Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
17/00056/B
Page 1 of 6
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 17/00056/B Applicant : Glenn Kinrade Proposal : Installation of window (retrospective) and construction of decking with perimeter rail Site Address : 4 Market Place East Ramsey Isle Of Man IM8 1JY
Case Officer : Mr Jason Singleton Photo Taken : 17.03.2017 Site Visit : 17.03.2017 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Officer’s Report
THE APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THERE IS OBJECTION FROM THE LOCAL AUTHORITY AND THE APPLICATION IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL
APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is the curtilage of 4, Market Place East Ramsey. The building is a three storey building with retail on the ground floor and the upper floors residential. It is situated on the south eastern corner of Ramsey's town centre car park.
1.2 At the rear of the application site is a flat roof area which backs onto the rear of the adjacent properties on Dale Street, namely, Marina House and Lyndale. The rear are somewhat peculiar as they extend over the property below and form small individual flat roof areas that are used as terraces and enclosed by fencing of various styles and materials
1.3 The application site is within Ramsey's Conservation Area and is part of the terrace lining the eastern side of Ramsey's car park. It is surrounded by a variety of land uses representative of its location within the town. The age of the building is unknown, but it is pre-1920s.
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed, is the installation of a non-opening, portrait window 900mm tall and 600mm wide to the landing / stairway in the south elevation; and the installation of decking and handrail above the flat roof to the west elevation with access from an existing kitchen doorway.
PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 15/01197/B - Installation of dormer window to front elevation. Refused. 13/91155/B - Conversion of existing first floor office to additional living accommodation for upper floor apartment - Approved. 12/01444 - Installation of replacement windows, door and top-light, removal of canopy and re- rendering to front elevation - Approved.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES 4.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is within an area recognised as being within mixed use (Town Centre) under the Ramsey Local Plan Order 1998. There are three policies within Planning Circular 2/99, the written statement that accompanies the local plan, considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application. Policy R/R/P4: Use of Upper Floors for Residential Purposes reads in part: "The upper floors above shops are often under- used. Use of this space for residential purposes will be encouraged, subject to compliance with the Housing (Flats) Regulations".
==== PAGE 2 ====
17/00056/B
Page 2 of 6
4.2 Policy R/TC/P3: Upper Floors is within the Town Centre chapter of the written statement, and reads in full: "The use of upper floors as retail units, offices and apartments shall be encouraged particularly where premises are currently vacant (see also Policy R/R/P4)".
4.3 Policy R/E/P6: Terraces, which follows the above text, reads in part: "There will be a general presumption in favour of retention of traditional uniform frontages on all pre-1920s buildings in terraces". Specifically criterion 'e' states that the introduction of dormer windows will be discouraged.
4.4 In terms of Strategic Plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains three policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this planning application. General Policy 2 states in part: "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;
4.5 Environment Policy 34 reads: "In the maintenance, alteration or extension of pre-1920 buildings, the use of traditional materials will be preferred".
4.6 Environment Policy 35 reads: "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".
REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Ramey Town Commissioners (29/03/17) object as it is considered un-neighbourly and would have a serious detrimental effect to immediate neighbours and not in compliance with General Policy 2(b) and (g).
5.2 Highways services have confirmed that there is no Highway Involvement (16/02/17).
5.3 The occupiers of Marina, 3 Dale Street have engaged an Architect/Agent (Cornerstones)to write on their behalf to register an objection (27/01/16) with regard to the long term history relating to the site; the relationship between the first floor bedrooms which have roof lights as their only source of light which open directly onto the area above their terrace; the inclusion of the window is contentious, even with obscure glazing, would be intrusive and has negative effect on their clients property. Question is raised with regard to the location of the decking and ownership of the wall not to mention the degree of overlooking onto their clients outdoor space. The proposal has no regard for the privacy, amenity and residential status of their client and any proposal will be vigorously fought.
5.4 The owners of 3 Dale Street have engaged advocates (Cains Gordon Bell) to write on their behalf to register and objection (13/02/17) highlighting the proposed window would have a significant impact on their clients' privacy and provide direct line of sight to their only master bedroom. The raised decking area would allow for significant overlooking from a raised position compromising the privacy of No.3. The advocates have also raised concerns regarding the wall separating both properties is in fact in the ownership of No.3 and not of the applicants No.4 and have provided copies of deed plans to highlight the matter.
5.5 The owners of No.3 Dale Street have written to object to the proposals (14/03/17). The window would be an intrusion of their privacy being only 2.5m away. The installation of obscure
==== PAGE 3 ====
17/00056/B
Page 3 of 6
glazing "would offer little comfort in the fact that the direct view of the proposed window has into our master bedroom will be hazy". The patio fencing as shown is unneighbourly and a gross intrusion of their privacy, this increase in height gives direct views into the stairwell, study, kitchen, master bedroom and into the second bedroom. Part of the proposed decking would be placed on their property and no permission has been given for this; the decking and fence would prevent any maintenance to be carried out to the existing walls. The raised decking present's potential fire and health hazard as the wooden decking would cover the flue outlet from the boiler.
ASSESSMENT 6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are; (i) the impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, (ii) the impact of the proposal upon the amenities of the neighbouring properties.
6.2 The scope of this application is concerned with works solely to the rear of the premises; (1) the installation of a raised deck and fencing; and (2) the installation of a window. Given the intrinsic relationship of the surrounding properties backing onto the application site, it is not possible to view the location of the works concerned with this application from any public highway, nor does it contribute to the important parts that makes up the character of the Conservation Area. The main thrust of this report gives more weight to those specific issues of General Policy 2 as opposed to the Environment Policy 34 & 35 seeking to preserve or enhance.
