View Terrace have been retained. This is due to the fact that these buildings form continuous lines of buildings erected in the same period."
"Boarding houses This area consists of Athol Park, Glen View Terrace and Athol Park Glen and incorporates boarding houses built in the 1890s and early 1900s. Athol Park Glen was landscaped as a public amenity by internees in circa 1942. This area is of importance in the conservation area because although less impressive architecturally than the seafront hotels, these buildings also demonstrate an important part of the history of tourism in the area. In addition, nearly the whole of the area is made up of boarding houses and as such there is a consistency of style. Furthermore, it is particularly fortunate that, despite minor alterations (particularly the introduction of pvc windows), the majority of the buildings in the area remain largely unaltered externally."
"2.4.3. Qualities of the buildings and their contribution to the area There are two key areas in the conservation area with dominant architectural styles; the buildings along the Promenade, and the boarding houses in Athol Park and Glen View Terrace."
"Athol Park and Glen View Terrace The boarding houses included in the conservation area in Athol Park are nearly all of an identical design; terraced, with three storeys and a semi-hexagonal bay running the whole height of the building (the exceptions are Erin House which was built about 10 years later, which is crenulated and has a tower, and 1-3 Park Court which although relatively modern, was designed in a manner which is fairly sympathetic with the boarding houses of Athol Park). In Glen View Terrace the buildings are also nearly all the same (these are terraced, with 3 storeys and a semi-hexagonal bay on the ground and first floors), although there are also 2 houses which are semi-detached with mock timber frame detail on second floor at the front."
==== PAGE 5 ====
20/00471/B Page 5 of 7
"Athol Park and Glen View Terrace - As detailed in the section above 'Qualities of the buildings and their contribution to the area' there are eight terraced buildings in each of Athol Park and Glen View Terrace of the same style. These buildings should all be seen as positive buildings in the conservation area as they demonstrate the historic style of the area which should be emulated when designing new buildings."
PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The application site has been the subject of an application for Installation of a replacement front door and surrounding frame (retrospective) under PA 19/01218/B which was approved in December 2019. There has been no application on the site or within the terrace to which it belongs that is particularly relevant to the current application.
REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 Representation from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division confirms that they 'do not oppose' in the letter dated 15 May 2020.
5.2 Port Erin Commissioners have stated that they support the application in a letter dated 3 June 2020.
5.3 The Owners/occupiers of Norwood, Athol Park, Port Erin have written with the following comments regarding the application in a letter dated 2 June 2020:
My concern is the planning permission that next door has applied for at Fairholme (20/00471/B). Part of their application shows a window on our side of the building as well as a roof terrace that I feel will invade our privacy as a family. It has also come to my attention that none of the other houses along this street have widows on the side of the building overlooking the properties next door for the same reason.
5.3.1 The applicants have provided a response to the above comment dated 4 June 2020: My Husband and I are the owners of the property mentioned above. I write in response to the comments made by the owners of Norwood. You will see from the first image which shows the window mentioned. It demonstrates that the window is in fact behind the edge of the wall line for Norwood. The window will only be 700mm wide and be frosted or patterned glass to impair the view in or out of the window. We intend to construct a screen on the side of the roof terrace adjacent to Norwood. We do not wish to look over into our neighbour's garden and remove their privacy, hence why we have planned to have this screening. I hope this will answer the questions asked by the occupants of Norwood.
ASSESSMENT 6.1 In considering an extension such as this, it important to have specific regard to potential impacts on neighbours and their amenity, and the appearance of both the site itself and the street scene or character of the area having particular regard to the fact that the site is proposed for Conservation Area status.
6.2 Impact on Appearance of the Dwelling and nature of the Street Scene
6.2.1 The proposed rear extension would fit in seamlessly into the appearance and character of the rear of the dwelling and would not detract from the overall appearance of the dwelling given that the rear of the dwellings on the terrace do not bear any particular architectural significance. Similarly, the addition of the second storey roof terrace on the extension, although a new feature on the rear of this terrace would not be a detriment to appearance as it would seamlessly fit into the character to the rear elevation which is somewhat bland and diverse, given that the rear of the dwellings on the terrace are dissimilar.
==== PAGE 6 ====
20/00471/B Page 6 of 7
6.2.2 With regard to the impact of the proposed works on the character and appearance of the area, it is primarily the frontage of the dwelling that is visible from a public thoroughfare and therefore of greater significance. Although the rear access lane would offer views to the rear of this terrace, it is not considered that the impacts would be significant enough to warrant a refusal as the works will be largely confined to the rear of the dwelling and would not project further than the rear extensions of the a significant number of dwellings on the terrace. Besides, as has been previously stated, the front elevation of the terrace is the element that is of particular significance in determining the character and contribution of the terrace to the proposed Conservation area and as such the proposed development will have no significant impact on the character or appearance of the proposed Conservation Area.
6.3 Impact on Neighbours
6.3.1 The key considerations in terms of impact on neighbours are risks of overshadowing and/or overlooking and loss of privacy to dwellings within 20 metres of the site dwelling.
6.3.2 Whilst the extension in this case is a three storey extension, it is bounded by higher walls which form the rear extension to Greenfold on the eastern elevation and the rear boundary comprises garages and grassed areas which cover an area more than 49m wide. Based on the foregoing, the neighbouring property most likely to be impacted would be Norwood situated on the western boundary of the application site. It is noted that there would be some overlooking into the rear yard of Norwood from the second floor roof terrace that would project about 2.9m beyond the rear elevation of Norwood. However, it is not considered that this would be significant to warrant a refusal since the applicant has indicated that a 1.8m high screen would be installed on the side of the roof terrace adjacent to Norwood to prevent any overlooking into this neighbouring dwelling from the terrace (This has been supported with revised plans).
6.3.3 The owners of Norwood have also raised concerns with regard to the ensuite window on the first floor with views to the side elevation of Norwood. This aspect of the proposed development has been evaluated and it is not considered that overlooking would result given that the window is situated within an existing indent between both properties where there are no windows installed on the abutting dwelling. Moreover, the applicants have indicated that the window will be frosted or patterned glass to impair the view in or out of the window and as such, it is considered that any impact would be negligible.
6.3.4 It is also considered that the proposed roof terrace would be less than 20m from the rear gardens of Wensleydale, the detached dwelling situated south-west of the application site and No. 9 Sunnydale Avenue situated south-east of the application site; with the possibility of views to the rear garden of these dwellings. However, the presence of hedging over 2.5m high and trees on their boundaries would limit the possibility for overlooking to occur from the terrace.
CONCLUSION 7.1 The proposal is considered to accord with the relevant Strategic Plan policies and is supported.
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;
==== PAGE 7 ====
20/00471/B Page 7 of 7
(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.
Decision Made : Permitted
Date: 25.08.2020
Determining officer
Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett
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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal