Planning Officer Report 08/00907/B

Planning Report And Recommendations {{table:536511}} ### Considerations {{table:536505}} ### Written Representations {{table:536506}} {{table:536507}} ### Consultations {{table:536508}} {{table:536509}} {{table:536510}} ## Consultee : Port Erin Commissioners Notes: Defer until after 11th June 2008. ### Strongly objects Meeting on 05th August 2008. ### Approved

Officer's Report

The Site

The site represents the domestic curtilage of an existing dwelling situated between Tower Road to the south and a narrow lane to the north which leads past the application property and Brackenbank to Headland Cottage to the west. The lane also runs to the north of another property to the east of the application site - Gorse Bank. To the north of the lane and to the north east of the application site are two properties - Cooil Ghlass Veg and Bradda Cottage. To the east of where Tower Road meets the lane there are three properties - Tower Cottage, Bradda Mooar and Heather Cottage on the northern side of the road. To the south of the site sit Charnwood House, Weston House and Dorincourt and Juniper House and Baycliffe to the south east.

The application property has a frontage to the upper lane of approximately 32 m and to Tower Road there is a frontage of around 34 m . The property appears largely as a single storey property from the upper lane, with a steeply pitched roof with accommodation therein: from Tower Road which is lower than the upper lane, the property appears significantly taller, with three full floors of accommodation, accommodation within the roofspace and space beneath the lowest level of formal accommodation.

Work has been on-going on the site for some time.

Planning Status

The site lies within an area designated on the Port Erin Local Plan of 1990 as Predominantly Residential.

Planning History

Planning permission has been sought for the following developments: PA 06/0745 - alterations and erection of extensions to provide additional living accommodation permitted PA 06/2067 - alterations and erection of extensions to provide additional living accommodation (amendment to PA 06/0745) - permitted PA 06/2257 - variations to approved 06/0745 to include widening of pool hall, extension of terrace and revisions to south elevation - permitted PA 07/1758 - alterations and extensions to dwelling to provide additional living accommodation (amendments to approved PAs 06/0745, 06/2067, 06/2257) - withdrawn and PA 07/1918 - alterations and extensions to dwelling (alterations to PAs 06/0745, 06/2067, 06/2257 and 07 / 1758 ). This application was permitted by the Planning Committee and subject to an appeal. The appeal hearing was commenced on 12th March, 2008 and a conclusion deferred pending the submission of a scheme which addressed a number of discrepancies and inaccuracies in the submitted drawings and which had been drawn to the Inspector's attention by the appellant, the occupant of Brackenbank which lies alongside the application property, to the west.

The Proposal

The application proposes a number of changes to the existing property: a number (21) have already been undertaken and some (8) have yet to be implemented at the time of the submission of the application. The works are as follows:

1. a render band has been provided around the windows above the garage and a corresponding lintel band above the garage although the latter is not shown on the proposed elevations. This is a minor and cosmetic change and its omission is not relevant to the consideration of the application.

1. new gate pillars are proposed at the northern side of the house, from the upper lane. These are around 600mm high. Gates were shown as being repositioned to this position in PA 06/2257 and 07/1918.

1. glazed round headed front doors in place of flat headed solid doors with round headed fanlight and amended glazing pattern for the patio doors alongside. Due to the age of the property, it is likely that this would not have required planning permission.

1. railings have been provided along the northern frontage in place of the wall and rail arrangement shown in PA 06/2257. These railings were not shown in PA 07/1918.

1. a pedestrian gate has been provided alongside the eastern end of the northern frontage. In 06/2257 a ramped access was provided up to double gates: it is proposed that the gate is smaller and that steps are provided, as were shown in PA 07/1918 (see 7 below).

1. four rooflights are proposed in the northern elevation, compared with two in PA 06/2257.

1. steps are now proposed alongside the front of the eastern end of the upper lane frontage (see 5 above).

1. two solar panels are proposed on the southern elevation on the eastern end of the roof where none was shown in PA 06/2257 (they were shown in PA 07/1918).

1. The glazing pattern on the patio doors on the southern elevation serving the master bedroom is changed: this would not require planning permission as the aperture permitted under PA 06/2257 is not changed and as such the change to the glazing would comply with Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2005 (Class 21).

1. the glazing in the central pitched roof annex above the living room extension is to change and have full length glazing across its length compared with a central door and windows on each side as shown in PA 06/2257. This change was proposed in PA 07/1918.

1. the glazing to the kitchen which was shown as being two windows in the 06 application is now a single long window with a windows below and a straight stair case leading from the side of the patio outside the living room extension. This is now to be a curved staircase leading from the balcony directly below the kitchen from patio doors which replace the previous window. This arrangement was shown in the 07 application.

1. a small extension is proposed to the west of the balcony alongside the living room extension on the ground floor. This will now project 0.6m further west between the northern extent of the pool hall and the edge of the living room extension.

1. The provision of a round end to the lower ground floor terrace rather than the hexagonal end proposed and approved in PA 06/2257. The terrace is now slightly shorter than previously proposed (16m long and 1.1m from the rear boundary compared with 17m long and 0.4m from the rear boundary).

1. provision of a set of steps onto Tower Road where previously there was no direct access from the eastern side of the site. This was shown on the 07 application.

1. changes from horizontally proportioned windows on the top two floors of the western pitched roof annex on the rear elevation to patio doors with "Juliet" balconies. The balconies will not project beyond the rear wall of the building and as such allow a view to each side only be leaning out over the balcony railing which comprises a handrail with glazed panel below.

1. a pergola is proposed at the western end of the rear garden. This is not shown on the proposed elevations but is illustrated in the photographs included with the application (page 15).

1. the balustrade on the first floor will now be glazed panels rather than a solid wall as proposed in the 06 application.

1. patio doors have been fitted in place of a previous window on the side of the lower ground floor serving the gym to the rear of the pool hall.

1. the series of steps to the lower level is to be removed and the level of the terrace and the internal floor level of the pool hall lowered by 0.85m.

1. installation of a wooden door in the arched stone aperture leading from the garden adjoining Tower Road, onto Tower Road. There was formerly an iron gate.

26 August 2008

1. the installation of vertical timber boarding beneath the pool hall compared with a void previously proposed and
2. Installation of a boiler flue within a chimney rather than a simple boiler flue as proposed previously.

Also proposed are the following works which have not yet been implemented:

1. repositioning of the conservatory on the western side of the rear elevation: this appears to be the introduction of a conservatory in front of the western projecting gable at the level of the main terrace. This will project from the main rear wall of the property by 4.2 m and has a triangular footprint with the longest side attached to the rear elevation. This conservatory will be 3.4 m in height and fully glazed. The side elevation illustrates the height of the existing boundary wall with Brackenbank, which is higher than the conservatory for all but the last 0.9 m where it is still 2 m above floor level
2. the balcony at first floor level is now to be curved rather than straight and with a glazed balcony rather than part solid masonry as approved under PA 06/2257. Due to its new shape, it extends marginally ( 0.7 m ) further out than did the approved balcony, above the living room extension 24. raising of the level of the terrace by 800 mm at the eastern end of the rear elevation, and linking this with the main house
3. the ground floor terrace is to be extended eastwards with a glazed balustrade in front 26. installation of a helical staircase from the ground and lower ground floors
4. redesigning of the living room extension, from a pitched roofed glazed structure to a round feature with domed roof. This projects 7.2 m from the rear elevation compared with the 4.5 m projection of the previous conservatory (although the eastern elevation shows this projecting out further than is shown on the ground floor plan or the western elevation. It should be noted that the style of the conservatory on the previous scheme included a point at the front of the ridge which projected out further than the ground floor so the ridge projected out 5.4 m from the rear wall. 28. The roof of the pool hall is now to be a glazed hipped design, compared with the squared hipped roof proposed in PA 07/1918 and the barrel shaped roof approved under PA 06/2257. The height is to remain the same as both previous applications
5. variation of the facade of the pool hall as viewed from Tower Road and omission of the balcony alongside Tower Road. This part of the building will now be 0.9 m from Tower Road rather than 0.2 m as previously approved.

Representations

Port Erin Commissioners raise an objection to certain parts of the scheme, including the revised glazing to the kitchen and patio doors fitted where there was previously a window as it is considered that the increase in glazing is inappropriate, the proposed circular end to the terrace gives an impression of a greater mass and the glass balustrade increases the impression of glazing, the balconies increase the amount of glazing which is considered out of keeping and the revision to the balcony on the eastern end of the rear elevation is considered out of keeping. Of the works which have yet to be undertaken, the Commissioners object to the raising of the existing terrace and the curved end to the living room all increase the massing of the structure, the helical staircase is out of keeping and the revisions to the roof and facade of the pool hall all increase the massing of the development and are out of keeping. Other parts of the scheme are not opposed.

The Commissioners express concern at the number of items (21) which are retrospective and the incremental way in which the scheme has increased in size and scale over the range of applications which have been submitted. Whilst there is benefit in the works being completed as quickly as possible the Commissioners are opposed to the further increase in size and scale of some of the proposals.

Department of Transport do not oppose the application. Manx Electricity Authority recommend a note regarding existing electricity supplies within the site. This is a matter for those undertaking the works and should not be referred to in the planning decision notice

A part-owner of Bradda Cottage on Tower Road expresses concern at the length of time which neighbours have had to put up with construction traffic passing and blocking the roads which serve their properties and suggest that the Planning Committee should have exercised its powers to control the situation and imply that the applications which have been submitted should not have been either considered or passed and that "all previous appeals have been turned down". In fact there has only been one appeal and that was not concluded. There were no objections to any of the applications prior to PA 07/1758.

The occupant of Brackenbank objects to the scale of the proposed development and the impact of over-development of the site and that it is out of keeping with the area. She suggests that the balconies at the rear of the garage will result in a loss of privacy for her property and a further loss of privacy from the proposed fully glazed living room. Finally, concern is expressed at the potential noise nuisance from the swimming pool plant room.

The Isle of Man Fire and Rescue Service recommend consultation regarding the Fire Precautions (Flats) Regulations 1996. This is a matter for the Building Regulations, not the planning system and as such, the points raised should not be referred to in the planning decision notice.

ASSESSMENT

There are a number of issues which should be considered in respect of this proposal and these are set out at General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan which 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 space 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 adverse 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."

There is no development brief, no features of wildlife, topographical features, public views of the sea which will be adversely affected by the proposal and there is no evidence that the proposal will result in the property not having sufficient amenity standards in itself, would not have sufficient services, would result in risk of erosion or flooding, would have an adverse effect on community safety, personal safety or contaminated land.

The proposal includes the installation of solar panels which will increase the amount of renewable energy collected within the site so addresses n) above.

26 August 2008

The critical issues in the assessment of the proposal are therefore the visual impact on the site and its surroundings, the impact on the amenities of local residents and character of the locality, impact on road safety and traffic flows.

The existing buildings around Tower Road contribute to a built landscape comprising a variety of dwelling types - some vernacular architecture, some semi-detached properties, some horizontally proportioned linear dwellings and other detached, more substantial properties. Roofing material includes slate, tiles, projecting gables and ridgelines running parallel with Tower Road. The property immediately alongside the application site to the north east - Gorse Bank has a large flat roofed extension on the southern elevation facing Tower Road and Brackenbank, to the south west has a flat roofed full height annex on the Tower Road elevation, between two pitched roofed eaves level dormers: both properties have slated roofs. The application property, by contrast has a hipped, tiled roof, two substantial projecting full height gables on the Tower Road elevation and even prior to the enlargement of the windows and installation of glazed balconies which are proposed here, has significantly more glazing than its neighbours and is a wider property. It is not considered that the proposed alterations introduce discordant features nor result in a property which would be so out of keeping with its neighbours as to warrant refusal of the application.

A site visit was conducted on 22nd August, 2008 at which point no workmen were present and no work being undertaken on any construction. An inspection of the inside of the property was undertaken and also of the three external levels of viewing (balconies, conservatory and decking. Despite the opportunities for viewing from the balconies, the projecting decking and structures below prevent an unobstructed view of the properties below (Dorincourt, Weston House and Charnwood House). It should be noted however that a view towards these properties is already available from the windows of the property and if anything, the proposed decking and additional structures (conservatory, pool room etc) obscure this view.

It is possible to stand on the decking and the proposed balconies and look towards Brackenbank. However, it is not possible to look straight into the windows of this property any more than a direct view of the application property is already available from the adjacent property and an existing window in Brackenbank already looks directly towards the application site. As the properties have been designed to maximise the spectacular view across Port Erin Bay - the inclusion of a flat roofed full height annex on Brackenbank with large windows at eaves and ground floor level as viewed from Tower Road, and the flat roofed annex on the rear of Gorse Bank which has a row of large windows looking towards Tower Road, there is already an element of overlooking of adjacent property, both the buildings and the garden areas. The balconies add little to this and do not afford significantly more opportunities for overlooking than are already available from the windows within the dwelling. The erection of the conservatories will provide further impediment of these views.

Whilst the proposed works will generate traffic during the construction period, as has already been experienced, this is not generally a planning consideration as such works are temporary and not connected with land use per se. The additional facilities are unlikely to generate significantly more traffic to or from the property.

In summary, whilst the list of proposed works is significant, some of these items are very minor in scale and have very little impact and no adverse impact. The addition of a slightly larger conservatory on the ground floor level will not have an adverse impact on the occupation of Brackenbank but will decrease the amount of overlooking of the properties on the other side of Tower Road and the addition of a conservatory on the lower ground floor will not introduce any overlooking of Brackenbank as it is at a lower level than the adjacent property. The new domed roofed conservatory on the ground floor will be around 18m from the closest window of Brackenbank and the line of sight is not direct. As such, it is considered that the application should be permitted.

Whilst it is unfortunate that some of the works have been carried out without planning permission, this should not benefit the applicant in any way nor should the applicant be disadvantaged in the

26 August 2008

consideration of the application. Should any part of the application be refused then the applicant has run the risk and expense of having to remove/restore it. Similarly, whilst some neighbours have experienced difficulties in the traffic which has been generated by the works undertaken to date, this should not be used as a reason for refusal.

Party Status

The Department of Transport and the local authority are, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (c) and (d), considered "interested persons" and as such should be afforded party status.

Manx Electricity Authority and The Isle of Man Fire and Rescue Service raise issues which are not material planning considerations and should not be afforded party status in this instance.

The occupant of Brackenbank are directly alongside the property and the owners of Bradda Cottage are affected by the traffic which the additional traffic generated by the additional facilities and accommodation and as such both parties should be afforded party status in this instance.

Recommendation

Recommended Decision: Permitted

Date of Recommendation: 26.08.2008

Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal

• : Notes attached to refusals

C 1. The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.

C 2. This permission relates to the alterations and extensions shown in drawings PA 1G, -2G, -3E, -5A, -6, -7,-8,928 / 1 and the schedule of variations received on 1st May, 2008 and PA 4H received on 16th July, 2008.

Decision Made : Committee Meeting Date :