6.3 The conversion of the premises from office to residential was approved in 2013 under PA- 13/91155/B, setting the principle of use of the upper floors as residential accommodation above a retail outlet or shop on the ground floor and also included the creation of a doorway on the rear elevation with steps down to the flat roof.
Installation of the decking. 6.4 From the site visits to No.4 and No.3, it was distinctly noted the use of the rear areas are an extension of the respective residential dwelling houses offering a degree of outside amenity space which was evident from the domestic paraphernalia within their respective curtilages. It was noted when standing on the application sites flat roof, a degree of mutual overlooking is already established, with Marina being lower than the application site and Lyndale being at a similar height. Views in and out of the site are mutually achievable, diminishing any degree of privacy which appears to be mutually acceptable and to some degree, established by the style of low level semi- transparent fencing on the boundaries. When standing in the rear outdoor area of No.3 it is noted there are two square shaped, domed roof lights, providing light into the kitchen/ dining room below which are semi- transparent. While views into the space below are not immediately apparent, you can see through them and notice people moving around inside.
6.5 The issue of the ownership of the wall is outside the scope of this report and more of a civil issue between the two parties, which has been noted. However, as part of the neighbours' submission a land ownership plan was submitted on behalf of No.3 by their advocates detailing the extent of the boundary ownership and deeds of the property, highlighting their objection.
6.6 Following on from the neighbours' comments to the original plan, an amended drawing (SM17/412/1-A) was received (03/03/17) which drew a compromise and proposed the decking to be fitted at a lower level, approx. 400mm above the level of the flat roof with the aim to mitigate the degree of overlooking and proposed additional steps down onto the decking platform. Whilst it is considered the proposed decking to be satisfactory additional to the property, the degree of overlooking that is already achievable in this confined area would not be seen to be exacerbated by the installation of the decking. For context, from the rear door of the application site, the same outlook is achievable out and across to the neighbouring properties from a higher level than the proposed decking. This aspect of the application is deemed acceptable.
Installation of the window (part retrospective)
==== PAGE 4 ====
17/00056/B
Page 4 of 6
6.7 The installation of a window in the south elevation would be at a similar window cill level as the existing, adjacent bathroom window on the east elevation and less than 1m away on the flank of the building with existing views out and over the roof scape of the neighbouring properties, albeit at a different angle. The proposed window when viewed internally would be within the stairwell and from the highest tread level would not offer any advantageous views out towards the roof scape of No.3 but the window would act more as a source of light into the stairwell. In any case the proposed window is to be fixed, non-openable and frosted glazed, preventing any views in or out.
6.8 The site visit highlighted a number of concerns, within the adjacent properties Marina and Lyndale are four roof lights which are clearly visible from the existing bathroom window of the application site. The concerns of the residents of No.3 are noted and when standing in their bedroom, the proposed window is clearly visible and if clear glass was installed could lead to a perception of an invasion of privacy and if the levels were achievable a degree of direct overlooking into the bedroom of No.3.
6.9 However, the proposed installation of a window is finely balanced, the neighbours' concerns are noted and as the proposal would not serve a habitable room, only a stairwell, at a higher level and is to be frosted glazing which can be strengthened with a condition. It is judged not to be disadvantageous to the occupants of Marina or lead to a loss of privacy and is deemed acceptable. Whilst it is noted that the local authority objects to the application, it is not clear whether they have visited the site which is important to clarify the existing situation as well as what is proposed.
RECOMMENDATION 7.1 Overall, it is concluded that the planning application is in accordance with aforementioned General Policies of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and is recommended for approval.
INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 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 (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.
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 owner and representatives of Marina, 3, Dale Street, Ramsey
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
==== PAGE 5 ====
17/00056/B
Page 5 of 6
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 25.04.2017
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 proposed window shall be glazed with obscure glass to Pilkington Level 5 or equivalent. The window shall also be non-opening and permanently retained as such.
Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjoining occupiers from overlooking and loss of privacy.
This approval relates to drawing referenced; SM17/412/1 Rev A dated 3rd March 2017 and SM17/412/2 dated 19th January 2017.
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 : ...Refused.. Committee Meeting Date:...22.05.2017
Signed :...J SINGLETON... Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
YES/NO See below
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.
==== PAGE 6 ====
17/00056/B
Page 6 of 6
PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 22.05.2017
Application No. :
17/00056/B Applicant : Glenn Kinrade Proposal : Installation of window (retrospective) and construction of decking with perimeter rail Site Address : 4 Market Place East Ramsey Isle Of Man IM8 1JY
Presenting Officer : Mr Jason Singleton
Addendum to the Officer’s Report
Following a site visit by the Planning Committee on 15th May, the application was further presented at its subsequent public meeting on 22nd May where the Committee concluded, against the officer’s recommendation, to refuse the application for the following reasons.
Given the limited distance between the application site and a habitable window within 3 Dale Street the proposed window would give rise to an unacceptable perception of overlooking contrary to General Policy 2 (g) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan.
The installation of the raised decking to the rear of the application site would allow for unobstructed views into 3 Dale Street and the increase in height of the decking adds to the unacceptable perception of overlooking contrary to General Policy 2 (g) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan.
Reasons for Refusal
R 1. Given the limited distance between the application site and a habitable window within 3 Dale Street the proposed window would give rise to an unacceptable perception of overlooking contrary to General Policy 2 (g) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan.
R 2.The installation of the raised decking to the rear of the application site would allow for unobstructed views into 3 Dale Street and the Increase in height of the decking adds to the unacceptable perception of overlooking contrary to General Policy 2 (g) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal