Officer Report 12/00749/B

Planning Report And Recommendations {{table:20111}} {{table:20110}}

Officer's Report

The Application Site

1. The application site comprises the curtilage of the New Inn public house located on the western side of New Road in Laxey. The site contains the public house building, an adjacent area of hardstanding providing car parking space and an undeveloped vegetated area that contains a number of trees. Levels across the application site increase significantly from east to west, although the already developed part of the application is contained within an area that is generally flat and level with New Road.

The Proposal

1. The proposal comprises the erection of six dwellings on the application site. The existing public house would be demolished and replaced with one pair of two-storey semi-detached dwellings and a terrace of four two-storey dwellings. A gap between the two blocks of dwellings provides access to a rear parking area that provides nine car parking spaces. A retaining wall divides the developed part of the site from the undeveloped part, which at its highest point is approximately five metres tall. Eight existing trees are shown as being removed to facilitate the proposed development.

1. As part of the assessment of the planning application additional information was sought, which lead to the submission of amended and additional drawings. These submitted drawings were duly advertised to allow further representations to made if desired. The applicant's agent clarified that the second floor windows in the gable ends of units 4 and 6 are purely to provide light to the respective attic storage areas.

Planning History

1. Whilst the application site has been the subject of previous planning applications it is considered that none of these are specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application.

Planning Policy

1. In terms of local plan policy, the application site is part designated as predominantly residential and part designated as mixed use (residential/retail) under the Laxey and Lonan

Area Plan Order 2005. The Laxey and Lonan Area Plan Order 2005 contains two policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this planning application:

1. Policy L/RES/PR/1 states:

"Residential development will generally only be approved within the study area in those areas designated as proposed and existing residential. In particular, in the case of Agneash no further dwellings will be approved although, as will be the case in areas zoned as residential, alterations and extensions to existing property may be accepted if such proposals are sympathetic to the character and appearance of both the building to be altered and the surrounding area in general."

1. Policy L/OSNC/PR/6 states:

"With the exception of the felling of trees planted for commercial purposes, there will be a general presumption against the removal of trees within the study area including instances where this is proposed in order to facilitate development."

1. The application site is not within, but is directly adjacent, to Laxey's Conservation Area.

1. In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 contains four policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application:

1. General Policy 2 states:

"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:

• (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief;
• (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them;
• (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape;
• (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses;
• (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea;
• (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks;
• (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality;
• (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space;
• (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways;
• (j) can be provided with all necessary services;
• (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan;
• (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding;
• (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and
• (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."

1. Environment Policy 36 states:

"Where development is proposed outside of, but close to, the boundary of a Conservation Area, this will only be permitted where it will not detrimentally affect important views into and out of the Conservation Area."

1. Transport Policy 7 states:

"The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards."

1. Current car parking standards are set out at Appendix 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007. The stated car parking standard for typical residential is "2 spaces per unit, at least one of which is retained within the curtilage and behind the front of the dwelling". The stated car parking standard for residential terraces is "2 spaces per unit, if not within curtilage then located as close to units as possible without compromising residential amenity. Parking spaces should not be provided in front of the dwellings where this would result in a poor outlook for residents and would detract from the amenity of the area". Appendix 7 also states that car parking standards may be relaxed where "development:

• (a) would secure the re-use of a Registered Building or a building of architectural or historic interest; or
• (b) would result in the preservation of a sensitive streetscape; or
• (c) is otherwise of benefit to the character of a Conservation Area.
• (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."

1. Community Policy 4 states:

"Development (including the change of use of existing premises) which involves the loss of local shops and local public houses, will only be permitted if it can be demonstrated that the use is no longer commercially viable, or cannot be made commercially viable."

Representations

1. Laxey Village Commissioners object to the planning application. The grounds for their objection can be summarised as concern that the proposed development is over intensive for the size of the site. They believe that 4 or 5 properties would sit more comfortably on the site. They also believe that the two properties with the end gables facing New Road are not in keeping with the traditional Manx cottage style of building and therefore would have a detrimental impact on the street scene.

1. The Department of Infrastructure Highways Division objects to the planning application. The grounds for their objection can be summarised as concern that the proposed development does not meet the relevant highway policies and standards regarding parking provision as only 9 spaces are provided instead of 12 as required under Appendix 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007. Whilst the application justifies the reduction in parking as acceptable due to the proximity of bus stops and shops the Highways Division believes that any on-road parking in this locality would be unacceptable and that the full standard should be applied. They have concerns that the reduced level of car parking will lead to on-road parking on New Road at a location where on-road parking has not previously been a routine occurrence. On-road parking has been a cause for concern for Highways Division for a number of years due to the width of the road and the restricted forward visibility along some of its length.

1. The Isle of Man Water and Sewerage Authority does not oppose the planning application.

1. The Manx Electricity Authority expresses an interest in the planning application. The grounds for their interest relates to non-planning issues.

1. The owners and/or occupants of Yew Tree Cottage, which is located above the application site, object to the planning application. The grounds for their objection can be summarised as concern that the proposed development would adversely affect the visual amenity of the area. They also have concerns that the work required to create the retaining wall would be harmful to their own property.

1. The owners and/or occupants of Braeside, which is located directly opposite the application site, object to the planning application. The grounds for their objection can be summarised as concern that the proposed development constitutes an over development of the site. This results in the positioning of the dwellings close to the road and means that each property has limited amenity space. They believe that a reduced number of dwellings, similar to the semi-detached dwellings opposite would be more appropriate and that design of the proposed dwellings is not in keeping with the character of the area. They also believe that the proposed car parking provision and layout is likely to lead to increased on-road parking. It is suggested that a reduction in numbers would allow the parking provision to be increased to meet requirements.

