(b) Planning Decision Notice, Report of Handling and Reference Documents (Pages 363-378)
Perth and Kinross Council · 18 December 2023
Back to Local Review Body — 18 December 2023 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Some pages contain no extractable text. They may be blank, graphics or scanned pages. OCR has not been applied.
Page 1
4(iv)(b) LRB-2023-41 LRB-2023-41 23/00796/FLL - Installation of replacement windows and door at Melville Terrace, cowgate, Southbank, Errol, Perth, PH2 7QS PLANNING DECISION NOTICE (included in applicant’s submission, pages 357-358) REPORT OF HANDLING REFERENCE DOCUMENTS (part included in applicant’s submission, pages 360-362)
Page 2
No embedded text on this page.
Page 3
REPORT OF HANDLING DELEGATED REPORT Ref No 23/00796/FLL Ward No P1- Carse Of Gowrie Due Determination Date 2nd October 2023 Draft Report Date 4th October 2023 Report Issued by DR Date 4th October 2023 PROPOSAL: Installation of replacement windows and door LOCATION: Melville Terrace Cowgate Southbank Errol Perth PH2 7QS SUMMARY: This report recommends refusal of the application as the development is considered to be contrary to the relevant provisions of the Development Plan and there are no material considerations apparent which justify setting aside the Development Plan. BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The application property is a traditional two-storey semi-detached dwellinghouse situated in the Errol Conservation Area. Full planning permission is sought to replace the windows and door on the ground floor of the south (front) elevation. This application does not include the replacement of the windows on the upper floor of the south elevation. These windows are not original or traditional windows, and it is believed they were replaced a number of years ago, possibly before the designation of Errol Conservation Area. DATE OF SITE VISIT: 03 October 2023 SITE HISTORY None PRE-APPLICATION CONSULTATION Pre application Reference: n/a DEVELOPMENT PLAN The Development Plan for the area comprises National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019) (LDP2).
Page 4
National Planning Framework 4 The National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) is the Scottish Government’s long-term spatial strategy with a comprehensive set of national planning policies. This strategy sets out how to improve people’s lives by making sustainable, liveable and productive spaces. NPF4 was adopted on 13 February 2023. NPF4 has an increased status over previous NPFs and comprises part of the statutory development plan. The Council’s assessment of this application has considered the following policies of NPF4: Policy 7: Historic Assets and Places Policy 16: Quality Homes Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 – Adopted November 2019 The Local Development Plan 2 (LDP2) is the most recent statement of Council policy and is augmented by Supplementary Guidance. The principal policies are: Policy 1A: Placemaking Policy 1B: Placemaking Policy 17: Residential Areas Policy 27A: Listed Buildings Policy 28A: Conservation Areas: New Development Statutory Supplementary Guidance Supplementary Guidance - Placemaking (adopted in 2020) OTHER POLICIES Non Statutory Guidance Conservation areas NATIONAL GUIDANCE The Scottish Government expresses its planning policies through The National Planning Framework, Planning Advice Notes, Creating Places, Designing Streets, National Roads Development Guide and a series of Circulars.
Page 5
Planning Advice Notes The following Scottish Government Planning Advice Notes (PANs) and Guidance Documents are of relevance to the proposal: PAN 40 Development Management CONSULTATION RESPONSES Conservation Team Do not support due to use of uPVC and concerns about lack of detail for the vertical astragals in the eastmost window. NB: ideally, astragals should be shown on a drawing at a scale of 1:20. However, the astragals for the eastmost window have been included on the proposed part ground floor plan at a scale of 1:50. As there are other reasons to refuse the application, it was not considered necessary to require the submission of a 1:20 scale drawing of the eastmost window. REPRESENTATIONS No representations were received. Additional Statements Received: Screening Opinion EIA Not Required Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Environmental Report Not applicable Appropriate Assessment under Habitats Regulations Habitats Regulations AA Not Required Design Statement or Design and Access Statement Not Required Report on Impact or Potential Impact eg Flood Risk Assessment Not Required APPRAISAL Sections 25 and 37 (2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 require that planning decisions be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The Development Plan comprises NPF4 and the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2019. The relevant policy considerations are outlined in the policy section above and are considered in more detail below. In terms of other material considerations, involving considerations of the Council’s other approved policies and supplementary guidance, these are discussed below only where relevant. In this instance, section 14(2) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 places a duty on planning authorities in determining such an application as this to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which
Page 6
it possesses. Section 64(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997 is relevant and requires planning authorities to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the designated conservation area. The determining issues in this case are whether; the proposal complies with development plan policy; or if there are any other material considerations which justify a departure from policy. Policy Appraisal Alterations to existing domestic dwellinghouses are, in many cases, considered to be supportable in principle. Nevertheless, consideration must be given to the scale, form, massing, design, position, proportions, and external finishes of the proposed development, within the context of the application site, and whether it would have an adverse impact upon visual or residential amenity. Assessment of the proposal against the relevant policies is provided below. Design, Visual Amenity and Impact on Conservation Area The existing ground floor windows and door on the front of the house are traditional in style and add to the character of the conservation area. The existing ground floor windows are timber sash and case. The eastmost window on the south elevation matches the ground floor windows on the adjoining dwellinghouse. The existing door is timber in a traditional style with glazing to its upper half and a fanlight above. For replacement windows in conservation areas, the Placemaking Supplementary Guidance advises the following: Ensure that replacement windows on the front and all sides of the building visible to the public match the original as closely as possible. Replacement windows should replicate the original in every respect. They should be fitted in the same plane as the originals, made up of timber sections (the profile and dimension of which match the originals), and have the meeting rails in the same position as the originals. It is proposed to replace the timber sash and case window on eastern side the south elevation with a double-glazed uPVC sliding sash and case style window. The meeting rail of this window will be 230mm higher than the meeting rail of the existing window. This change in height means that the proposed window fails to replicate the existing window. It also means that the proposed window would clash with the appearance of the ground floor windows on the adjoining house. The proposed window is also to have horns, which are not a feature of the existing window or of the windows on the adjoining house. Due to the uPVC frames, the height of the meeting rail, and the addition of horns, the proposed eastmost window is detrimental to the traditional character of the house and is detrimental to the character and appearance of the Errol Conservation Area. It is proposed to replace the three timber sash and case windows forming the bay window at the western side of the south elevation with different styles of windows. The two side windows are to be replaced with top opening uPVC windows; this opening method fails to replicate the sash and case opening method of the existing
Page 7
windows. The central window is to be replaced with a non-opening uPVC window, which again fails to replicate the sash and case opening method of the existing windows. The central window is to have two horizontal astragals, with the upper astragal being wider than the lower one. The wider upper astragal (69mm in height) may be an attempt to replicate the thickness of the uPVC across the side windows (a total of 115mm in height); however, the difference in these heights further detracts from the appearance of these windows. Due to the uPVC frames, the opening method, and the varying frame widths, the proposed windows in the bay window are detrimental to the traditional character of the house and are detrimental to the character and appearance of the Errol Conservation Area. For replacement doors in conservation areas, the Placemaking Supplementary Guidance advises the following: Doors and their associated features such as steps or surrounds are a vital part of a building’s character. By replacing them using a different style or material, it can have a negative effect on the appearance of the building. Traditional doors are generally painted pine or oak, with the design dependent on the building type but usually a variation on vertical boarding or panelled construction. Ensure that replacement doors on the front and all sides of the building visible to the public match the originals as closely as possible. It is proposed to replace the traditional timber front door with a modern-style fully glazed uPVC-framed door with a fanlight. In terms of design and materials, the proposed door does not match the existing door. Due to the non-traditional design, the uPVC frames, and the extensive use of glazing, the proposed door is detrimental to the traditional character of the house and is detrimental to the character and appearance of the Errol Conservation Area. Given the concerns noted above, the proposal is contrary to Policies 7(d) and 16(g)(i) of NPF4 and contrary to Policies 1A, 1B and 28A of LDP2. It is noted that the colour of the proposed uPVC frames has not been specified. If the application had been recommended for approval, the colour of the uPVC would have been controlled by condition. Impact on Listed Building The graveyard that lies 60 metres to the northwest of the dwellinghouse is a category B listed building. Due to the distance and the lack of invisibility, there are no concerns that the proposal would be detrimental to the setting of the listed building. As such, the proposal is in accordance with Policy 7(c) of NPF4 and Policy 27A of LDP2. Residential Amenity Due to the nature of the proposal, the proposal would not affect the residential amenity of the application property or neighbouring properties. As such, the proposal is in accordance with Policy 16(g)(ii) of NPF4 and Policy 17 of LDP2.
Page 8
Developer Contributions The Developer Contributions Guidance is not applicable to this application and therefore no contributions are required in this instance. Economic Impact The economic impact of the proposal is likely to be minimal and limited to the construction phase of the development. PLANNING OBLIGATIONS AND LEGAL AGREEMENTS None required. DIRECTION BY SCOTTISH MINISTERS None applicable to this proposal. CONCLUSION AND REASONS FOR DECISION To conclude, the application must be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this respect, the proposal is considered to be contrary to the Development Plan. Account has been taken of the relevant material considerations and none has been found that would justify overriding the Development Plan. Accordingly, the proposal is refused on the grounds identified below. Reasons for Refusal 1. The proposed eastmost window, by virtue of its uPVC frames, the height of the meeting rail, and the addition of horns, is detrimental to the traditional character of the house and is detrimental to the character and appearance of the Errol Conservation Area. Approval would therefore be contrary to Policies 7(d) Historic Assets and Places and 16(g)(i) Quality Homes of the National Planning Framework 4; contrary to Policies 1A & 1B Placemaking and 28A Conservation Areas: New Development of the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2; and contrary to the Perth & Kinross Placemaking Supplementary Guidance 2020. 2. The proposed windows in the bay window, by virtue of their uPVC frames, the opening method, and the varying frame widths, are detrimental to the traditional character of the house and are detrimental to the character and appearance of the Errol Conservation Area. Approval would therefore be contrary to Policies 7(d) Historic Assets and Places and 16(g)(i) Quality Homes of the National Planning Framework 4; contrary to Policies 1A & 1B Placemaking and 28A Conservation Areas: New Development of the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2; and contrary to the Perth & Kinross Placemaking Supplementary Guidance 2020.
Page 9
3. The proposed door, by virtue of its non-traditional design, the uPVC frames, and the extensive use of glazing, is detrimental to the traditional character of the house and is detrimental to the character and appearance of the Errol Conservation Area. Approval would therefore be contrary to Policies 7(d) Historic Assets and Places and 16(g)(i) Quality Homes of the National Planning Framework 4; contrary to Policies 1A & 1B Placemaking and 28A Conservation Areas: New Development of the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2; and contrary to the Perth & Kinross Placemaking Supplementary Guidance 2020. Justification The proposal is not in accordance with the Development Plan and there are no material reasons which justify departing from the Development Plan. Procedural Notes Not Applicable. PLANS AND DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THIS DECISION 01 02 03
Page 10
No embedded text on this page.
Page 11
No embedded text on this page.
Page 12
No embedded text on this page.
Page 13
No embedded text on this page.
Page 14
No embedded text on this page.
Page 15
No embedded text on this page.
Page 16
No embedded text on this page.