Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
18/01273/B Page 1 of 4
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 18/01273/B Applicant : Mr Kieren Mildwaters Proposal : Alterations to front and rear elevations of property Site Address : 18 Hutchinson Square Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 4HS
Planning Officer: Mr Nick Salt Photo Taken : 20.12.2018 Site Visit : 20.12.2018 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 07.01.2019 __
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. The creation of the two additional doorways in place of bay windows would neither preserve or enhance the character of Ballaquayle Road Conservation Area, the street scene of Hutchinson Square or 18 Hutchinson Square itself. This aspect of the proposal would not comply with General Policy 2 or Environment Policy 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
R 2. The proposed replacement of the railings on the front steps of the property is unacceptable for the following reasons:
(a) There is a lack of information specifying the type and style of the railings to be installed. (b) it does not appear that the replacement railings would match the traidional cast iron pattern and style of the existing and would therefore be detrimental to the character and appearance of the area and the site.
The railing replacements would not comply with Environment Policy 35.
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 18 Hutchinson Square, Douglas. It is an end terrace traditional yellow brick 4 storey dwelling within Ballaquayle Road Conservation Area. The front of the site features prominent steps leading to the front door which is located
==== PAGE 2 ====
18/01273/B Page 2 of 4
on the first floor, with sunken small garden areas to either side of the steps, bounding the public footpath.
1.2 The property features large bay window features the length of the dwelling on both sides of the uPVC front door, with uPVC windows throughout. There is a low boundary wall at the front of the property. Similarly designed houses are a feature of the street scene, although the prominent front steps are somewhat unique to the small terrace of which No.18 is part.
1.3 To the rear of the site, there is a raised concrete area containing an oil tank. There is a small lean-to store at a lowered area of the rear, almost level with the main concrete yard. There is a narrow access lane to the side of the site.
2.0 PROPOSAL 2.1 There are three elements to the proposal: I. The replacement of the uPVC front door with a traditional timber unit to match that of the originals in the area. New metal railing installed on top of the side walls of the entrance steps. II. The removal of ground floor bay windows and alteration of the apertures to create two fully glazed symmetrical patio doors. The lowering of the front gardens and forming of patios. III. The removal of the lean-to store at the lower rear yard level and replacement with an oil tank store.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The application site has been the subject of the following planning applications which are considered relevant to the current: o 05/92181/B - Conversion of lower floor level to form a self-contained apartment, 18 Hutchinson Square. Approved. o 01/01395/B - Installation of uPVC windows to replace existing, 18 Hutchinson Square. Approved.
4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is within an area zoned as residential on the Douglas Local Plan of 1998. The site also lies within the Ballaquayle Road Conservation Area.
4.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this application;
4.3 General Policy 2 states: "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 Environmental Policy 35 states: "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."
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Douglas Borough Council have no objections to this application (18/01273/B).
==== PAGE 3 ====
18/01273/B Page 3 of 4
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are; (i) The impact of the works to the rear of the site; (ii) the impact of the proposed front part of the development on the character of No.18, and whether the new front doors would preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Ballaquayle Road Conservation Area. It is pertinent to consider this application against Environment Policy 35 in particular.
6.2 The Impact of the works to the rear of the site
6.2.1 The rear yard of the site is not readily visible from the public thoroughfare of Hutchinson Square or to vehicles travelling along the access lane to the side of the site. The works proposed would have the effect of tidying up the rear of the site and would have no detrimental impact on either the appearance of the building or the area as a whole.
6.3 Impact of the works to the front of the site
6.3.1 The replacement of the front door with a traditional timber unit would be a welcome and acceptable alteration to the front of the dwelling. The retention of the traditional character and appearance of such dwellings in Conservation Areas is a priority, and the replacement proposed would go some way to ensuring this, and would comply with Environmental Policy 35 in that it would enhance the Conservation Area.
6.3.2 The lowering of the front areas to create patios would not be out of keeping with the character of the area. A number of nearby similar dwellings feature such front patios, and as these works would be below the level of the road, impact would be low. The front of these dwellings is formal in appearance, and these proposed works would be in keeping with that appearance. However, the replacement of the railings proposed does not provide adequate detail as to the style and type of the railings proposed. In a Conservation Area, the identical match of the railings, or a very close match is preferred as this would preserve the character of the area and of the site. The lack of information on the railings means that it cannot be confirmed that the style would match the existing and for this reason the railing replacements are unacceptable.
6.3.3 The key issue to consider here is the replacement of two bay windows at the front ground floor level with patio doors to provide access to the proposed patio areas. The works would be noticeable from the street and would noticeable alter the front of the building. If the bay windows in question were to be replaced, they would be required to match the method of opening and glazing pattern of the original in order to preserve character and appearance. In this case, the apertures would be altered to accommodate a door and the small garden areas lowered. It is not considered likely that the patios to the front would be used enough to warrant the creation of two new doorways - resulting in three doors to the property on the front. With that in mind, it is considered that the creation of the doors would neither preserve nor enhance the character of the area and the appearance of the building.
6.3.4 Additionally, the creation of the two additional doorways could lead to a fragmentation of the dwelling and a further loss of character as a result.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 Whilst some aspects of this planning application are acceptable, the creation of the additional front doors and replacement railings is not as outlined above. As a split decision cannot be issued, it is concluded on balance that the planning application would not comply with aforementioned planning policies of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and is recommended for refusal.
==== PAGE 4 ====
18/01273/B Page 4 of 4
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 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 in Article 6(4) 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 : Refused Date: 16.01.2019
Determining officer
Signed : C BALMER
Chris Balmer
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