Loading document...
Application No.: 18/00101/B Applicant: Trevelyan Hotel Ltd Proposal: Conversion of existing dwelling in to three self contained one bedroom apartments Site Address: 4 Victoria Place Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 4ET Case Officer : Mr Jason Singleton Photo Taken: 05.04.2018 Site Visit: 05.04.2018 Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 01.05.2018 _________________________________________________________________ Reasons for Refusal R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons - R 1. The application is considered contrary to Housing Policy 17 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan as the conversion fails to provide a clear and pleasant outlook from the flats; results in an over intensification of accommodation for the building and would add to the pressure on kerbside parking. - R 2. The application is considered contrary to General Policy 2(h) & (i) and Transport Policy 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan as the proposed development does not meet the Department's current parking provision requirements nor demonstrate that a reduced level of parking would not result in unacceptable on-street parking in the locality and as such would lead to the aggravation of on-street vehicle parking to the detriment of existing on street parking provision, highway safety and the free flow of traffic in the area. - R 3. The application is considered contrary to General Policy 2(g) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan as the increased level of bin storage to the front of the property would adversely affect the residential character and appearance of the Streetscene. _______________________________________________________________
It is recommended that the following persons should be given Interested Person Status on the basis that they have made written submissions and they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are mentioned in Article 6(4):
The owners/occupiers of No 2; 3; 5; 5a; 6; 7; 10 Victoria Place _____________________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT
1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of a No.4 Victoria Place, Douglas. The property is a mid-terrace and two stories in height with a small dormer roof within the roofscape. The terrace is set back from the edge of the highway with some properties having front gardens and No's 3; 4 and having parking to the front, with No's 1 and 2 having landscaped front gardens. It should be noted no permission appears to have been approved for the creation of the parking area to the front of the application property. - 1.2 The immediate terrace is formed by five properties with No's 1-4 being single occupancy residential use and No. 5 is the headquarters / office use for the Samaritans. The remainder of the laneway is made up of private properties and two garages. Victoria Place is a cul-de-sac with no parking in the street and double yellow lines either side. PROPOSAL
2.1 Proposed is the conversion of the existing dwellinghouse into three self-contained, one bedroom apartments. There are no external works being proposed to either the front or rear elevation. - 2.2 The proposed apartments will have a net floor area of (as provided by the applicant);
*Under the Housing (Standards) Regulations 2013 Schedule 1 part 2. PLANNING HISTORY
3.1 The application site has not been the subject of any previous planning application that is considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application. - 3.2 However the outcome from the following planning applications, since the introduction of the Strategic Plan, are considered relevant to this application; 6 Stanley Terrace, - 13/00164/B - Conversion of residential dwelling to provide four apartments
3.3 1 Victoria Place - 17/00767/B - Creation of a driveway and vehicular access - REFUSED R.1 The proposed removal of the garden wall and creation of vehicular parking,
would create an adverse visual impact on the appearance and character of the area and would create a parking space which has insufficient length to safely and conveniently park a standard sized car and could result in inconvenience to other users of the lane and potentially a reduction in highway safety.
4.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is within an area zoned as residential on the Douglas Local Plan 1998.
4.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this application; - 4.3 General Policy 2 (GP2) (in part) 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: (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape;
4.4 Housing Policy 17 The conversion of buildings into flats will generally be permitted in residential areas provided that:
4.5 Some of the supporting text preceding HP17 at paragraph 8.13.1 states; There are in the Island, and particularly in Douglas, many substantial buildings which, because of their size or form, are no longer suitable for the originally intended use as either single dwellings or holiday accommodation, but which are still structurally sound. The Department has for many years encouraged the conversion of such buildings, where appropriate, into flats. - 4.6 Transport Policy 7 states: The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Departments current standards. - 4.7 Appendix 7 sets out the parking standards for different types of development. For apartments: 1 space for 1 bedroom; 2 spaces for 2 or more bedrooms.
REPRESENTATIONS
5.1 Douglas Borough Council has commented (14/02/18) the application is somewhat scant and concerns there is no parking provision or mitigating reasons as detailed in the policy documents.
5.2 Highways Services have commented, assessed the parking provision and confirm they do not oppose (13/02/18) as the provision of two car parking spaces is acceptable as levels of car ownership for a one bedroom flat is relatively low. - 5.3 Occupiers of 2 Victoria Place; object on the grounds of; the inadequacy of the lane way for any further increase in usage; the area is characterised with families and young children; parking is a major issue here and the driveway is not sufficient for 3 flats; the proposal will
6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application at Victoria Place are;
6.2 The preceding text to HP 17 is helpful as it guides the principle of the policy. "Dwellings because of their size or form are no longer suitable for the originally intended use as either a single dwellings or holiday accommodation". In this case, the property is of a size and form
6.7 As there are no proposals to alter the facades of the building or amend the existing window configurations or sizes or replacement windows, the visual impact on the street scene would be minimal, posing little to no visual harm.
6.8 The proposal does not include any external modifications that would lead to any loss of light, overlooking or loss of privacy. The change of use proposed by this application would certainly lead to an increase in use of the dwelling, more so than if the property remained a single occupancy dwelling. This intensification could affect the character of the area as noted in the level of objections received at paragraphs 5.3-5.10 which revolve around the intensification of use and the lack of parking in the area as a whole. - 6.9 Regarding the sub-division of the building and the use as three flats, this would be the first of its kind in the streetscene and could set a dangerous precedent for others to follow.
Nevertheless, there is a strong degree of disenchantment amongst the residents of the streetscene for the area and could be considered an incongruous use, contrary to Gp2(g).
6.10 The existing dwellinghouse has adequate parking within the curtilage for up to two vehicles for a single occupancy. Highway Services have considered the proposal and noted the provision of two parking spaces to the front and that Transport Policy 7 requires one parking space per one bedroom apartment. Highway Services have noted the IoM strategic plans call for three off road parking spaces. Given the application site is with a sustainable central location which is within close proximity to primary public transportation links. The Strategic Plan does allow for a relaxed standard where "In the case of town centre and previously developed sites, the Department will consider reducing this requirement having regard to: (a) the location of the housing relative to public transport, employment, and public amenities". There are also taxi ranks, local services and employment opportunities to encourage pedestrian movement amongst the above. However the Strategic Plan also requires that: "…it can be demonstrated a reduced level of parking will not result in unacceptable on street parking in the locality. The application does not provide such evidence to demonstrate this. - 6.11 Further consideration is given to the level of objections received and the common issue regarding parking in the wider area. This again brings into question that the proposal would "…not result in unacceptable on street parking in the locality" (Appendix 7 paragraph d). Whilst it is acknowledged highways do not object on Highway safety grounds, there is an extant issue regarding kerb side parking and the competing demand for a space. This application could further increase this pressure on the streetscene affecting all residents of the cul-de-sac that forms Victoria Place. Whilst there is no control over occupants of properties owning a vehicle and given there is disc zone parking in the surrounding areas to control demand for parking, this is reassurance that there is a distinct problem of parking and on balance, and therefore find the issue here contrary with General Policy 2 (h); (i) and HP 17(c). - 6.12 It is also noted that the current off street parking provision to the front of the site measures 6m wide, with a depth of 5m (including side boundary walls) which does not meet current parking space standard (3.25m wide x 6m depth per space). Further, no planning permission exists for the creation of this parking area, which appears to be a recent alteration. However, it is understood that the Enforcement Team has investigated the matter and concluded at this point that the works had been undertaken more than 4 years ago and therefore the works are potentially immune from enforcement action. However, there still remains a concern that the parking spaces would not meet modem day parking space standards. Further there are concerns that the said parking area would also need to accommodate at least three bins (likely any approval would require the provision of an enclosed bin store via a condition) and also provide a pedestrian path/access to the front door of the property. Therefore, the available space would arguable reduce the parking area further, potentially to a single space, albeit not meeting current parking space standards.
7.1 Summing up the competing issues, it is considered the application fails to satisfy Housing Policy 17 and General Policy 2 for the above reasons. It is therefore concluded that the planning application would harm the use and enjoyment of neighbouring properties. Twinned with the lack of a clear and pleasant outlook that would be afforded to the proposed flats; the parking issues; over development; the principle of the conversion are all together fatal to this application. INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 (Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons:
8.2 The decision-maker must determine:
8.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given Interested Person Status.
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.
Decision Made : Refused Committee Meeting Date: 09.05.2018
Signed : J SINGLETON Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See below
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
