Loading document...
1.1 The application site forms the curtilage of 9 Arbory Street, Castletown which is a traditional three storey terrace property located on the southern side of Arbory Street and north of Farrants Way. To the immediate west of the site is Shoprite store, which includes a pedestrian access which runs from Arbory Street running through the store and along the eastern boundary of the application site to Farrants Way.
1.2 The ground floor of the application property was until recently used by the Hospice, which includes the rear attached outbuilding. The first and second floor of the main building is also registered (in 1995) as a permanent flat with a maximum occupancy of two persons.
2.1 The application seeks approval for alterations, erection of extension and installation of a replacement shop front.
2.2 In terms of alterations/extensions to the front facade of the property (i.e. facing onto Arbory Street) the main changes include the installation of a flat roof dormer, the blocking up of two second floor windows and the installation of a new traditional styled shop front.
2.3 To the rear elevation it is proposed to install a flat roof dormer replacing existing roof lights and a single storey lean-to extension to the existing attached outbuilding to create a sorting area.
3.1 The previous planning application is considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application;
3.2 Extension to shop - 01/01905/B - APPROVED
4.1 The application site is in an area zoned as "Mixed Use" identified on the Area Plan for the South. The site is within a conservation area.
4.2 Due to the zoning of the site, and the nature of the proposed development, the following planning policy is relevant in the consideration of the 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: (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief; (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; (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea; (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (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; (j) can be provided with all necessary services; (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan; (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding; (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." 4.4 Environment Policy 35 states: "Within Conservation Areas, the Department will permit only development which would preserve or enhance the character of appearance of the area, and will ensure that the special features contributing to the character and quality are protected against inappropriate development."
5.1 Highways Division do not object to the proposal as it has no traffic management, parking or road safety implications. 5.2 Castletown Commissioners recommend that the application be approved.
6.1 It is considered the issue with the proposals relates to the potential impact upon the visual amenities of the street scene/Conservation Area by the proposals. 6.2 When considering any extension/alteration within a Conservation Area the Department will permit only development which would preserve or enhance the character of appearance of the area. 6.3 In relation to the front elevation there are three aspects of the proposal which require consideration. The first is the alterations to the front shop facade which would replace the existing simple facade with a more ornate traditional designed shop front. The applicant indicates that this would be similar in design to similar approved shop fronts. This statement would be correct as the recently completed development 'Callows Yard' shop facades incorporate similar designs. In relation to this proposal, it is considered the scheme would improve the appearance of the ground floor shop facade, enhancing the character of appearance of the street scene.
6.4 The next aspect is the blocking up of the second floor windows. The reasons for this are not indicated within the submission. What is indicated is the windows are at floor level, which in terms of outlook is not ideal. However, the windows serve a bedroom and this configuration already exists and presumably has done since the flat was registered in 1995. Consequently, it cannot be argued that such works are essential. If such works were carried out the two second floor windows would be blocked up which in terms of the visual appearance of the property would adversely affect the character and quality of the property, contrary to Environment Policy 35. 6.5 The third issue relates to the creation of a flat roofed dormer (timber/lead dressed). This proposal would provide outlook and light to the bedroom which is currently served by the second floor windows, proposed to be blocked up. Along this section of Arbory Street the majority of properties do not have dormer accommodation. The exception to this are the inclusion of pitched roofed dormers within the newly constructed 'Callows Yard' development and to the immediately adjacent property Nr 7 Arbory Street, which has two lean-to styled dormer windows to the front elevation, which were approved in 1985. From the street scene these two dormers are apparent and arguable do not add to the character or quality of the property Nr 7 or the Conservation Area. It should be noted that since these two dormers were approved the Castletown Conservation Area (1990), the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2007) and the Area Plan for the South (2013) have all been adopted. The proposed single flat roof dormer would not add to the character or quality of the property, neither would it preserve or enhance the character of appearance of the area. Consequently, it is considered this aspect of the proposal would be also contrary to Environment Policy 35. 6.6 To the rear there are two aspects which need consideration. The first relates to the rear lean to extension to the existing stone outbuilding. This in terms of proportion, form and size would be appropriate to the existing building, whilst not impacting upon residential amenities in the area. 6.7 The second aspect is the proposed flat roof dormer (timber/lead dressed) to the rear elevation of the property. This would replace two existing roof lights. This dormer would not be overlay apparent from Farrants Way; given the rear stone outbuilding which would screen views, but also due to neighbouring properties, which from most aspects screened the rear elevation of the property. Again view of the proposal would be limited from the pedestrian footpath which runs from Farrants Way into the Shoprite Store (along western boundary of site) given the setback position of the dormer from the rear elevation of the Shoprite building and given the positing of the boundary wall and the stone outbuilding. Whilst the proposed flat roofed dormer is not ideal in terms of design, it is considered given its modest size, limited appearance from public view and given the overall screen of Farrants Way is made up of differing styles, designs compared to the street scene of Arbory Street, the proposal would be acceptable in this case.
7.1 For the reasons indicated the proposal would be contrary to General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan and therefore the application is recommended for a refusal.
8.1 It is considered that the following meet the criteria of Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (d) and should be afforded interested party status:
Castletown Commissioners
8.2 The Department of Transport Highways and Traffic Division is now part of the Department of Infrastructure of which the planning authority is part. As such, the Highways and Traffic Division cannot be afforded party status in this instance.
Recommendation
Recommended Decision: Refused
Date of 19.03.2013 Recommendation:
Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
R 1. The proposed flat roof dormer and the blocking up of the second floor windows both to the front elevation, would not contribute to the character or appearance of the area which is designated as a Conservation Area and where the area generally is of considerable age and character and where the Department has a responsibility to require that development preserves or enhances its character and appearance. Consequently, the proposals are considered contrary to General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan.
I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control / Development Control Manager/ Senior Planning Officer.
Decision Made : Refused Date : 2011/12
Determining officer (delete as appropriate) Signed : __________________________ Signed : __________________________ Anthony Holmes Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer Senior Planning Officer
Signed : __________________________ Signed : __________________________ Michael Gallagher Jennifer Chance Director of Planning and Building Control Development Control Manager
19 March 2013 13/00174/B Page 4 of 4
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown