Item 4(vi) LRB-2023-10
Perth and Kinross Council · 24 April 2023
Back to Local Review Body — 24 April 2023 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
4(vi) LRB-2023-10 LRB-2023-10 22/01789/FLL – Alterations and extension to dwellinghouse, Strawberrybank, Golf Course Road, Blairgowrie, PH10 6LF INDEX (a) Papers submitted by the Applicant (Pages 769-820) (b) Decision Notice (Pages 819-820) Report of Handling (Pages 823-828) Reference Documents (Pages 829-865) (c) Representations (Pages 867-872) 767
Page 2
768
Page 3
4(vi)(a) LRB-2023-10 LRB-2023-10 22/01789/FLL – Alterations and extension to dwellinghouse, Strawberrybank, Golf Course Road, Blairgowrie, PH10 6LF PAPERS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 769
Page 4
770
Page 5
771
Page 6
772
Page 7
773
Page 8
774
Page 9
1 Glen Blackler, Glenalmond, Perthshire PH1 3SF Tel: (H) 01738 880 373 (M) 07922 442 107 Email: gdimeckplanning@gmail.com www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk Local Review Body Perth & Kinross Council Committee Services Council Building 2 High Street Perth PH1 5PH February 24 2023 Dear Sirs, Submission of Request for Local Review Planning Application: 22/01789/FLL Proposal: Alteration and extension to dwellinghouse Site: ‘Strawberrybank’, Golf Curse Road, Blairgowrie, PH10 6LF On behalf of the applicant, Mr P Boyle I am pleased to submit this request for a review of decision of Planning Application 22/01789/FLL. This request is submitted within 3 months of the Refusal decision and I attach here: • Applicants Review Forms; • Applicants Review Statement with Appendices (A-E) • Appendix A – Case Summary • Appendix B – Photographs of Site and Setting • Appendix C – Design Statement • Appendix D – Clarification of roof ridge • Appendix E – Before and after photomontages • Application Refusal Notice; Please Note Appendices C-E do not change any aspect of the proposal, but are presented simply to clarify matters for the Review Panel. Yours faithfully GDimeck BTP MRTPI 775
Page 10
776
Page 11
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 1 | P a g e S43A(8) REVIEW OF PLANNING DECISION ALTERATION AND EXTENSION TO DWELLINGHOUSE STRAWBERRY BANK, GOLF COURSE ROAD, BLAIRGOWRIE, PH10 6LF WRITTEN SUBMISSION OF MR P BOYLE (APPLICANT) IN RESPECT OF PLANNING REFUSAL 22/01789/FLL JANUARY 2023 777
Page 12
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 2 | P a g e DOCUMENT ISSUE RECORD Client Mr P Boyle Contact Details c/o GD Planning Ltd Glen Blackler Glenalmond Perth PH1 3SF Name Title Prepared By: G Dimeck BTP MRTPI Principal Planner GD Planning Ltd Approved By: G Dimeck BTP MRTPI Director GD Planning Ltd Date of Issue: 30 January 2023 Issue Date Version 1 11 January 2023 Draft Internal Review 2 12 January 2023 Client Draft 3 30 January 2023 Finalised Statement www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 778
Page 13
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 3 | P a g e DISCLAIMER This Statement has been prepared for the use of Mr P Boyle to support a submission to Perth & Kinross Council’s Local Review Body and should not be reproduced in whole or part, nor relied upon by any third party, for any use whatsoever, without the express written authorisation of GD Planning Ltd. If any third party comes into possession of this report, they rely on it at their own risk. GD Planning Ltd accepts no duty or responsibility (including in negligence) to any such third party. 779
Page 14
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 4 | P a g e CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction ……………………….……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..5 2.0 Reasons for Review…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….7 3.0 Process of Review……….……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…….7 4.0 Submitted Documents ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………....7 5.0 Review…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….8 6.0 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..21 Appendix A Key point summary of Case Appendix B Photographs of site and setting Appendix C Design Statement Appendix D Section through roof ridges Appendix E Supplementary photo-montages 780
Page 15
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 5 | P a g e 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Strawberrybank is a detached 3 bed, single storey dwelling with outbuildings, in Blairgowrie. Although initially constructed as a dwelling, at one stage, prior to the construction of a Golf Club House, the building serviced the adjacent Golf Club with Tea Room facilities. 1.2 In residential use once again, the house has been successively extended and altered over-time. It is not a listed building; is not within a Conservation Area and is not within a protected landscape. 1.2 The applicant bought the house in November 2021. The dwelling is in need of physical upgrade and improvement. The existing roof is not fully weatherproof; the house is thermally inefficient, has a constrained internal layout, lacks adequate guest accommodation and a home office, and the garage/outbuildings are in a dilapidated condition and are no longer secure. Notwithstanding these shortcomings, the property benefits from a generously sized plot, and its aspect and gardens, and close proximity to local amenities, all appealed to the applicant when purchasing. 1.4 In a responsible way, the applicant sought advice from an experienced local architect to explore how structural faults could be remedied, and his family’s accommodation needs might be met, in a way which is sensitive to the buildings character and setting (the house is located at the southern edge of the town, close to a road and opposite the entrance to Blaigowrie Golf course). 1.5 MAK Architecture Ltd were subsequently appointed to advise and prepare plans for planning submission. The practice has more than 30 years of experience in the design and build of housing within the Blairgowrie area. 1.6 Client/Architect discussions then explored the merits of demolition and rebuild vs adaptation and extension. Notwithstanding the financial benefits of new-build construction (vat exemption and a quicker build-process), the applicants appreciation of the character of the older parts of the cottage and its garden features, led him to pursue a design approach which could retain the best of the original, whilst extending in a contemporary way, albeit informed by the form and proportions of the older building. This was achieved by: • Retaining the existing rear extension and providing a new extension off that structure running parallel to the main cottage; • Constructing a pitched roof over the new extension with ridge running parallel to the cottage roof; • Ensuring that eaves and ridge of new roofs do not exceed existing heights; • Creating first floor accommodation within the roof space with use of the hidden valley area between original and new roofs; 781
Page 16
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 6 | P a g e • Demolishing both garages and constructing a new single garage with pitched roof over, providing a first-floor link to the house; • Providing dormers and larger glazing to the rear of the property; • Providing sympathetic but contrasting finishing materials to the extension to maintain the identity of the original cottage. 1.7 The ground floor plan submitted indicates the original cottage and limited footprint of new works (shown hatched). Fig 1: Hatched area showing proposed footprint extension – new garage replaces existing Fig 2 Position of proposed extension with eaves and ridge heights shown to match original cottage 2.0 REASON FOR REVIEW 2.1 The submitted application was refused for the following reason: 782
Page 17
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 7 | P a g e 1. The proposals, by virtue of their competing form, excessive proportions and inappropriate design and finishes, would result an extension which is unsympathetic to, and overdevelops, the existing cottage. The proposals would have a dominating effect on the cottage and an adverse impact upon the character and visual amenity of the area. Therefore, the proposals are contrary to the Perth & Kinross Placemaking Guide 2020 and Policies 1A, 1B(c) and 17(c) of Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2, 2019, which seek to ensure that development contributes positively to the quality of the built environment, in terms of design, appearance, height, scale, massing, materials, finishes and colours, in order to respect the character and amenity of the place. 2.2 It is a concern to the applicant that the Report of Handling: • Fails to show a full and proper understanding of the proposed design; its cohesiveness; and the limited impacts it would have on the amenity of the area; • Is selective with reference to the Council’s Placemaking Guide & Policy; & • Fails to demonstrate the weight accorded in the balance of the decision, to the positive improvements to the building and site, and the extent to which those positive changes would deliver planning policy objectives. 2.3 Neither the Community Council nor third-parties raised objection to the proposals, and no concerns were raised by statutory consultees. 2.4 This Review Statement and its Appendices will provide a full response to the Refusal recommendation, but a key point summary of the applicants case is presented as Appendix A. 3.0 PROCESS OF REVIEW 3.1 The applicant considers that a written process of Review together with Site Inspection would be an appropriate mechanism for appraisal of the issues raised in this case. This would enable the LRB Members to view the proposal in its local context and understand the qualities of the site, and the limited impacts of new works on the character of the building, and the street scene. 4.0 SUBMITTED DOCUMENTS 4.1 In addition to the application documentation and this Statement, the following are presented to support the Review and assist Members understanding of the proposal: • Key Point Summary of Case (Appendix A to this Review Statement); • Existing photographs of site and wider setting (Appendix B to this Review Statement); • A Design Statement from MAK Architecture explaining the design approach adopted in this case. (Appendix C to this Review Statement); 783
Page 18
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 8 | P a g e • A section drawing indicating the relationship of the roof of the valley infill to the roof ridges (existing and proposed - Appendix D to this Review Statement). • Supplementary montages indicating the remodelled property following completion of the proposed works, and presenting views from the street (Appendix E to this Review Statement). It should be noted that whilst montages did form part of the submitted application, these were presented in axiometric view from above, and may have given the Officer the impression that some elements of the design would be more visible than will actually be the case. 5.0 REVIEW The Development Plan 5.1 Sections 25 & 37(2) of the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, require a Planning Authority, to determine planning applications in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. 5.2 When interpreting the Development Plan, case law has determined that it should be read as a whole, with a focus on relevant objectives and policies which give effect to sustainable development objectives which underpin the Plan (Tesco Stores Limited v Dundee City Council [2012] UKSC 13). 5.3 In taking a decision on any application the Planning Authority is required to consider more than just conflict or tension with any single policy before determining conflict with the Development Plan as a whole (Cummins v L B Camden [2001] EWHC Admin 1116). LDP2 5.4 The Development Plan does not have a specific ‘design’ policy, nor a policy for house extensions. However, Policy 1 sets out general placemaking criteria (design is one component only), which will fall to be considered with all development proposals; whilst specific guidance on Householder applications is set out in supporting planning guidance (Placemaking Guide 2020). 5.5 The Refusal reason asserts that the proposals are contrary Policies 1(a&b) & 17(c) of LDP2. As a consequence, it concludes the application fails to accord with the Development Plan. 5.6 In relation to the specific wording of those Policies, LRB Members are invited to note: Policy 1A – requires positive change to the local environment. In design terms development should be respectful of local character and amenity, whilst development should also address the challenge of climate change. 784
Page 19
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 9 | P a g e Policy 1B - sets out a range of placemaking criteria (listed a-j) which must be met. However, some of those matters cannot be relevant to an application for a house extension (ie: connectivity (e); layout and integration of positive townscape features (g); delivery of greenspace and facilitating and promoting active travel (h)). This demonstrates how the Council, as required by Case Law, will adopt a broader holistic view of the Development Plan and its policies when approving the many applications it receives each year for house extensions Policy 17 – requires residential amenity to be protected. This is generally understood to be those elements that are relevant to the living conditions of any dwelling. The Report of Handling confirms that, in terms of overlooking, overshadowing, and noise, the living conditions of near neighbours would not be adversely affected in this case. Criteria (c) of the Policy offers encouragement only to proposals which will improve the character and environment of the area or village. Critically, the policy does not make that ‘improvement’ a requirement of all new development. 5.7 It will be demonstrated in the sections of this statement which follow, that the submitted proposals do accord with the broad sustainable planning objectives of the Development Plan. Placemaking Guide 5.8 Scottish Government puts placemaking and the delivery of high-quality design at the heart of its aspiration to deliver sustainable development through planning. Protection of the Public Realm is an important sustainable planning objective. 5.9 The Council’s own placemaking guide has been introduced to aid interpretation of the objectives of Development Plan Policy 1. It is a guide only and does not set out prescriptive rules which must be followed in every case. The particular qualities of each building, site and setting will always be factors to be appraised when considering the appropriateness of any design. 5.10 It is a concern to the applicant that whilst the Report of Handling accords significant weight to the Council’s Placemaking Guide, it is selective in its review. It simply states that: Extensions should respect the shape, scale and proportions of the existing building and relate to the roof pitch and original building depth… In most cases an extension should be a subordinate addition in all respects. 5.11 Any holistic review of Guidance requires other relevant parts of the advice to also be appraised, and weighed in the balance, before determining that a proposal is contrary to Development Plan. Those relevant parts are reviewed below, together with the applicant’s comments in bold: Householder Applications – p49 An extension to a building can be conceived to either appear as an integral part of the original architecture or, al- ternatively, it may be of a contemporary or contrasting design. In the former, an extension may go unnoticed. In the 785
Page 20
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 10 | P a g e latter case the extension would purposefully be different yet aim to be equally compatible and complementary. It is not often appreciated that the best extensions are architecturally attractive in their own right. Both approaches require particular skill and the Council recommends that you seek professional advice from someone trained and experienced in designing buildings. A well-designed extension can enhance a property. The applicants have employed the services of a professional local architect with knowledge and experience of de- signing new homes and house extensions within Blairgowrie. The design incorporates contemporary elements (style of dormers) and contrasting materials, with the aim of de- livering an extension which is purposefully different, but is compatible and complementary, to the character of the original cottage. Scale, Shape, Form – p52 • Extensions should respect the shape, scale and proportions of the existing building and relate to the roof pitch and original building depth. • In most cases an extension should be a subordinate addition in all respects. • New roof ridges should not normally exceed the height of the original. A new ridge line which is set lower than that of the original will generally be more acceptable. • Extensions should seek to achieve a building depth which respects traditional building forms and avoids depend- ence on artificial lighting and ventilation. It is clear that extensions do not need to be subordinate in all cases. The new garage is constructed to match, in shape, proportions and height, the existing rear extension of the cot- tage. The new rear extension linking, the two wings will replicate the depth of the existing cottage, with the height and finish of the ridge also consistent with the house. Materials – p53 • When it comes to extensions, using materials that reflect (not match) the existing building helps to create a harmo- nious addition; • Ensure that the colour of materials is harmonious with the existing building; • Choose high-quality materials that are sustainable and long-lasting; • Avoid unsustainable materials wherever possible • Timber is a sustainable and long-lasting material, and has been selected as a finishing material (timber to doors, roofs and walls) for its durability, low carbon footprint and harmonising qualities to the cottage (texture and col- our). • When applied to the new roof the colour will reflect that of the existing clay tiles. Weathering over time, will see a natural discolouration of the timbers resulting in a tone closer to the natural slate cover of the cottage bay win- dows; and the main house roof of the adjacent cottages (Brae Cottage & Heathcote). 786
Page 21
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 11 | P a g e Roof extensions – p54 • It is important that roof extensions fit with the local street character; • An appropriate dormer extension should as a minimum: • Be set below the ridgeline of the roof. • Be set back from the wall-head. • Be generally of pitched roof form. • Be physically contained within the roof pitch. • Relate to windows and doors in the lower storey(s) in terms of character, proportion and alignment. • Have the front face predominantly glazed. • Not extend more than half the length of the roof plane. Flat-roofed dormers are a distinctive characteristic of buildings near to the application site. The proposed dormers sit below the roof ridge; are set back from the wall-head; are physically contained within the roof-slope; do not cover more than ½ the roof plane and are positioned to relate to windows/doors below. A ‘box-like’ appearance is avoided by recessing glazing and splaying dormer cheeks. Rear Extensions - p56 • Appropriately designed rear extensions are generally preferable to side and front extensions, particularly on tradi- tional and historic properties. • If the plot and original building can accommodate it, then a two-storey extension may receive planning permission providing the design is satisfactory and there is no unacceptable loss of sunlight, daylight or privacy to adjoining properties. • Rear extensions can provide greater opportunities for contemporary design. The extension is to the rear of the property and would not be prominent in the street scene. The mansard roof, providing space for first-floor accommodation, would not be visible from street level. An acceptable relationship to adjacent properties would be secured. 5.12 The guide includes a photo example (see below) of a contemporary approach to domestic extension which is considered to successful integrate new works, with its host. The complex and varied form of extension, roof pitch, building depth, and mix of finishing materials, should all be noted. This contrast markedly with the simpler, more restrained approach to addition proposed at Strawberrybank. 787
Page 22
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 12 | P a g e Fig 3 extract from approved Placemaking Guide held as exemplar. 5.13 Other guidance in the document has also been embraced by the applicant, is of relevance in this case, and is set out here: Energy Efficiency – p43 • New development should reduce reliance on fossil fuels through the use of alternative sustainable forms of energy production including energy storage solutions where feasible. • Energy efficiency measures have been considered in order to achieve energy savings in new development or retrofit to existing development Energy efficiency measures can include wall insulation, cavity insulation, solid wall insulation, loft insulation, floor insulation, double and triple glazing, water tank and pipe insulation and draft- proofing An air-source heat pump will provide energy efficient, sustainable, space heating. Roof-mounted solar collectors will provide on-site energy generation. Replacement windows and thermal upgrade of the existing building fabric, together with a modern extension, will improve the energy rating of the building (currently ‘D’ rated), reducing long-term energy demand and consumption. Passive Design – p44 • The principles of sustainability should be incorporated in the design, layout and orientation of new neighbourhoods, streets as well as individual dwellings 788
Page 23
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 13 | P a g e • Skylights, light monitors, clerestories, light shelves, light tubes, atria, courtyards, and glass or glass-block partitions and doors all contribute to increasing natural light in buildings. Technologies that can be used to provide heat and electricity to a building, emitting low or no net CO2 emissions, have been considered and incorporated in the proposal where possible. With the orientation of the building, opportunity is taken to incorporate extensive glazing to the south-east facing wall and roof-slope to maximise passive solar gain. Construction and Materials – p45 • New development should maximize the use of materials from sustainable resources and the use of sustainable construction methods. Materials to be used in construction projects are responsibly sourced and are sourced from local suppliers wherever possible; The intention to replace UPVc widows with timber, together with the use of Scottish Larch as a finishing material to new walls and roofs, delivers a sustainable approach to construction. Retrofitting Sustainable Design – p45 • New build development represents approximately 1% of the total housing stock each year, highlighting the importance of addressing the sustainability of the existing housing stock. There are a number of technologies that can contribute to the reduction of carbon emissions from the existing housing stock. These technologies are generally focused around energy efficiency in premises through increasing the thermal efficiency of a building so that less energy is required. The proposals would deliver whole-house upgrade and improvements in energy performance of a 19th Century building. 5.14 From review it is clear that the submitted application satisfies a significant number of the design recommendations set out in the Guide. Site Character and Local Amenity 5.15 The Refusal reason indicates that the submitted proposal would have: ….. an adverse impact upon the character and visual amenity of the area. 5.16 Strawberrybank is sited in a part of the town which is characterised by low-density detached housing, set within established landscaped grounds and featuring hedgerows and trees to site frontages. Buildings are typically set back from the street, providing Golf Course Road with the appearance and character of a country lane. Photographs of the wider setting are presented at Appendix B. 789
Page 24
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 14 | P a g e 5.17 Although Strawberrybank is closer to the road than many other properties, it rests comfortably in this setting and displays many of the same local characteristics (generous plot, established hedge to the roadside boundary, and both young and mature tree planting within garden). 5.18 The submitted design responds to these local characteristics by focussing all new building work on the existing built terrace, and footprint of the existing garage, and retaining the large garden with its mix of mature tree and hedge planting. 5.19 Through its age, form and character the existing building makes a positive contribution to the character of the area. The submitted design responds by extending the cottage to the rear only (a less prominent elevation); by respecting the height, eaves level and horizontal emphasis of the existing cottage; and by introducing a replacement garage which follows the form and scale of gabled projection to the rear of the cottage (South-East elevation). 5.20 The alignment of the house to Golf Course Road, means that the rear of the dwelling is not open to view when approaching from the west. Fig 4 Rear of Strawberrybank not visible when approaching from west 5.21 In the close view from the road and footpath to the east, tree and hedge planting soften public views. The features of the building that do become visible on approach, and which are visually dominant, are the two flat roofed outbuildings within the grounds (garage & store). These unsightly structures are in poor condition, and their utilitarian form and mix of materials, detract from the character and setting of Strawberrybank,, and the wider amenity of the area (see Photos 5 & 6 Appendix B). 790
Page 25
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 15 | P a g e Fig 5 Strawberrybank some screening provided by existing planting when seen from east Fig 6 Rear of Strawberrybank approaching from east with existing outbuildings prominent. Slate roof of Brae House visible adjacent. 5.22 The proposals respond to these site conditions by replacing the unsightly garage structures, and achieving a clearer visual break between Strawberry Bank and Brae House adjacent. 5.23 Residential and commercial properties elsewhere in Golf Course Road, and close to the application site, display flat roofed dormers within the roof. These are a characteristic of the area, and are visually prominent (clearly seen from the road - (Golf Club House; Caban; Candletrees; Lyall Cottage). A number of those properties have dormers set between imposing gables (Estrada; St Annes). 5.24 The need for headroom and outlook from first floor rooms requires dormer additions to the roof. The proposals respond by following the dominant pattern of roof addition displayed by properties close-by; and effectively hiding the new flat roof of the first-floor addition, within the valley between new and old roofs 791
Page 26
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 16 | P a g e 5.25 Finishing materials evident within the local area are a mix of render, stonework and timber cladding to external walls; and natural slate and concrete or clay roof tiles to existing roofs. The proposals respond by selecting finishing materials which will successfully integrate with the surroundings. 5.26 These are the placemaking qualities which the applicant and architect have sought to respect in the submitted design. Detailed Design 5.27 Strawberrybank is not a Listed Building; is not within a conservation area and is not within a protected landscape. Furthermore, the house is not within the zone of influence of any designated heritage asset. These are factors which should provide opportunity for some design expression, provided local placemaking qualities are also respected. 5.28 The Design Statement at Appendix C sets out in detail all matters which have informed final design choices. The submitted plans deliver a cohesive design with new sympathetically blending with old. 5.29 Whilst a contemporary approach is adopted for some elements (dormer style and roof material); overall the design is influenced by the qualities of the existing cottage. The form, height and proportions of the existing building are all respected (ie: roofs pitched to prominent elevations; gable widths repeated; ridge heights; eaves levels followed etc); original features of character and interest are retained and echoed in new work (gabled garage); whilst new elements (dormers) have been informed by local characteristics. 5.30 Replacement of existing windows and doors will harmonise new with original; whilst sustainable finishing materials (timber roof and walls) provide contrast and design expression. 5.31 The mansard roof provides important circulation space at first floor. By extending upwards, the proposals limit the overall footprint of the extension, enabling retention of more of the garden amenity space. 5.32 Because of the age of property current door widths would inhibit wheelchair movement. The extended home offers adaptability for future users. The layout incorporates a ground floor bedroom and bathroom to meet disabled access requirements should the applicant’s mobility needs ever change. A dedicated library/office area provides opportunity for home-working. 792
Page 27
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 17 | P a g e 5.33 The design will change the appearance of the cottage but its original character and proportions are preserved and remain identifiable. The extensions respond to the character of the local area and will deliver visual improvement through removal of the existing garages. The proposals retain the landscape framework of the site and sufficient amenity space is available to provide bin storage, practical amenity space and off-road vehicle parking. Response to Report of Handling 5.34 The Report of Handling asserts that: The proportions, scale, bulk and visual massing would overwhelm the modest cottage and the formation of a mansard roofed design would be an incongruous feature which would significantly detract from its character and appearance. The incongruous appearance of the mansard roofed extension would be exacerbated by the introduction of contrasting finishing materials and large box dormers. The proposals raise several concerns in relation to the extent of accommodation sought, which goes well beyond the development potential of the cottage, resulting in its over-development……. 5.35 In response the applicant would provide the following comments: Excessive Proportions and Overdevelopment 5.36 Figure 1 above clearly demonstrates that the footprint of the extension is not large. The new works do not overdevelop the site. 5.37 The photographs at Appendix B show that to the western and northern elevations, the form, proportions, scale and appearance of the cottage is largely unchanged. 5.38 Viewed from the east the height and form of new works respect the original, and public views are softened by boundary planting. 5.39 The new extension effectively sits behind the existing cottage and replicates its appearance to the road. The pend corresponds with the end of the existing cottage achieving a visual break. Together with the alignment of the new garage (ie at 90* to the cottage), the bulk and mass of the extended cottage is effectively broken-up. The re-built garage is clearly identifiable as a linked, functional outbuilding. 5.40 Through a sensitive approach to design the character and appearance of the existing cottage would remain identifiable and would not be overwhelmed. 793
Page 28
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 18 | P a g e Mansard Roof 5.41 The submitted drawings (SW, SE & NE Elevations), and montages clearly show that the mansard roof is set down below the existing ridge of the cottage roof: Fig 7 Extract from submitted montage showing surface of mansard roof set down below existing and new ridge levels 5.42 The supplementary sectional drawing at Appendix D, has been prepared to aid Members’ understanding. It clearly demonstrates that from street level the mansard roof would not be visible. 5.43 The roof-mounted solar panels would modestly project above those ridges, however, because of perspective, and the upward angle of view from the street, those features would also would be hidden. This is clarified by the supplementary montages at Appendix E which, in photograph form, present the eye-level experience of the viewer when passing the site. 5.44 As these features would not be visible from the public realm, it is unreasonable to conclude that they would be incongruous, or would significantly detract from the appearance of the cottage. Contrasting Materials 5.45 Existing finishing materials for the cottage are painted render to external walls, clay tiles to the pitched roof with zinc ridge covers, and natural slate to bay window roofs. Rones and timber fascias are painted black; and doors and windows are a mix of timber painted black, and white upvc. 5.46 The proposals adopt a similar colour scheme to rones and gables, feature identical zinc ridge covers; and replace doors and windows throughout to achieve a consistency in style/pattern and colour. 5.47 Whilst introducing contrasting materials to roof and external walls, those materials are sustainable (timber) and sympathetic in colour and tone (fresh cut larch will closely respond to the colour of clay 794
Page 29
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 19 | P a g e tiles); The natural weathering process will result in a tone transition which will reflect the natural slate of the roof cover of the bay windows and the adjacent dwelling (Brae House). 5.48 Fig 3 above, showing the extract from the good practice Placemaking guide makes clear that the use of contrasting finishing materials does not prevent cohesive design, and is supported by the Council. The proposals provide a simpler palette but one which will realise continuity and harmony of materials and design throughout, whilst also enabling sympathetic new to be distinguished from original. Dormers 5.49 The two new dormers would be flat-roofed, and reflect those of nearby properties in Golf Course Road (St Annes; Estrada & Golf Club – see below and also Appendix B). Those dormers are similarly set within pitched roofs, where imposing gables are dominant features of the host buildings (see below). Figs 8 – 10 demonstrating that box dormers are a prominent local characteristic in Golf Course Road. 795
Page 30
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 20 | P a g e 5.50 In each case those dormers are visually prominent from the street. 5.51 In contrast, the proposals at Strawberrybank are on the less prominent rear roof slope and are discretely positioned between gables. They are set below the ridge, positioned centrally within the roof, and relate to ground floor window and door opening below. Overlooking of neighbouring land and gardens is avoided. Figs 11 & 12 showing harmonious relationship of dormers to windows below 5.52 The contemporary qualities of the design (recessed glazing & splayed cheeks) avoids a ‘box-like’ form. Assertiveness is reduced through the dark colour of window frames and the continuation of the same timber cladding. 5.53 The dormers do not dominate the roof, are not box-like; their form is not uncharacteristic of the street; and they comply fully with the placemaking guide. 796
Page 31
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 21 | P a g e Figs 13 demonstrating ‘recessed’ glazing and ‘splayed’ cheeks of proposed dormers 6.0 CONCLUSION 6.1 The applicants have followed the Council’s best practice guidance in appointing an architectural practice to design an extension which is purposefully different, yet compatible and complementary to its host. It is clear that the proposals are consistent with many aspects of Plan Policy and the placemaking guide. 6.2 Both the building and its setting have been used to inform a sympathetic design solution. Existing ridge heights; building shape, proportions; roof pitch and original building depth, are all respected and appropriately scaled. The use of contrasting materials to the extension allows the identity of the original cottage to be retained; and dormers have been set wholly within the roof, below the ridge, above the wall head and in a discrete position. Elsewhere flat roofs are hidden. 6.3 The principles of sustainability have been incorporated into the design itself, through extension orientation, selection of finishing materials; internal layout and the choice of heating. A thermally efficient, low-energy use, adaptable family home would be realised. 6.4 It is shown that the approach to design is consistent with the Council’s Placemaking guidance. The proposals would not have a dominating effect on the cottage and would not have an adverse impact on the character and visual amenity of the area. Development would contribute positively to the quality of its surroundings. 6.5 The Report of Handling reveals a selective and narrow interpretation of the Council’s Placemaking Guide and Policies 1 (a&b) & 17 of the Development Plan has been adopted. The applicant has shown that the key amenity objectives of those policies would be met. 797
Page 32
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 22 | P a g e 6.6 The purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development and the applicants have provided sufficient information to demonstrate it can be delivered in this case. 6.7 That Plan and its supporting guidance is required to be interpreted broadly and read as a whole. Consideration is required to be given to the sustainable development objectives which underpin the plan. Any decision taker is required to consider more than just conflict with a single policy (or part of a policy or Guidance) before determining conflict with the Plan as a whole. 6.8 The applicant has shown that there are no adverse impacts which significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits which can be delivered in this case. Accordingly, it is respectfully suggested that the presumption in favour of sustainable development set out in the Principal Act, and Scottish Planning Policy, should be applied in this case, and that planning permission be granted. 798
Page 33
www.garrydimeckplanning.co.uk 23 | P a g e North Elevation – Existing cottage retained with addition of windows only. New garage largely on footprint of existing – Mansard Roof not visible West Elevation Unchanged - Mansard roof not visible SE Elevation – Limit of existing cottage shown. New garage largely on footprint of existing – Mansard Roof not visible 799
Page 34
800
Page 35
Appendix A Key point summary of case: Existing Proposed A Review Statement has been prepared to directly respond to the single reason for refusal, and includes a number of photographs (Appendix B) which will help to understand more fully, the application site; the existing outbuildings at Strawberrybank; and the property’s setting. To further assist Members a brief summary of the applicants case is presented here: • Strawberrybank is not a Listed Building, is not within a Conservation Area, is not within the zone of influence of any Listed Building or Scheduled Ancient Monument; and is not within a protected landscape. This should provide opportunity for some design expression. 801
Page 36
• In formulating proposals for extension and whole-house upgrade the applicant has used the services of a professional architectural practice based in Blairgowrie, and one which is familiar with local buildings. This is recommended by the Council’s Placemaking Guide. • Applicant and Architectural practice have followed best -practice guidance set out in the Council’s approved Placemaking Guide (see paras 5.10 – 5.14 of review statement). • Although constructed as a dwelling, at one stage, before construction of the Golf Course Club House, the building functioned as tea rooms providing refreshments to Golfers. • The applicant has been keen to preserve the ‘historic’ association of Strawberrybank to the Golf Club opposite. To that end the north and west elevations, visible from Golf Course Road and the Golf Clubhouse car park, are largely unchanged and internal features are retained. • The extension matches the proportions, form and height of the existing cottage. • The use of contrasting finishing materials enables the identity of the original cottage to remain distinct. • Window and door installation, together with new bargeboard, fascia and rones in the new extension matching those of the existing cottage, will achieve harmony between old and new. • The flat roof link between original and new roofs would not be visible from the public realm; • Flat roofed dormers between gables are a distinctive feature of houses immediately adjacent and fronting Golf Course Road. The proposal reflects those local characteristics. • Dormers would be minor components of the new roof; meet Councils guidelines, in terms of position and siting; and a ’box-like’ form is avoided by recessing glazing and splaying dormer cheeks. • The existing garages are in poor condition and not secure. Removal would deliver visual enhancement, and improve the relationship to the neighbour (Brae House). • Sustainable materials would be used providing a contrasting finish, an approach supported by the Placemaking Guide. Similar timber cladding with render to external walls can be found on nearby houses in Golf Course Road. • Relationship to near neighbours is improved, with no adverse impacts in terms of dominance, overlooking or loss of light. • On-site power generation (roof-mounted solar) and physical upgrade of the fabric of the cottage will improve the buildings energy rating, minimise energy demand and use, and address Policy expectations for delivering climate change goals. • Wheel-chair accessibility is provided (the current layout does not) offering flexibility for the applicant and future users should mobility needs ever change. • A Home office work space is provided. 802
Page 37
• Footprint increase over existing is only 19% • Limiting the footprint of new works ensures that the character of detached houses in generous landscaped garden grounds, is preserved. Policy requirements for off-road vehicle parking (2 spaces) and bin storage are met. • The extension would not be visually prominent. Changes to the rear ensure works are screened by the existing cottage, to public views from the north and west. To the east existing tree and hedge planting to the site boundary is retained, softening views. • The applicants have closely followed the approved Placemaking Guidance. Proposals accord with the Development Plan and there are no adverse impacts which significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits which can be delivered in this case. Existing Proposed 803
Page 38
804
Page 39
Appendix B Photographs of Existing Building and Wider Setting Photo 1: View from Golf Course Road. All works screened by retained rear extension Photo 2 All works set to rear of house and not visible Photo 3 Showing position set back behind retained gabled extension, and limited width of proposed addition. 805
Page 40
Fig 1 Footprint of proposed extension Photo 4: Rear garden showing position and extent of proposed extension. Walkway through between house and garage retained (orange dot). Form, width and height of replacement garage matching that of retained rear extension Fig2: Proposal 806
Page 41
Photo 5 Left hand garage (highlighted) to be removed. Right hand garage (green) replaced with room over Photo 6 Removal of existing garages achieves visual enhancement and improved relationship to neighbour. Photo 7 Existing garages visually prominent The following 4 photographs are immediate neighbours to Strawberrybank and demonstrate that flat roofed dormers set within imposing gable features, together with timber cladding to external walls, are original design components of housing in the immediate locality and provide a local context for the applicants design choices. 807
Page 42
Photo 8 St Annes Golf Course Road -125m west of Strawberrybank . Flat roof dormer set between imposing gables Photo 9 Cabana Golf Course Road – 90m west of Strawberrybank A mix of pitched roof and flat roofed dormers together with gable Photo 10 Estrada Golf Course Road – 50m west of Strawberrybank Flat roof dormer set between imposing gables 808
Page 43
Photo 11Heathcote Golf Course Road – 15m west of Strawberrybank Timber cladding and render to external walls Photo 12 Contemporary refurbishment and extension of traditional bungalow (Inchblane, Golf Course Road PKC Planning Approval Ref: 13/009919/FLL), with successful use of contrasting materials to external walls 809
Page 44
810
Page 45
Page 46
! "
# "
$
% & "
' & (
)
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
No embedded text on this page.
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
!"#$ %
Page 54
Page 55
&'
Page 56
Page 57
&'
Page 58
(
Page 59
) * *
Page 60
+, - . , , )! /% 0 0 . 1 " %* 2 811
Page 61
723 - 06.docx Page 2 of 3 +
Page 62
3
Page 63
Page 64
4
Page 65
* * $ % * ** ) " ) ( * ( % * " ( ) " "" &
Page 66
+ %+,
Page 67
-. / -/ $.0),% 1 .
Page 68
.2&
Page 69
0 3
Page 70
& &4&5 3*& & 16 . 7 % . .
Page 71
.& .
Page 72
4 ** 8 /" * * ". 9 $%* * ) "3"/ & - :% %) /( "" % ) * % -&- :% ( /( %* "" / ". % " % & -. ** :% % "/ ) " "/ " ,;* % "*- 9 /" % " *% ) " &
Page 73
4 <* * ./-9 %) "* ) ".(9* * ** * ).% % ( %-"* . 9 9*. ( &* * % 9 " )) 9 "* %* 9% " -) & ) . * * - +7 " $0% .
Page 74
45 45) 7 39*" .=.$ % 9*" /% * 9- :% -) /% 9 " . "). ** . . ." ." .) % . * " -) * &>
Page 75
0 4 ? $/- 1 ) 1)% /9&? * )) ) ** . ** . . ." ." . ) % - % * * ) ) & .
Page 76
% 812
Page 77
723 - 06.docx Page 3 of 3 ? ( * * "* ) "&) ") * * )%- "*" ( ) "&( ) ") @?. ? ) !9 % )) &/%" ) / "" ( )* . 9 " * ) " / ( & ) * *& &'
Page 78
?"* -) ")<(9* * &> )%-9* /* * ( & / "* * ( %( ) ) "" -9/ !9 ) " * * ) ( % / "" %- ) " -9/- %) ) )& 3
Page 79
Page 80
Page 81
Page 82
? - &" % ) " ) ( " ** (9% % ) ) )&) ). 9" ( ) ( /% /% )- "* -( 9 "/ & 5
Page 83
Page 84
Page 85
% /9 $ * % % / ) -"* ( /% * ) ( &1 * * 9 9*" * % ) * ) * * % - /-"" ( "& * ) * )-=A& .
Page 86
Page 87
6 ** % / -* * 9%/" %** ) ** " - 9 % * )) 8 * - 9 9 9% ) * ) * * % ) )&9 -9/ ) " 9 % "* &? 9* * /) ) 9% ) "! ? 0),% 1 ) % ** - /9/) "0,1& .
Page 88
Page 89
?) * )) 8* * * 9 - 9- "*" ( "*- :% " ) % 39*" - )- " "+
Page 90
B " $C13B1 . + 7 ,%8B " $0%&? ) ** *) * )) 9*" /% * 9- :% -) /% 9 " . "). ** . . ." ." .) % . * " -) * & 813
Page 91
814
Page 92
Appendix D Illustration clarifying height of flat roof infill in relation to existing and proposed roof ridges: Proposed flat roof surface Existing roof slope Flat roof infill not visible from street Existing ridge Proposed ridge Proposed dormer roof 815
Page 93
816
Page 94
EXISTING VIEW A VISUALISATION A EXISTING VIEW B VISUALISATION B
Page 95
Page 96
Page 97
Page 98
Page 99
Page 100
Page 101
!" # $% & '" %$ #
(" )' * +
,
Page 102
No embedded text on this page.
Page 103
Page 104
Page 105
Page 106
Page 107
Page 108
!
Page 109
"#
Page 110
$%
Page 111
&'( )* ' &
Page 112
$
Page 113
Page 114
Page 115
" + +*** , -./ '. 0.12
Page 116
No embedded text on this page.
Page 117
Page 118
" ( 817
Page 119
818
Page 120
Page 1 of 3 Mr Paul Boyle c/o MAK Architecture Gordon Darge 32 Leslie Street Blairgowrie PH10 6AH Pullar House 35 Kinnoull Street PERTH PH1 5GD Date of Notice:2nd December 2022 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (SCOTLAND) ACT Application Reference: 22/01789/FLL I am directed by the Planning Authority under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Acts currently in force, to refuse your application registered on 1st November 2022 for Planning Permission for Alterations and extension to dwellinghouse Strawberrybank Golf Course Road Blairgowrie PH10 6LF David Littlejohn Head of Planning and Development Reasons for Refusal 1. The proposals, by virtue of their competing form, excessive proportions and inappropriate design and finishes, would result an extension which is unsympathetic to, and over- develops, the existing cottage. The proposals would have a dominating effect on the cottage and an adverse impact upon the character and visual amenity of the area. Therefore, the proposals are contrary to the Perth & Kinross Placemaking Guide 2020 and Policies 1A, 1B(c) and 17(c) of Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2, 2019, which seek to ensure that development contributes positively to the quality of the built environment, in terms of design, appearance, height, scale, massing, materials, finishes and colours, in order to respect the character and amenity of the place. Justification The proposal is not in accordance with the Development Plan and there are no material reasons which justify departing from the Development Plan. 819
Page 121
2 The plans and documents relating to this decision are listed below and are displayed on Perth and Kinross Council’s website at www.pkc.gov.uk “Online Planning Applications” page Plan Reference 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 820
Page 122
4(vi)(b) LRB-2023-10 LRB-2023-10 22/01789/FLL – Alterations and extension to dwellinghouse, Strawberrybank, Golf Course Road, Blairgowrie, PH10 6LF PLANNING DECISION NOTICE (included in applicant’s submission, pages 819-820) REPORT OF HANDLING REFERENCE DOCUMENTS 821
Page 123
822
Page 124
823
Page 125
824
Page 126
825
Page 127
826
Page 128
827
Page 129
828
Page 130
829
Page 131
830
Page 132
831
Page 133
832
Page 134
833
Page 135
834
Page 136
835
Page 137
836
Page 138
837
Page 139
838
Page 140
839
Page 141
840
Page 142
841
Page 143
842
Page 144
843
Page 145
844
Page 146
845
Page 147
846
Page 148
847
Page 149
848
Page 150
849
Page 151
850
Page 152
851
Page 153
852
Page 154
853
Page 155
854
Page 156
855
Page 157
856
Page 158
857
Page 159
858
Page 160
859
Page 161
860
Page 162
861
Page 163
862
Page 164
863
Page 165
864
Page 166
865
Page 167
866
Page 168
4(vi)(c) LRB-2023-10 LRB-2023-10 22/01789/FLL – Alterations and extension to dwellinghouse, Strawberrybank, Golf Course Road, Blairgowrie, PH10 6LF REPRESENTATIONS 867
Page 169
868
Page 170
869
Page 171
870
Page 172
871
Page 173
872