Loading document...
Application No.: 21/00681/B Applicant: Mr Patrick & Mrs Kay O'Meara Proposal: Formation of a second floor balcony and installation of replacement balustrading Site Address: Albert Hotel Athol Street Port St. Mary Isle Of Man IM9 5DS Planning Officer: Miss Lucy Kinrade Photo Taken: 13.08.2021 Site Visit: 13.08.2021 Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 21.10.2021 _________________________________________________________________ Reasons for Refusal R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons R 1. By reason of the height and overall massing of the proposed parapet wall the application is considered to have an unacceptable visual impact on the historic and traditional appearance of the original building and the wider streetscene and fails to preserve or enhance the individual character of the locality and fails to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the proposed Conservation Area. The application is considered to fail Strategic Polices 3 and 5, General Policy 2 (b), (c) and (g) and the principles of Environment Policy 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons
None _____________________________________________________________________________
1.0 APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is the curtilage of The Albert Public House, Port St Mary an existing end terrace property located at the southern end of Athol Street and facing directly over Port St Mary harbour. The original building is a traditional, three storey building with two large gable end chimney stacks and an unaltered slated pitch roof. The façade of the building comprises two large windows and a door at ground floor and three windows to each floor vertically aligned above. The building is grey render dashed with white string courses defining the floor levels and render bands surround each of the windows.
1.2 On the end gable are two stepped extensions both finished with flat roofs. These extensions provide additional floor area at ground and first floor. They are both finished to match the detail of the original building. On the submitted drawings the flat roof of the lower extension measures 3.8m high, the flat roof of the upper extension measures 6m high. The eaves level of the original building measures 8m high and the central ridge 11.5m high. - 1.3 To the rear of the extensions is a metal fire escape stairwell and landing which appears to provide a means of escape from a second floor window on the end gable. - 1.4 The topography of the site means that the land slopes down towards the east and towards the harbour. The dwellings along Queens Road which sit to the rear of the pub sit at a higher level with views over the site and towards the bay. - 1.5 During a site visit it was noted that there was frameless glazed balustrading installed around the lower level flat roof.
2.0 PROPOSAL - 2.1 The current application seeks approval for the installation of a parapet wall and a glazed balustrades around the upper flat roof extension and its subsequent use as a balcony accessed from the upper floor of the main building. - 2.2 The proposed parapet wall is to be built up to 1.1m tall with an overall measurement from ground floor of 7.3m high. The glazed balustrades to be fitted above the parapet are to be 0.7m tall taking the overall height of the wall and glazing to 8m above ground level and matching the eaves of the existing building. - 2.3 The parapet wall is to be finished to match rest of the building. - 2.4 The metal balustrades enclosing the escape landing at second floor will be removed, and access onto the escape stairwell maintained through a break in the parapet wall at the rear of the building. - 2.5 Both the existing and proposed elevation drawings as submitted show glazed balustrades around the lower level flat roof.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The application site has been subject to a number of previous planning applications for various alterations and extensions over the years, two of these are considered to be materially relevant to the assessment of the current proposal, it is noted that there are no previous applications for the glazed balustrading already installed on the lower level flat roof.
As such, the proposal does not have the same impact as that proposed and refused previously."
4.0 PLANNING POLICY - 4.1 The application site is in an area designated as Mixed Use on the Area Plan for the South 2013 and also within a proposed Conservation Area. Given the nature of the proposal it is relevant to consider Strategic Policies 3 and 5, General Policy 2 and Environment Policies 23 and 35 of the Strategic Plan. Given the location of the site within the proposed Conservation Area it is also relevant to consider the 2009 Port St Mary Draft Conservation Area Character Appraisal. - 4.2 Strategic Policy 3: "Proposals for development must ensure that the individual character of our towns and villages is protected or enhanced by:
4.3 Strategic Policy 5: "New development, including individual buildings, should be designed so as to make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island. In appropriate cases the Department will require planning applications to be supported by a Design Statement which will be required to take account of the Strategic Aim and Policies." - 4.4 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:
4.5 Environment Policy 23: "When considering alterations and improvements to existing facilities the Department will require that consideration be given to the potential adverse impact of the proposed changes to existing neighbours." - 4.6 Environment Policy 35: "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." - 4.7 The 2009 Port St Mary Draft Conservation Area Character Appraisal only specifically references the Albert Hotel once and indicates its siting pre-dating 1869:
"Little of Athol Street was built in 1869, although the Albert Hotel, formerly known as The Ship Inn and The Temperance Hotel can be noted."
4.8 In addition to this the following extracts relate to the development of dormers overtime and where there inclusion has had a negative impact on the conservation area as a whole:
"The Victorian expansion, which occurred due to the growth of the tourist trade, resulted in much larger properties, with up to four floors and increased floor-to-ceiling heights. Most properties were still built in terraced form, with occasional semi-detached or detached houses. Windows in these properties are typically two pane sashes, often set in bay windows, and rendered eves brackets were used. Roof coverings were still slate, but with steeper pitches to accommodate rooms in the roof, which often had dormer windows. Walls were usually rendered, but with a hood drip moulding replacing window architraves."
"Throughout the proposed conservation area, there are properties where alterations, particularly to windows and entrance doors, have a negative effect on the area as a whole. This includes replacement of original timber windows and doors with incorrectly proportioned uPVC replacements. These often have an inappropriate wood grain. There are many examples of enlarged and oversized window openings with no consideration to appearance, but merely to improve the view out from the property. This problem is particularly prevalent with dormer and roof windows."
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only. - 5.1 Port St Mary Commissioners - no comments received as of 21/10/2021. - 5.2 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services - No highways interest (28/06/2021). - 5.3 No comments received from neighbouring properties.
6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 There are two key matters to consider in the assessment of the current application, i) the visual impact and ii) the amenity impact on the neighbours. Visual Impact - 6.2 The Albert Hotel, formerly known as The Ship Inn pre-dates most of Athol Street which was constructed after 1869. Over time (and likely prior to the designation of the proposed Conservation Area) there have been a number of changes to properties along Athol Street and The Underway including some flat roof dormers, enlarged window openings and designs changed to maximise harbour views and in the case of this site large flat roof extensions. In some cases these changes have had consequential impacts on the original historic and architectural quality of the area. It is therefore all the more important to seek to preserve or enhance those existing buildings and remaining fabric which make a positive contribution to the proposed Conservation Area. The original building of the Albert Hotel is of both historic and architectural interest and forms part of one of Port St Mary's most prominent vistas from the bay and it is considered that this principle harbour facing property and elevation should be protected from harm. - 6.3 Although large, the current flat roof extensions remain, to a degree, subordinate to the original building due to their lower levels being below the upper floor windows of the original building and below the top string course. However, the parapet wall as now proposed will result in an increase to this overall height and massing of the upper flat roof extension and to a level which would negatively encroach on the eaves height of the original building and one which will further reduce views to the original end gable. The proposals would not be subordinate to the original building and would only seek to make worse the current arrangements to an unacceptable level. The proposed parapet wall would be an inappropriate level of development and would be insensitive to the character and appearance of the original building. Amenity Impact
6.4 It is clear from planning history that concerns have been expressed in respect of the overlooking and privacy impacts on the rear properties of Queen Street from a balcony or patio here. - 6.5 In the specific case of this application for the parapet wall and glazed balustrade works to the upper flat roof level, it may be that given the elevated position of the upper proposed balcony coupled with the height of the parapet wall and glazed balustrading above (which could be conditioned to be obscured nearest the edge along the rear Queen Street properties) may help to limit some overlooking between Baie Fiion and the application site given the distance, orientation and level changes between them, however the proximity of The Courtyard and its two storey rear elevation will likely be more affected as you step away from the screening and further towards the harbour side of the balcony where views upwards, backwards above the screening may still be achievable. - 6.6 Of course the very nature of the typography and properties here would be that those properties sitting at a higher level would naturally have views overlooking those at a lower level, and ultimately the key views are those outwards and over the harbour. Environment Policy 23 indicates that consideration shall be given to the potential adverse impacts of the proposed changes on the existing neighbours, and in the case of this application it is not felt that it has been suitably demonstrated that the proposal will not make worse the arrangements between the application site and the neighbours at The Courtyard.
7.0 CONCLUSION - 7.1 By reason of the height and overall massing of the proposed parapet wall the application is considered to have an unacceptable visual impact on the historic and traditional appearance of the original building and the wider streetscene and fails to preserve or enhance the individual character of the locality and fails to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the proposed Conservation Area. - 7.2 For the above reasons it is considered that the application fails to comply with Strategic Polices 3 and 5, General Policy 2 (b), (c) and (g) and the principles towards development in Conservation Areas as set out in Environment Policy 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
8.2 The decision maker must determine:
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 and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.
Decision Made: Refused Date: 25.10.2021 Determining officer Signed : J SINGLETON Jason Singleton 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
View as Markdown