Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
15/00893/GB
Page 1 of 4
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 15/00893/GB Applicant : Mr John Morris Proposal : Retrospective approval for alterations and construction of a first floor conservatory (comprising amendments to PA 12/01567/GB)(in association with PA 15/00894/CON) Site Address : The Old Sail Loft And Smithy Shore Road Underway Port St. Mary Isle Of Man IM9 5DX
Case Officer : Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken : 19.08.2015 Site Visit : 19.08.2015 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO THE PLANNING HISTORY OF THE SITE
THE SITE 1.1 The site is the curtilage of an existing building, The Old Sail Loft, which is registered (RB 203) and situated on the landward side of Shore Road underway between a new dwelling which is also in the ownership of the applicant, and another residential property attached to the west -22, Shore Road Underway.
1.2 The building has been the subject of a number of proposals for alterations and extensions, the most pertinent of which to the current application are PAs 12/01567/B and 1568/CON which proposed a first floor extension to provide a conservatory. What is proposed now alters the approved scheme but addresses what was built which was not in accordance with the approved drawings in respect of its use (it was approved as a simply conservatory but has been built as a kitchen which would affect the Registered Building consent but not the planning approval). The rear roof was to be slate but has been finished in grey coloured GRP and is a flat roof. The stone faced parapet wall at the front has been modified to be replaced by a glazed balustrade which provides better views from the room and adds lightness to the structure, in the opinion of the applicant. What was to be a frameless glazed frontage is a conventionally framed conservatory structure which has been coloured dark grey (it was originally white).
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the retention of what has been constructed which is not in accordance with the original approval. Effectively what is proposed is the erection of an extension to the main building in the form which is currently in situ. This is a simple structure with five vertically proportioned glazed panes in the front, flat facade which is now coloured dark grey. In front of the facade is a frameless glass balustrade in between and above a stone wall above a garage door. The roof is glazed at the front and at the rear is a flat roofed section which takes the structure right to the rear wall across the full height of the extension, which is a tall structure which provides the rear boundary of the property to the east - Columcille. The
==== PAGE 2 ====
15/00893/GB
Page 2 of 4
previously approved scheme took the structure right to the back wall at the base of the structure but with a pitched roof sloping back down towards the wall.
PLANNING STATUS AND POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the APS as Mixed Use. The site also lies within a proposed Conservation Area. The accompanying appraisal refers to the Old Sail Loft only in respect of it being one of only two Registered Buildings in the village. The Shore Road Underway is similarly not specifically identified for discussion.
3.2 Environment Policies 32 and 35 both require that special care is taken with applications for changes to Registered Buildings and buildings within Conservation Areas to ensure that their special qualities are not damaged. This is also echoed in Planning Policy Statement 1/01
REPRESENTATIONS 4.1 Port St. Mary Commissioners indicate that they have no objection to the application (25.08.15) but indicate in a later e-mail that they have been steadfastly opposed to developments on this site and continue to do so, maintaining that the development has strayed beyond its legal limits and encroaches on land which was formerly public open space. They are of the view that the conservatory is actually a kitchen and should be advertised as such so that all concerned and affected may have the opportunity to comment (28.08.15).
4.2 The owner of Columcille, 8, High Street which shares a common boundary with the application site, is surprised that those who were party to earlier applications on this site were not automatically notified of this application, and are disappointed that the application is retrospective, reflecting work that has been undertaken other than in accordance with a planning approval. He too is concerned with possible encroachment of the development onto land which is not in the ownership of the applicant. He is concerned that the Old Sail Loft is not being used as a single unit of accommodation and if the insurance relating to the stability of the wall is therefore still valid. This relates to the alleged use of the conservatory as a kitchen not a conservatory. If this room is to be a kitchen, he asks what precautions are to be taken in respect of fire risk, noise and smell? The roof material is less attractive than as approved and will be more attractive to birds and vermin (03.09.15).
PLANNING HISTORY 5.1 Planning approval was granted for the erection of a dwelling to the north of the application site and this has been implemented. This is a modern building but following the profile of the Old Sail Loft but importantly projects out as far as does the Old Sail Loft, leaving the garage and the proposed extension some 9m recessed from the front of both the Old Sail Loft and the adjacent dwelling. This results in the structure not being visible until one passes the front of the building, other than from across the harbour, some 150m away.
5.2 The Old Sail Loft has also been the subject of numerous applications for alterations and extensions, none of which is considered material to the consideration of the current application.
ASSESSMENT 6.1 Concern was raised by the Planning Committee about the original conservatory. These applications were refused for the reason that, "The proposed extension will reduce the distinction between the Registered Building and the new dwelling being built alongside. This is considered to reduce the character of the Registered Building and thus is considered to be contrary to Environment Policy 32 as the special nature of the building would be adversely affected by it starting to merge into the building alongside." This was not accepted however as the inspector considered that the Old Sail Loft and the new dwelling appear as separate buildings even though they are effectively attached to each other and the proposal would not cause the two buildings to visually coalesce. He considered that the proposed extension would
==== PAGE 3 ====
15/00893/GB
Page 3 of 4
have little impact on the character and appearance of the building due to the inclusion of a stone parapet and the lightweight structure.
6.2 What is now proposed has a slightly increased impact due to the provision of the glazed balustrade and the less lightweight structure. However, given what was approved, it is not considered that what is proposed here has a significantly greater impact such as would warrant refusal of the application. The glazing now ties nicely in with that on the new dwelling and as the building is set back so far between the two projecting buildings alongside, its impact is greatly reduced and the grey colour of the frame helps this and as such, it is recommended for approval. Whilst the view down onto the roof of the conservatory may be less attractive than as previously approved but this view is a private view and only achievable if one looks down onto the site. The concerns about encroachment of development into adjacent land is a civil matter and in any case, not one which involves this current proposal which is entirely contained within land owned by the applicant.
6.3 Concerns regarding the use of the conservatory - as a kitchen rather than a leisure room is not a material consideration as planning approval is not required for internal changes of use of rooms. It is also clear from the plans as submitted that the building is a single dwelling unit.
PARTY STATUS 7.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, 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 and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
In addition to those above, article 6(3) of the Order requires the Department to decide which persons (if any) who have made representations with respect to the application, should be treated as having sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application.
In this instance, it is recommended that the following persons have sufficient interest and should be awarded the status of an Interested Person in accordance with Government Circular 0046/13: - the owners of Columcille, The High Street, Port St. Mary.
With effect from 1 June 2015, the Transfer of Planning & Building Control Functions Order 2015 amends the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 to give effect to the meaning of the word 'Department' to be the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture unless otherwise directed by that Order.
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 07.09.2015
==== PAGE 4 ====
15/00893/GB
Page 4 of 4
Conditions and Notes for Approval: C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
--
This approval relates to drawings 1208/01 and 1208/03B both received on 6th August, 2015.
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 : APPROVED
Committee Meeting
Date:...21.09.2015
Signed : A Morgan Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal