Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
19/00192/B
Page 1 of 7
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 19/00192/B Applicant : Mrs Mary Slater Proposal : Alterations, erection of a first floor extension and widening of driveway and vehicular access Site Address : 23 Scarlett Road Castletown Isle Of Man IM9 1NS
Photo Taken : 09.10.2019 Site Visit : 23.04.2019 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 22.10.2019
Reasons for Refusal:
R 1. The proposed rear extension/s by reason of the siting (adjacent to a public highway Queens Street), its substantial size (height, width and mass) and design results in a significant and adverse visual impact on the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and from public view and on the wider character of the locality and appearance of the streetscene and therefore the application fails the tests of General Policy 2 (b), (c) and (g) and the guidance set out under 3.0 of the Residential Design Guidance. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties 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):
No. 25 Scarlett Road - as they do not satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (July 2018).
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 23 Scarlett Road, Castletown a detached single storey dwelling with attic space in the roof. The dwelling is situated on the southern side of Scarlett Road, its front elevation faces into the estate while its rear elevation faces over the rear garden and towards Queen Street which runs between the back of the houses and along the Scarlett coastline.
1.2 The Scarlett Road streetscene comprises similarly sized and styled properties although some have slight variations with small dormers or forward projecting gables.
==== PAGE 2 ====
19/00192/B
Page 2 of 7
1.3 The Queen Street side of the streetscene comprises a much wide range of rear elevations comprising a variety of styles, forms, periods, massing and scale including dormers, full two storey extensions and there are a number of first floor roof terraces.
1.4 The existing dwelling is set back slightly from Scarlett Road and includes an integral single garage on the front elevation in front of which a narrow drive for the parking of one car off the road. At the rear the dwelling has an existing flat roof conservatory projecting 2.2m from the real elevation and 5m wide. The existing dwelling has an eaves level of 2.8m and a central ridge height 6.2m high.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application proposes a number of external alterations and extensions to the existing dwelling to create additional living accommodation at first floor and facilitating an internal rearrangement of the existing layout.
2.2 The proposed external alterations include the removal of a side elevation porch and the installation of a new front porch canopy, the making smaller of an existing front elevation window, the rendering of the dwelling throughout with smooth render, the removal of each gable elevation window, the replacement of the interlocking concrete roof tiles with smooth concrete tiles and the increase of the existing driveway from 3m wide to 7.5m wide.
2.3 The proposed extension to create additional living accommodation is to be situated at the rear of the dwelling (Queen Street elevation). The extension is to project directly upwards from the line of the existing rear elevation and is to result in the formation of two projecting gables from the existing roof. Each gable elevation will be approx. 5m wide with a two storey eaves level of 6.5m and central ridge line 8.5m high. Between each gable is to sit a 3m wide flat roof two storey element.
2.4 The proposed extension is to introduce large feature windows on each proposed gables at both ground and first floor and two windows in the flat roof element between. Each gable is proposed to be finished in cedral cladding.
2.5 The current application follows from an original scheme submitted which proposed the same external alterations works as above (2.2), however the proposed rear extension was to be a two storey flat roof extension stretching the full 13m rear elevation and including 3 large Juliet balconies at ground floor and 3 large feature windows to the first floor. The extension did not seek to increase the existing footprint. The proposed flat roof was to sit around 0.5m lower than the ridge of the main house with a rear elevation eaves level approx. 6.5m high. An external stepped access was proposed to sit central to the rear elevation providing access from the house to the lower level of the garden. The extension and dwelling is to be finished in smooth render throughout and cedral weatherboard cladding is proposed on the small projecting section on the rear elevation.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 There have been no previous applications submitted for the site. Minded of the nature of the current proposal it may be relevant to consider the following applications for dwellings along the same stretch of road in the assessment of the current proposal.
o PA 15/01051/B - Alterations and first floor extensions to dwelling - 21 Scarlett Road o PA 16/01404/B - Erection of replacement dwelling - 31 Scarlett Road
4.0 DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES 4.1 The application site is within an area zoned as "Predominantly Residential" identified on the Area Plan for the South 2013. Given the nature of the application it is appropriate to consider General Policy 2 and Paragraph 8.12.1 of the Strategic Plan, and the recently released Residential Design Guide which sets out a number of general standards towards development to existing residential properties.
==== PAGE 3 ====
19/00192/B
Page 3 of 7
4.2 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, and g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways"
4.3 Paragraph 8.12.1:
"As a general policy, in built up areas not controlled by Conservation Area or Registered Building policies, there will be a general presumption in favour of extensions to existing property where such extensions would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent property or the surrounding area in general."
Residential Design Guide states (in part):
4.4 "3.0 Householder 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 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.
3.2 POTENTIALVISUAL IMPACT OF AN EXTENSION UPON THE EXISTING HOUSE 3.2.1 The first aspect which the Department considers when determining the suitability of an extension to a house is whether the design of the extension fits with the existing property.
==== PAGE 4 ====
19/00192/B
Page 4 of 7
Extensions should generally appear subordinate to the existing house i.e. appear as smaller additions rather than being overbearing features dominating the existing house.
3.2.2 Extensions should generally have the same roof pitch (angle) and shape as the existing dwelling and the height (roof ridge) should be lower than that of the main building. Generally, pitch roofs are the preferred roof type compared to flat roofs which are generally inappropriate forms of development, especially if publically viewable, unless the existing property has a flat/low pitched roof design. The extension should normally incorporate any design/interesting features of the existing dwelling (with windows and doors replicating the design, proportions and materials of the original building, and being in line with the existing openings) unless a deliberate design decision has been made to adopt a different approach - as set out on the next page.
3.3 POTENTIALVISUAL IMPACT UPON THE STREETSCENE/LANDSCAPE 3.3.1 Extensions should generally be in keeping with the character and appearance of the street in which they are seen. Taking note of the spaces between existing dwellings and adhering to the front building line are important aspects when considering the appropriateness of an extension in the street scene. In the case of dwellings which form part of a group of properties and which have a prominent appearance within the street scene, it will be especially important to ensure any extension does not adversely affect either the overall group of dwellings or the individual dwelling."
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed in full on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 Castletown Commissioners - no comments received for the original scheme or amended drawings as of 21/10/2019.
5.2 The Department of Infrastructure Highway Services - no comments received for the original scheme or amended drawings as of 21/10/2019.
5.3 A representative of the owner of neighbouring property 25 Scarlett Road, has written in on the application stating that they have no objections to the current application (17/10/2019).
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The assessment of the application can be split into three parts;
i) the external alterations to the front and side elevations - the removal of existing side porch and installation of a front entrance canopy, the modification to and removal of existing windows and the replacement of the roof tiles ii) the widening of the driveway iii) the proposed rear extension.
i) External Alterations
6.2 These works are proposed throughout the side gable elevations and the Scarlett Road facing front elevation. As a whole the alterations to the front and side elevations are fairly moderate and small in scale and would not unduly affect neighbouring amenity. The removal of the side gable windows and re-rendering over will help to maintain a uniform appearance throughout the dwelling and the loss of the windows minimising overlooking and privacy impacts on the neighbour and the alterations to the size of one existing front elevation window and the installation of a covered porch area will be generally in-keeping with the overall residential appearance and not especially prominent albeit they would likely present a more modern appearance and approach to design compared with the general style of the neighbours.
ii) Driveway
==== PAGE 5 ====
19/00192/B
Page 5 of 7
6.3 The existing driveway provides room for one vehicle off the road with the current application seeking to enlarge this area to 7.5m which could allow for up to 3 vehicles to park of the road. This provision is in excess of the 2 spaces required by the IOM Strategic Plan and would improve parking at the site. At least 9m width of the existing front garden will remain which benefits the visual amenity of the estate. As the dwelling is not bound by any walling or existing vegetation along the edge of the highway it is not expected that there will be any issues in terms of visibility and no new highway issues are expected as a result of the development.
iii) Rear Extension
6.4 In assessing development here consideration must be given to the relationship of the extension to the existing original dwelling with the surrounding streetscene and adjacent dwellings, ultimately proposals should respect the siting, layout, scale, form and design of the existing dwelling, should not adversely affect neighbouring amenity and should not adversely affect the character and appearance of the area all as set out in the Residential Design Guide and General Policy 2.
6.5 This part of the application has been the most difficult to consider particularly as the existing dwelling remains largely unchanged since its original development, and that the existing Queen Street elevation of the dwelling sits amongst a number of properties that have already been subject to previous alteration and/or extension resulting in the introduction of flat roof features across many of the rear elevations including single and two storey flat roof extensions and flat roof dormers. On the other hand however No. 19 and immediate neighbour No. 25 remain single storey and with little or no changes to their rear elevations similar to the application site.
6.6 The original scheme for the application proposed a full two storey flat roof extension at the rear, this extension stretching the 13m width of the dwelling and having a roof level 0.5m lower than the main ridge line. In its own right when considered against General Policy 2 and the Residential Design Guide the relationship of the proposal compared with the existing original dwelling was considered by reason of its siting, scale (height and width) and design (flat roof) which fronted the public highway to result in an adverse visual impact on the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and subsequently a negative impact the wider character and appearance of the streetscene, resulting in a proposal which further replicated those flat roof elements which did not positively contribute to the streetscene.
6.7 In order to resolve the design concerns of 6.6 the applicant and agent sought to revise the scheme omitting the large flat roof and replacing it with two pitched roofs. It's clear that in trying to resolve the earlier concerns, that the current proposal now results in a scheme which is taller and far more prominent which wouldn't sit comfortably next to the original dwelling or next to the neighbours dwellings (particularly No. 25) and contradicting those relevant parts of the Residential Design Guide and General Policy 2.
6.8 There have been two proposals put forward for the site. In looking again at the streetscene and the two proposals, it would be reasonable to say that the introduction of the original flat roof design would likely have a lesser impact compared with its pitched roof counterpart, the flat roof design mimicking those flat roof features already found throughout the streetscene and seeking to camouflage the development amongst its surroundings. The pitched roof counterpart would be taller with a contrasting roof arrangement and modern approach to design, while this perhaps follows those principles set of the Residential Design Guide, its impact is exacerbated negatively due to the modest size of the existing dwelling to which it will be attached, the small size and stepped back position of No. 25 and the extant flat roofs already prevalent in the area.
6.9 In reaching a balance, an officer must consider not what scheme would be the least objectionable but which is acceptable and appropriate based on the tests of the relevant policies and against the tests of the relevant design guides. In light of the above it is considered that the
==== PAGE 6 ====
19/00192/B
Page 6 of 7
proposal for the pitched roof design is unacceptable. The original flat roof design is expected to have less of a visual impact in comparison but is still likely to have both neutral and negative effects on the appearance of the existing dwelling and the wider streetscene. It is undisputed that this flat roof and two storey arrangement has over time become visible in the surroundings, but that this is not an approach to design which should be sought to be replicated and development should not adversely impact the character and appearance of the existing dwelling when viewed in the streetscene.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 The rear extension by reason of its adverse visual impact on the existing dwelling and the streetscene is on balance considered to fail the tests of parts (b), (c) and (g) of General Policy 2 as to warrant the application's refusal. While those other works relating to the driveway, front and gable windows, the removal of a side porch and installation of entrance canopy are considered acceptable, a split decision cannot be actioned.
8.0 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 Planning Committee 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.
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: 28.10.2019
Signed : L KINRADE 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 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 7 ====
19/00192/B
Page 7 of 7
PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 28.10.2019
Application No. :
19/00192/B Applicant : Mrs Mary Slater Proposal : Alterations, erection of a first floor extension and widening of driveway and vehicular access Site Address : 23 Scarlett Road Castletown Isle Of Man IM9 1NS
Planning Officer Miss Lucy Kinrade Reporting Officer As above
Addendum to the Officer’s Report
The Planning Committee unanimously agreed to overturn the recommendation of the officer and to approve the application. The members concluded that the appearance of the dwellings from Queen Street was already so varied with most of the dwellings having already been altered or extended in the past resulting a wide mix styles and finishes, and that the pitched roof arrangement of the proposed extension would not result in such a level of visual harm on this streetscene as to refuse the application. The members considered that the application met with the tests of General Policy 2 (b, c and g).
The final decision made by the members was to approve the application subject to two conditions, the standard 4 year condition, and a condition stipulating the specific drawing number for the pitched roof scheme.
Conditions of Approval
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. For the avoidance of doubt, this approval relates to the development works shown in drawing number 2G date stamped and received on 24 JUL 2019.
Reason: To clarify the nature of the approval.
This application relates to drawing numbers 1A, 3, 4 and 5 all date stamped and received 22/02/2019, and drawing number 2G and 6, and supporting statement date stamped and received 24/07/2019.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal