Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
20/01031/B Page 1 of 4
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 20/01031/B Applicant : Mr Martin Bell Proposal : Installation of replacement windows to rear elevation and replacement front door Site Address : 9 Bridge Street Peel Isle Of Man IM5 1NB
Technical Officer: Mr Thomas Sinden Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 02.11.2020 __
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.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposals meet the tests of General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and Planning Policy Statement 1/01 as they will preserve the character of the Conservation Area, and is therefore judged to be acceptable.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This decision relates to the information received on 9th September 2020, and amended information received on 21st October 2020.
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the following persons 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
==== PAGE 2 ====
20/01031/B Page 2 of 4
as they do not clearly identify the land which is owned or occupied which is considered to be impacted on by the proposed development in accordance with paragraph 2A of the Policy __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE
1.1 The site is a mid-terrace dwelling on the western side of Bridge Street in Peel, within the town's Conservation Area. The terrace is comprised of two storey dwellings (some with a third storey accommodated within the roof space) with pitched roofs and chimney breasts at the midpoint of the roof ridge positioned on each party wall. The eaves level and roof ridge of each property is stepped as the street climbs away from the promenade. The other side of the street has a terrace of two storey pitched roof dwellings. All of the properties on the street are sited directly on the highway. The buildings on the street have painted render walls, natural or artificial slate roofs and generally sliding sash windows in either timber or uPVC. Doors are a variety of styles, and are either painted timber or uPVC in terms of material.
1.2 The property itself is sited opposite the junction with Stanley Mount. The property has two storeys below eaves level, with a third storey accommodated in the roof space. The property has an artificial slate pitched roof containing roof lights, chimney breasts on the party walls, a painted stippled render front wall, white uPVC sliding sash front windows and a black painted timber front door that has a glazed panel in its upper portion. The rear of the property overlooks a private yard area, and has a mixture of black painted timber sliding sash or fixed windows, and white uPVC casement or fixed windows.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL
2.1 The proposal is to replace the existing black painted timber door with a red uPVC composite stable door, and to replace all of the existing rear windows (a mixture of painted timber and uPVC, sliding sash, casement and fixed in style) with a mixture of sash, casement and fixed units, all in white uPVC. The front elevation windows are not proposed to be replaced as part of this application. It was originally proposed that the sliding sash units were to be replaced with casements. However, the applicant has changed the proposals following discussions during consideration of the application, and the proposal is now for the method of opening of each replacement window to match that of the window being replaced.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY
3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Peel Local Plan of 1989 as Mixed Use and within the town's Conservation Area where Environment Policy 35 and Planning Policy Statement 1/01 require development to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the area and to take into account in any decision, the special character of the area.
3.2 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; and (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality.
3.3 Environment Policy 34 expresses a preference for the use of traditional materials in the maintenance, extension or alteration of pre-1920 buildings.
==== PAGE 3 ====
20/01031/B Page 3 of 4
3.4 Planning Circular 1/98 provides advice on the replacement of windows and suggests in Conservation Areas the method of opening is more important than the frame material but the original method of opening should be replicated where the originals are in place.
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY
4.1 The only planning history on the site relevant to the current proposals is 02/00238/B, which approved the installation of uPVC sliding sash windows on the front elevation.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS
5.1 Peel Town Commissioners have stated that they do not oppose the application (25.9.2020).
5.2 The Department of Infrastructure Highways Division have stated that there is no highways interest relating to the application (30.9.2020).
5.3 The Isle of Man Victorian Society has made comment that the proposed stable type door is not traditional in Peel or anywhere on the island, but that it is close boarded which corresponds with traditional doors and therefore passable in their view (30.9.2020).
5.4 Following the circulation of amended information regarding the rear windows, the Isle of Man Victorian Society made further comment regarding the windows, stating that the proposed use of sliding sash units where shown is encouraging, and also noting that where existing sliding sash units do not have horns, replacement units should not have horns either (23.10.2020).
6.0 ASSESSMENT
6.1 The issue here is whether the proposed windows and door preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area in which the property sits taking into account the special character of the area.
6.2 The existing windows to the rear of the property are a mixture of both style and material, with sliding sash, casement and fixed windows present together with painted timber and uPVC frames. The front elevation windows are not proposed to be replaced as part of this application, having been replaced under 02/00238/B. Planning Circular 1/98 states that the original method of opening should be replicated, and the proposals here comply with this guidance. The alteration from a mix of timber and uPVC frames to all rear windows having uPVC frames is not judged to have a significant negative impact, and may have a more coherent appearance than at present. It is therefore judged that the replacement windows meet the tests of General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 35 as the character of the Conservation Area will be preserved.
6.3 The replacement front door will be uPVC composite material, in a stable door style with a small rectangular glazed panel in the upper section. As mentioned in the representation from the Isle of Man Victorian Society, this door is not a style traditionally found in Peel. However, given the variety of styles in place along Bridge Street, and the timber close boarded appearance of the proposed design, it is judged that the door meets the tests of General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 35 as the character of the Conservation Area will be preserved.
7.0 CONCLUSION
7.1 It is judged that the proposals meet the tests of General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 as they will preserve the character of the Conservation Area, and the application is therefore recommended to be approved.
==== PAGE 4 ====
20/01031/B Page 4 of 4
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.
Decision Made : Permitted
Date: 03.11.2020
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