51 ARDLAIR TERRACE, DYCE
PROPOSED ALTERATIONS AND
EXTENSION TO CONVERT EXISTING
DETACHED DWELLING INTO 2 SEMIDETACHED DWELLINGS
For: Mr Zulfiqar Ahmad
Application Ref.
: P101856
Application Date
: 16/11/2010
Officer
: Lucy Greene
Ward:
Dyce/Bucksburn/Danestone
Clark/B Crockett/M McDonald/ G Penny)
3 7
R I
V
E R
V I
E
W
D R
IV
Advert
: Full Notify not poss.
(neighbours)
Advertised on
: 01/12/2010
(R Committee Date
: 24 March 2011
Community Council : Objection
E T
L
E
40.9m
A R
DL
A I
R
T E
RR
A
CE
50
1 1
2 5
1 9
2 9
1 3
4 9
7
P L
A C
E
41.7m
B U
N Z
E A
C H
5 4
60
59
70
1
6 6
1 4
D U
N B
E N
N A
N
5 2
5 8
6 4
R O
A D
56
62
68
2 1
1 5
9
2 3
17
8
2
1
1 9
9
2
4 8
13
7
1
15
7 8
2
2 5
1 7
3
42.1m
5
1 1
4 2
A L
K
W
4 0
3 6
3 0
2 2
RECOMMENDATION: Approve conditionally
1 9
Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Aberdeen City Council 100023401
2
8
1 4
1 9
T O
D L
A W
1 2
Berrymoss
G L EN
TANA
R CRE
SCEN
T
1 1
9
T O
RN
A
SH
E
AN
G A
RD
E
NS
DESCRIPTION
The application site consists of an existing detached 4 bed house within garden
ground in Dyce. The site is bounded by Ardlair Terrace, a residential street, to the
south and by Riverview Drive, a ‘distributor’ road to the north. There is no direct
vehicular or pedestrian access onto Riverview Drive, there being a driveway off
Ardlair Terrace.
On Ardlair Terrace directly opposite the application site is a three storey block of
flats set within a grassed site, also along Ardlair Street are detached, terraced
and semi detached houses of one and one and a half storeys in height, and
several three storey blocks of flats. The houses directly adjacent to the
application site are detached houses and many of these have been extended
with dormers and extensions.
HISTORY
Recent applications on Ardlair Terrace have been for house extensions. Planning
permission was granted in 1994 for extensions to the adjacent house at no. 49
Ardlair Terrace. These included very large dormers to both elevations of the roof
and a single storey garage extension on the Ardlair Terrace frontage, the latter
projects out approximately 3.5m in front of the main elevation.
REASON FOR BEING DETERMINED BY SUB-COMMITTEE
The Dyce and Stoneywood Community Council have objected to the application
and it therefore falls outside the scope of powers delegated to offices and must
be determined by the Development Management Sub-Committee.
PROPOSAL
The application proposal is to divide the existing house into two dwellinghouses
with two extensions: one to the rear (south side onto Ardlair Terrace); and,
another to the side and rear, following the removal of the existing garage at the
side of the house.
The proposal would also include extending the box dormers to both elevations of
the house across the side extension, relocating some existing windows and
adding new windows within the side extension. Each dormer would contain
windows of a uniform size and design. The side extension would be
approximately 2.6m wide, with the proposal extension to the dormer being
approximately 2.4m long. The overall length of the dormers, as extended, would
be approximately 13.8m.
The extensions on the Ardlair Terrace side of the house would consist of two
single storey 4.5m wide extensions, projecting our 3.2m in front of the main
elevation of the house
Each of the proposed houses would have 4 bedrooms.
Double driveways would be provided off Ardlair Terrace, the remaining garden
areas would be 3.2m and 3.4m for the two houses, with a stretch of the existing
hedge remaining at the back of the pavement and a 600mm high timber fence
being erected along the boundary.
The houses would have areas of garden ground to the Riverview Drive side, in
common with the arrangement for other houses along the street. The gardens
would measure 5.5m by 8.2m and 5.5m by 8.75m approximately. As both sides
of the house face onto streets, the garden would be divided by a 600mm high
fence. This is of similar height to the existing enclosures, which would remain.
The existing house to the east has very large dormer extensions to both pitches
of the roof that cover nearly the entire roof area. These dormers are mainly solid
with small areas of glazing.
CONSULTATIONS
ROADS SECTION – Satisfied with the number of parking spaces
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH – No comments
COMMUNITY COUNCIL – Dyce and Stoneywood Community Council oppose
the application as it would set an undesirable precedent in terms of curtilage
splits; and, it would have an undesirable effect on the privacy, residential
amenity, sunlight and daylight – access of neighbouring properties
REPRESENTATIONS
One letter of objection was received. This was on the grounds that there would
be insufficient provision for off-street parking on a narrow part of the street and
that this may also hinder access for emergency vehicles.
PLANNING POLICY
The application site lies within an area zoned under Policy 40 ‘Residential Areas’
in the adopted Aberdeen Local Plan 2008. This policy seeks the retention of the
predominantly residential character and amenity. The policy also states that
proposals for new residential development must be satisfactory in terms of all
other relevant policies in the local plan and in terms of siting, design and external
appearance, access, landscaping, amenity, public and community safety and
drainage.
Policy 8 in the local plan lists design and policy guidance and states that regard
must be had to relevant published supplementary planning guidance (SPG).
The SPG on Subdivision of residential plots was published in August 2008. The
guidance contained within the SPG includes the following:
-
reference to privacy and daylighting, in terms of the proposed house and
existing residential accommodation;
amenity space: rear gardens of dwellings up to 2 storeys should have an
average length of at least 9m with an acceptable level of privacy and
amenity;
the density, pattern and scale of development: new dwellings should
respect the relationships between buildings in the area with regard to
these factors;
density should as a general guide mean that no more than 33% of the site
area should be built upon;
all new dwellings should front onto an existing public road and not project
forward of the building line
Policy 8 refers to the Dormer Windows and Roof Extension Design Guide. This
contains guidance, including: that dormers should not be built off the wallhead
and should be a minimum of 600mm from the edge of the roof; that the outermost
windows in dormer extensions should be positioned at the extremities of the
dormer; box dormers should generally have a horizontal proportion; and there
should be more glazing than solid.
EVALUATION
The application shall be determined in accordance with the development plan
unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The application proposal is for a residential use and is therefore acceptable in
principle, in terms of its use, in this residential area. Policy 40 requires that the
proposal complies with all relevant policies in the local plan, and these cover
issues similar to those described within the SPG on Sub-division of Residential
Curtilages.
The proposal consists of creating two semi-detached houses in place of one
larger detached house. The houses would front onto the street in the same way
as the existing house. There would be no impact on the privacy of the occupiers
of the neighbouring properties.
The existing building would be extended to the side and to the Ardlair Terrace
side of the site. The extensions are similar in nature to extensions that have been
built on many of the houses nearby and include extensions that would project
further forward than the main frontage of the neighbouring property to the west.
However, the adjacent house to the west has a garage on the boundary. There
would be no impact on daylighting to neighbouring properties.
Residential properties in the surrounding area include three storey flatted blocks,
one of which is opposite the application site, detached houses and semi
detached properties. The application premises would be of a similar density and
pattern of development to the semidetached properties that exist diagonally
opposite the application site, and along a number of streets nearby. Although the
density of the site in question would be increased significantly, this is considered
acceptable in the context of the surroundings.
Plot coverage would increase to 35% and 39% for the two residential properties
that would be created. Although this is slightly higher than the guideline one third,
it is considered acceptable. The proposed semi detached houses would not
extend in front of the general building lines on either street frontage.
The length of garden ground provided for each house would be less than the 9m
mentioned in the SPG. However, the area is not considered unreasonable and is
not considered to warrant refusal of the application. The existing rear garden is
already less than 9m in length and would not be reduced any further by the
proposal.
The existing house has a dormer that extends along most of the roof on both
sides. The proposal would involve extending this across the side extension.
Windows would be reused and new windows installed, so that the windows to
each side match in style and size. There would be slightly more solid to glazing,
however, the dormers would be shallow in height, with no large ‘apron’ area. The
rationalisation of the glazing, together with the improvements to the property in
general would result in an enhancement to the appearance of the property, which
is rather run down at present. Taking into account the appearance of the dormers
on the adjacent property, and amendments that have taken place during the
application process to improve the design of the dormers, it is considered that the
proposed dormers are acceptable.
The Roads Section confirms that the proposal is acceptable from the point of
view of parking in the area.
REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
It is considered that the principle of the splitting of the plot and the proposed
alterations to the application premises to create two houses would be acceptable
and would not impact detrimentally on the surrounding residential area. The
proposal would accord with the aims of Policy 40 and the SPG on the Subdivision of Residential Curtilages.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
with the following condition(s):
(1) that notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 and Schedule 1, Parts
1, 2 and 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted
Development) (Scotland) Order 1992, or any subsequent legislation to
the same effect, no extensions, alterations or improvements which
materially affect the external appearance of the dwellinghouse, nor
any means of enclosure shall be erected or carried out either on, or
in the curtilage, of the dwelling houses hereby approved without a
further grant of planning permission from the planning authority - in
the interests of visual amenity.
(2) that no development pursuant to this planning permission shall take
place, nor shall any part of the development hereby approved be
occupied, unless there has been submitted to and approved in writing
by the Planning Authority, a detailed scheme of site and plot boundary
enclosures for the entire development hereby granted planning
permission. None of the buildings hereby granted planning permission
shall be occupied unless the said scheme has been implemented in its
entirety - in order to preserve the amenity of the neighbourhood.
(3) that no development shall take place unless a scheme detailing all
external finishing materials to the roof and walls of the development
hereby approved has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the
planning authority and thereafter the development shall be carried out
in accordance with the details so agreed - in the interests of visual
amenity.
Dr Margaret Bochel
Head of Planning and Sustainable Development