Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
21/00921/B Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 21/00921/B Applicant : Mr Eric Anglin Proposal : Alterations, Erections of a rear extension and installation of roof light to front elevation Site Address : 32 Queen Street Castletown Isle Of Man IM9 1PA
Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken : 28.09.2021 Site Visit : 28.09.2021 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 08.11.2021 __
Conditions and Notes for Approval
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
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 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposal meets the tests of Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999; General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, as well as Planning Policy Statement 1/01.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This decision relates to the Photograph, Existing Location Plan, Existing Site Plan, Proposed Location Plan, Propose Site Plan, Existing Plans and Elevations, and Proposed Plans and Elevations received on 27 July 2021, and Correspondence from Applicant received 14 October 2021. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None
__
==== PAGE 2 ====
21/00921/B Page 2 of 5
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The site is the residential curtilage of 32 Queen Street, Castletown, a two storey mid- terraced dwelling in Castletown, within the town's Conservation Area. The property has a pitched roof, a chimney stack on each of the party walls, painted render walls and single glazed casement windows.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application seeks planning approval for alterations, erections of a rear extension and installation of roof light to front elevation. The extension which would be at first floor level would project 6.9m from the rear of the dwelling, be about 3.7m wide and about 3.5m high from the street level to the top of its pitch roof. A patio door and two windows on either side of the patio door will be installed on the rear elevation which would be at street level from the rear yard which is on elevated land. There would be some areas of glazing above the windows and patio door. No windows would be installed on either of the side elevations, although a conservation style velux rooflights would be installed on either roof plane of the pitch roof which would be finished in natural slate tiles. The external walls of this first floor extension would be finished in render to match existing building.
2.2 Also proposed is the installation of a conservation style roof light on the front roof plane of the dwelling. All the rooflights proposed for the extension and that proposed for the main roof plane would measure 800mm x 600mm, and be to a conservation style.
The neighbour's velux is approx. 140 cm horizontally from the side of the wall at an average height of 130cm (110cm to 160cm) from the proposed floor. Therefore, projecting from the line of the roof, a horizontal distance of 140cm at an angle of 38 degrees means the shadow will fall at a maximum height of 61cm from the proposed floor. o In other words, at a projected 38 degree angle there will be no shadowing of any part of the neighbours' velux, 140 cm from the side of the building, from the bottom to the top because the highest point of shadow is 61cm, and the lowest point of the velux is 110cm, (61cm height and above will be in light). o The measurements are accurate within 5%, of which will not alter the outcome significantly, in that the velux will remain out of the projected shadow of the roof even with a 5% variation in measurement or build.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY. 3.1 The site is within area defined as Predominantly Residential on Map 5 of the Area Plan for the South 2013, and within the town's Conservation Area where Planning Policy Statement 1/01 requires development to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the area and to take into account in any decision, the special character of the area. The site is not prone to flood risk, although the road serving the application property and its neighbours is considered to have medium likelihood of surface water flood risk. The site is also not within a Registered Tree Area, and there are no protected trees on site. As such, the following Strategic Plan policies are relevant:
3.2 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:
==== PAGE 3 ====
21/00921/B Page 3 of 5
(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; (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption.
3.3 Strategic Policy 4: Proposals for development must: (a) Protect or enhance the fabric and setting of Ancient Monuments, Registered Buildings(1), Conservation Areas(2), buildings and structures within National Heritage Areas and sites of archaeological interest;
3.4 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.
3.5 Environment Policy 34 expresses a preference for the use of traditional materials in the maintenance, extension or alteration of pre-1920 buildings.
4.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1999 S18 Designation of conservation areas Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999) states, "(4) Where any area is for the time being a conservation area, special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing its character or appearance in the exercise, with respect to any buildings or other land in the area, of any powers under this Act".
4.2 Planning Policy Statement 1/01 "POLICY CA/2: SPECIAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS When considering proposals for the possible development of any land or buildings which fall within the conservation area, the impact of such proposals upon the special character of the area, will be a material consideration when assessing the application. Where a development is proposed for land which, although not within the boundaries of the conservation area, would affect its context or setting, or views into or out of the area; such issues should be given special consideration where the character or appearance of a conservation area may be affected".
5.0 PLANNING HISTORY 5.1 The site has not been the subject of any previous planning application and as such there are no applications considered to be materially relevant in the assessment and determination of the current application.
6.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.
6.1 Representation from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division confirms that they 'Do not oppose' in a letter dated 11 August 2021.
6.2 There has been no written representation made regarding the current planning application by the Castletown Commissioners at the time of writing this report, although they were consulted on 4 August 2021.
==== PAGE 4 ====
21/00921/B Page 4 of 5
6.3 No comments have been received from neighbouring properties.
7.0 ASSESSMENT 7.1 The issues in this case are whether the proposed works would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area and secondly, whether they would have an adverse impact on the living conditions of those in 30, Queen Street.
7.2 The proposed change to the front elevation through the installation of a conservation style rooflight is not considered to detract from the character of this traditional terraced property and the Conservation area. This is hinged on the fact that the new rooflight is unlikely to have any significant impact as the roof structure which is mostly not visible due to the height of the building and the raised site level when compared to the abutting highways. Besides, the style and appearance of the new rooflight is a common feature within the street scene, and is the generally acceptable form and design of rooflights in Conservation areas.
7.3 The rear extension will increase the bulk of the dwelling when viewed from the rear. However, the fact that the extension would be finished with already existing features such as the pitched roof, natural slate finish and painted render finish, would ensure that the new extension fits seamlessly with the existing dwelling. Whilst it is noted that it would have been more acceptable to set the roof of the extension lower than the main roof ridge, the first floor of the dwelling already has a low head room and as such lowering the ridge lower than proposed may impede on the functionality of the space. Similarly, the removal of the existing rear yard to create this extension is also not considered to be detrimental to the property given that the rear yard is not particularly spacious and a number of the neighbouring properties have built to the rear boundary, and as such the works would not be out of keeping with the area.
7.4 In terms of the impact of the rear extension on the character of the Conservation Area, it is noted that the works on the rear elevation of the property would likely be the aspect with the least visual impact within the street scene, given its location at the rear of the property and along a rear lane which is not considered to be a particularly important viewpoint, considering the rear lane is not characterised by the same charm and character that the front street scene bears. Besides, the proposed works would be a significant improvement over similar first floor rear extensions that have been carried out within this rear lane. Thus, it is considered that the works would have a neutral impact on the character and appearance of the dwelling and Conservation Area.
7.5 In terms of the impact on the rear of number 30, particularly the rear rooflight on this neighbour's rear roof plane, the applicant has provided correspondence which assesses why there would be no real impacts on this neighbouring rooflight, and highlights the roof angle and distance from the northern wall of the proposed extension from the neighbouring roflight as factors that would limit any impacts in terms of loss of light. It is, however, worth noting that this neighbouring property is situated northeast of the extension with the inclined layout of the site in relation to the suns path serving to ameliorate any impacts that could result. Likewise, observations during the site visit on 28 September 2021 showed that the key challenge for this neighbouring rooflight would be the mono-pitched extension on the rear of this neighbouring property which stretches to the boundary and rises over 1.5m high. As such, it is considered that the proposed extension will not have so significant an impact on light reaching this property as to justify refusal of the application.
7.6 It is also not considered that the scheme would result in overbearing impacts on this neighbour considering the eaves level would be set lower than the mono-pitched extension at the rear of this neighbouring property, with the roof of the extension leaning away from this neighbour with the ridge height only 1.4m higher than the eaves.
==== PAGE 5 ====
21/00921/B Page 5 of 5
7.7 The installation of a rooflight on either roof plane of the extension is also not considered to be of detriment to this dwelling given that conservation style rooflights would be used. Their position within the roof plane would also ensure they do not impact on the privacy of neighbouring properties.
8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 Whilst the proposal may impact on some level of lighting reaching the rooflight on number 30, it is considered that given the location and context of the site, the existing extension on this neighbouring property, the areas from where the extension will be viewed and the fact that the works will not have an impact on the public view or the Conservation Area itself, the application is recommended for approval.
9.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 9.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.
9.2 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 above who should be given Interested Person Status __
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management 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 : Permitted Date : 24.11.2021
Determining officer Signed : S BUTLER
Stephen Butler
Head of Development Management
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