Loading document...
The property in question is Harbour House, 7 The Quay, Castletown registered building (RB 047), located within the harbour area of the town in the Castletown Conservation Area.
The application proposes the replacement of an existing roof light with a larger roof light (in association with 06/00880 GB)
None
I have considered the content of the application with particular consideration to Policy RB/5 Alterations and Extensions to a Registered Building as set out in Planning Policy Statement 1/01.
Of consideration here, is the Appeal Inspector’s decision on 05/00386/GB and CON. In it the Inspector concludes, inter alia,
"In this case the dormer is not necessary to accommodate a new or existing use or to ensure long term viability. There is no evidence that the building cannot continue to support its residential use without the dormer. Having inspected the interior of the building I can well understand why the appellants feel that it would enhance their enjoyment to have views from the upper floor over the harbour. However, the bedroom and small study can and no doubt will continue to accommodate those uses without the dormers as they have in the past. The view they seek to enjoy is, in essence, available on the other floors and I do not consider the justification provided is sufficiently strong to override the harm to the Registered Building I have identified" (his paragraph 13).
Policy RB/5 is quite clear in that it sets out that an Applicant should justify their application;
"There will be a general presumption against alteration or extension of registered buildings, except where a convincing case can be made, against the criteria set out in this section, for such proposals.
Applicants for registered building consent for alteration or extension to a registered building must be able to justify their proposals. They will be required to show why the works which would affect the character of the registered building are desirable or necessary and they should provide full information to enable the Department to assess the likely impact of their proposals on the special architectural or historic interest of the building and on its setting."
This justification is not included as part of this application.
In addition, the application drawings are not prescriptive in relation to the size of the new skylight. The property, given its location on the Quay and within the Conservation Area, is highly visible and the imbalance in size of the skylight to the others on the roof would, in my opinion, look awkward.
I correspondingly recommend Refusal of this application.
None
Recommended Decision: Refused
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
R 1.
The property is a prominent one within Castletown's Conservation Area and is Registered. The introduction of a rooflight which is not the same size as the others on each side of it would create an imbalanced appearance and would be detrimental to the appearance of the property.
Decision Made : ... Committee Meeting Date : ...
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
