Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
19/00843/B Page 1 of 4
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 19/00843/B Applicant : Mr Mark & Mrs Shannon Smith Proposal : Alterations, erection of rear first floor extension and installation of dormer windows Site Address : 21 Kissack Road Castletown Isle Of Man IM9 1NW
Principal Planner: Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken : 13.08.2019 Site Visit : 13.08.2019 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 02.09.2019 __
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan requires that development has an acceptable impact on the surrounding area and this is further guided by the Department's Residential Design Guidance adopted in March 2019. This clearly presumes against flat roofed extensions and annexes which do not follow the style and design of the buildings to which they would be attached, particularly where the works would be publicly visible. In this case, the two storey flat roofed extension would be visible from both Kissack and Scarlett Roads and would appear as an incongruous and clumsy addition to the built fabric. The rear extension is therefore contrary to GP2b, c and g. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
THE SITE 1.1 The site is the residential curtilage of an existing dwelling which sits on the south eastern side of Kissack Road. The rear garden wraps behind those of its neighbours, numbers 23 and 19, incorrectly annotated on the site plan as both 25.
1.2 The property is a dormer bungalow with currently no dormers on the front or rear roofs although the adjoining property, number 23 has flat roofed dormers in both the front and rear planes.
==== PAGE 2 ====
19/00843/B Page 2 of 4
1.3 The property has a single storey flat roofed extension on the rear with a flat roofed garage alongside which sits slightly further back than the rear elevation.
1.4 The current flat roofed rear extension is visible from Kissack Road as from Scarlett Road, particularly as there is a lane to the north of 36, Scarlett Road which affords a view towards the rear of the application property and number 23 and 19.
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the upward extension of the existing flat roofed rear annex and its external finish in render to match the existing finish and the end finished in cladding in a light colour. This will form an uninterrupted extension of the existing gable.
2.2 Also proposed is the installation of a flat roofed dormer on the front and rear both finished in cladding (presumably coloured to match the roof against which they will sit).
2.3 An additional window will be introduced in the side elevation and the existing side door will be replaced with a window.
2.4 The rear of the two storey elevation will have a clear glazed Juliet-style balcony at first floor level and patio doors beneath which will replace an existing window alongside another set of patio doors replacing another existing window.
PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South as Residential. As such, the following parts of the Strategic Plan are relevant:
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; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality".
"8.12.1 Extensions to Dwellings in built up areas or sites designated for residential use 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."
3.2 The Department has recently published the Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) which provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property. This aims to "encourage creative, innovative and locally distinct designs" and which improves the quality of the built environment. Specific advice is given regarding the design of extensions, suggesting that "extensions should generally have the same roof pitch and shape as the existing dwelling and their height should be lower than that of the main building. Generally pitch roofs are the preferred roof type compared with flat roofs which are generally inappropriate forms of development, especially if publicly viewable, unless the existing property as a flat/low pitched roof design" (3.2.2)
PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 17/00069/B saw the approval of the existing flat roofed extension on the rear. The planning officer's report for that application states the following:
==== PAGE 3 ====
19/00843/B Page 3 of 4
"6.2 The proposed extension is not particularly attractive but not completely out of keeping with the property which already has a flat roofed annex to the side. The rear of the property is not particularly publicly visible and the impact from adjacent residential property will be little different from what presently exists."
4.2 The front and rear dormers on number 23 were approved under 02/01846/B.
REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services indicate that there is no highway interest in the application (09.08.19)
ASSESSMENT 6.1 Whilst the character of the street and surrounding area (Scarlett Road) is formed by relatively modern properties with some flat roofed dormers and flat roofed extensions, some of which may now fail to meet the standards set out in the RDG to avoid such features, most are modest in size and many largely situated at the rear where they are either not publicly visible or where only a small part of the feature is visible from a public perspective. The proposed two storey flat roofed extension does not accord with the advice in the RDG about flat roofed extensions and would be clearly visible from Kissack Road between numbers 19 and 21, as well as from Scarlett Road.
6.2 The extension would be a clumsy, discordant and easily visible feature in the streetscenes of both Kissack and Scarlett Road which would adversely affect the character and appearance of the area contrary to General Policy 2b,c and g.
6.3 The rear and front dormers, whilst not overly attractive, are not dissimilar to those already on the adjoining property and would therefore not significantly affect the appearance of the pair, arguably introducing more balance to the semi-detached dwellings. The alterations to windows and doors would have a neutral impact and are not objectionable.
6.4 The rear extension will be 15m from the rear boundary and well over 20m from the rear of the property directly behind and as such, it is not considered that there is any adverse impact on the living conditions of those in neighbouring property to justify refusal of the application for that reason.
CONCLUSION 7.1 The application is not supported.
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. __
==== PAGE 4 ====
19/00843/B Page 4 of 4
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: 17.09.2019
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