Loading document...
Application No.: 20/00873/C Applicant: Brillig Investments Ltd Proposal: Change of use from an office (class 2.1) to a residential dwelling (class 3.3) Site Address: 8 Mount Pleasant Douglas Isle Of Man IM1 2PU Planning Officer: Mr Peiran Shen Photo Taken: 11.09.2020 Site Visit: 11.09.2020 Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 22.10.2020 _________________________________________________________________
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.
Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. This application is considered to comply with General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan.
This approval relates to the submitted documents, site plan, existing and proposed plan datestamped as having been received on 4th August 2020 and photos attached to emails having been received on 9th September 2020.
_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 4(2):
Owner and occupier 5 Mount Pleasant, Douglas, IM1 2PU Owner and occupier 9 Mount Pleasant, Douglas, IM1 2PU
as they refer to the relevant issues in accordance with paragraph 2C of the Interested Person Operational Policy 2019 and as they have explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy.
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS IT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BUT CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
THE APPLICATION WAS DEFERRED AT PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING ON 19TH OCTOBER 2020 AS THE CONSULTATION FOR THE AMENDED LOCATION PLAN DOES NOT END UNTIL 30TH OCTOBER 2020. NO CHANGES TO THE REPORT SINCE 19TH OCTOBER 2020.
1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is 8 Mount Pleasant, Douglas, a three-storey mid-terraced house located on the north of Mount Pleasant. The property is currently vacant has five offices with a net space of about 96 square metres. - 1.2 The property is located in an area that is populated with many offices. The area is characterised by a number of terraced houses. - 1.3 Mount Pleasant is an alley lead from Finch Road, a one-way street running north to south (travel direction is from south to north at the time of the report). There is no on or off-street parking associated with this site, as is the case with all properties on Mount Pleasant and the many properties along Finch Road. There are two major public car parks near the site, which are available for contract hire.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The planning application seeks approval for the change of use from office (class 2.1) to a residential dwelling (Class 3.3). - 2.2 The proposed dwelling would have a living room and a dining room on the ground floor; two bedrooms and a bathroom on the first floor; a bedroom with storage on the second floor. There is also a kitchen/dining area in the basement. - 2.3 There is a storage space in the garden leads to Strand Street and can be used for cycling storage.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 There is no previous application considered materially relevant to this application.
4.0 PLANNING POLICY - 4.1 In terms of the local plan, the site is designated within an area of "Predominately Office" in the Douglas Local Plan 1998. In the Area Plan for the East (adopted but waiting for approval by Tynwald), the site is designated within an area of "Mixed Use (St. George)". The written statement states that "some residential use will also be acceptable." - 4.2 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered materially relevant to the assessment of this current planning application: - 4.3 General Policy 2: "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:
4.4 Transport Policy 7: "The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards. The current standards are set out in Appendix 7." - 4.5 Appendix 7.1: "High levels of car ownership have led to an increase in the level of parking expected for residential development, and outside of town centre locations, these standards should not be relaxed. New-built residential development should be provided with two parking spaces per dwelling, at least one of which should be within the curtilage of the dwelling and behind the front of the dwelling …… the Department will consider reducing this requirement having regard to:
4.6 Appendix 7.1 continues: "Where new dwellings are created by the conversion of existing buildings, parking space should be formed by the clearance of outbuildings and low-grade annexes or 'outlets' if it is reasonable and practicable so to do. However, in general, the need to find a use for redundant buildings which are in sound condition will outweigh the drawback of any shortfall in parking provision." - 4.7 Appendix 7.6 states typical residential dwelling should have "1 space for 1 bedroom; 2 spaces for 2 or more bedrooms." For offices, there should be "1 space for every 50 square metres of nett floor space" - 4.8 Appendix 7.6 also states: "These standards may be relaxed where development: (d) is within a reasonable distance of an existing or proposed bus route and it can be demonstrated a reduced level of parking will not result in unacceptable on-street parking in the locality."
5.0 REPRESENTATION - 5.1 Douglas Borough Council originally raised some concerns regarding bin and cycling storage (21/08/2020). After the applicant supplied additional information, the Council has no objections to this application (24/09/2020). - 5.2 DoI Highway Services does not oppose this application (19/08/2020). They then gave an update (20/10/2020) stating the additional information satisfies the provsion for bicycle and waste bin storage. - 5.3 The owner and occupier of 5 and 9 Mount Pleasant have commented in objection of the proposal (21/09/2020). The reason for objection includes a reduction in privacy for clients and customers; greater noise disturbance from residential use; renovation process will generate noise and affect traffic and parking; reduction in security due to potential of changing tenant, potential overshadowing if the front garden is used as storage.
6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The key issues to consider are the principle of the development, the suitability of the location for residential purposes, the residential amenities for future occupiers, parking, and its impact on the neighbouring properties. Principle of the Development - 6.2 The site is located in a central location in Douglas. The Local Plan designated the area as being Predominantly Office. Although this application is a departure from the designated land use, the number of offices would still be dominant within the area if the application is approved.
Douglas Borough Council states that the area used to be a former residential area and the Area Plan for the East states that some residential development within the area is acceptable. Therefore, the development is principally acceptable.
Suitability of the Location
6.3 The site is within easy reach of shops, services, amenities, and employment opportunities and is therefore in a sustainable location for residential development. The proposal would make effective use of previously developed land and add to the vitality of the town centre. The location of the site is sustainable and raises no strategic concerns. The site is considered an acceptable location in principle for residential accommodation. Amenity and Parking - 6.4 According to TP7, the office should have two parking spaces and the proposed dwelling would need two parking spaces. Therefore, there is no change in demand for parking spaces. - 6.5 There is no specific parking to be allocated for this development. Whilst there is undoubtedly pressure on kerbside parking in the vicinity, Highway Services have confirmed that they have no objection and that the local disc zone permits on-street parking during the evening when occupiers are most likely to be home. In addition, as residents are more likely to require parking space outside instead of during business hours, they are unlikely to in competition on parking spacing with the offices within the area. Impact of the Development - 6.6 All new developments have impacts on their surroundings. This impact is of two stages: the development stage and the usage stage. For the development stage, a certain level of noise and other nuisance is expected. If there is no tolerance for such nuisance, it will be impossible for any redevelopment to take place within or near a built-up area. Therefore, although the hours of renovation is likely to collide with the neighbouring business's operation hours in this case, it is not enough reason by itself to warrant a refusal. - 6.7 For the usage stage, In terms of impact generated by different usage, the Strategic Plan has indicated that residential usage generates the minimum level of nuisance among all usages. This can be inferred from subsection (g) of General Policy 2 which states development that "does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality" will normally be permitted. - 6.8 The word choice "local residents" has implied that the focus is the impacts of development on people who "reside" within the area, meaning other developments have more impact on residents than the residents can have on the developments. In other words, this indicates that the baseline impact is that of a residence. Therefore, the impact creates by the new residence is generally acceptable. Noise, Crime, and Other Nuisance - 6.9 The site is off-street and has a unique scene of tranquillity despite located within the town centre. This tranquillity is an attractive amenity for business and residents alike. Since residential development is considered to be with minimum impact to its residents. The noise generated by the proposal is considered acceptable.
6.9 It is a common perception that active occupancy decreases the change of crime against adjacent properties as disturbance will more likely to be noticed. Mount Pleasant is off-street, poor-lit and lacks natural surveillance created by the public at night, which makes the lane susceptible to anti-social behaviour and other crime. When the proposed residence being occupied, the lane will be in use at night as well and decrease the chances of crime. - 6.10 Although concerns of privacy has been raised, the mere observation of who comes and goes towards a front entrance is a reasonable expectation within the town centre and therefore should not be considered as an invasion of privacy.
6.11 9 Mount Pleasant is already overshadowed by the St Andrews Church and 6-8 Mount Pleasant, there is no additional overshadowing can be created in the front yard.
7.0 CONCLUSION - 7.1 For the reasons that the proposal is considered to comply with General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan, it is recommended for an approval.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
8.2 The decision-maker must determine:
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 : Permitted Committee Meeting Date: 02.11.2020
Signed : P SHEN 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