1. The owners and/or occupants of Rencell House, which is located above the application site, object to the planning application. The grounds for their objection can be summarised as concern that the proposed development is an over intensive use of the site, that it would result in the loss of too many mature trees, and that the excavation work to provide the car parking area would be harmful to the old properties within the area.

1. The owners and/or occupants of Laurel Bank, which is located above the application site, object to the planning application. The grounds for their objection can be summarised as concern that the proposed development is an over intensive use of the site. The express concerns that the submitted planning application fails to properly explain what is proposed, particularly in respect of the excavation and retaining wall work.

ASSESSMENT

1. The first issue to consider is whether the basic principle of the residential development of the application site is acceptable. In terms of this it can be seen that the proposed residential use accords with the land use designation within the Laxey and Lonan Area Plan Order 2005, which designates the application site as part predominantly residential use and part mixed use (residential/retail). As such, it would appear that the basic principle of residential development on the application site is acceptable. However, given that the application site contains a public house it is necessary to consider the acceptability of its loss in accordance with the provisions of Community Policy 4, which seeks to avoid undue loss of local shops and local public houses.

1. Community Policy 4 requires a demonstration that the use is no longer commercially viable or cannot be made commercially viable. As part of the planning application the applicant has submitted correspondence from their accountant that states that profitability has declined every year recently, that the business is no longer viable and that it would be uneconomic for the business to continue. The correspondence also highlights that the viability of many small public houses is decreasing and many are closing. Whilst this provides a clear statement that the applicant's accountant considers the use is no longer commercially viable and cannot be made commercially viable it is noted that this is not accompanied by any supporting evidence (i.e. accounts, etc.). However, as the application site is located opposite another existing public house, the Queens Hotel, it is reasonable to conclude that the loss of the existing public house should not adversely affect the provision of facilities for the local community. As such, it is considered unnecessary to require further justification and appropriate to accept the loss of the New Inn public house. Overall, the basic principle of the residential development of the application site is concluded to be acceptable. It remains necessary to consider the site specific impacts and acceptability of the proposed development.

1. As part of the assessment of the site specific impact of the proposed development it is necessary to consider the effect on public amenity. The two main issues to consider in this respect are i) street scene; and ii) trees. In terms of i) the proposed development will undoubtedly change the appearance of the application site within the overall surrounding street

scene through the introduction of the proposed built development. On one hand the quality and contribution of the application site as existing to the street scene could be said to be low as the frontage primarily consists of a somewhat unattractive area of hardstanding. On the other hand the effect of the proposed development could be said to be substantial as the level of development along the frontage is dramatically increased. On balance, as New Road is characterised by frontage development it is considered although it would change the character of the street scene the impact of the proposed development on public amenity would be acceptable. The form and design of the proposed dwellings is sufficiently in keeping with the locality and the character of the adjacent Conservation Area should not be unduly harmed by the proposal.

1. In respect of ii) the proposed development is shown as resulting in the loss of eight existing trees, which the applicant's agent suggests are generally self seeded sycamores. As stated highlighted earlier in this report there is a presumption against development that results in the loss of trees within the area under the provisions of Policy L/OSNC/PR/6 of the Laxey and Lonan Area Plan Order 2005. Whilst it is recognised that the trees in questions may be self seeded sycamores the policy does not specify what types of trees are, or are not, protected. As such, it has to be assumed that policy is applicable to the trees contained within the application site. There may be instances where some tree loss is acceptable and Policy L/OSNC/PR/6 can be set aside but in this instance the trees are prominently visible within the surrounding area. The loss of the pleasant green environment that they provide is detrimental to public amenity and it is concluded that such adverse impact is grounds for refusal of the planning application.

1. It is also necessary to consider the impact of the proposed on the private amenity of the existing properties on New Road and Rencell Hill. In respect of New Road the proposed development is either basically in line with existing property or sufficient distance from existing property so as not unduly affect their private amenity. The significant change in levels between the proposed dwellings and the existing properties on Rencell Hill means that the private amenity of those existing properties should not be unduly affected by the proposal.

1. The two highway related issues to consider are the provision of acceptable visibility and on-site car parking provision. In terms of visibility the submitted drawings show acceptable visibility being achievable for the proposed new access onto New Road. As this access and visibility has not been opposed by the Department of Infrastructure Highways Division it is assumed to meet their required standards. As such, the proposed access arrangements are concluded to be acceptable. In respect of on-site car parking provision, the car parking standard under the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 for the proposed development is two spaces per unit. The provision of nine spaces as proposed by this planning application is three less than the requisite twelve, which is contrary to the provisions of General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7. As stated earlier in this report there is provision within the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 to relax car parking standards where development:

• (a) would secure the re-use of a Registered Building or a building of architectural or historic interest; or
• (b) would result in the preservation of a sensitive streetscape; or
• (c) is otherwise of benefit to the character of a Conservation Area.
• (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.

The applicant's agent has stated that nine car parking spaces are considered acceptable as the application is well served by public transport and is within close proximity of convenience shopping. This position is not accepted as the failure to meet car parking standards is likely to increase pressure on, and the likelihood of, on-road parking which would be harmful to highway safety in this location, especially as New Road is the main road and main coastal route through Laxey. This view is supported by the objection from the Department of Infrastructure

Highways Division. Where there is realistic opportunity for a site to be able to provide the correct level of car parking to serve proposed development it should normally do so. The failure to do so on this application site is perhaps an indication the proposal represents overdevelopment of the land in question.

1. A number of representations have expressed concerns over proposed excavation and retaining wall work. Whilst it is accepted that the level of detail provided within the planning application to cover these issues is limited it does provide sufficient detail to allow an assessment of the planning merits, or otherwise, of such proposal. If planning approval is granted other non-planning approvals, such as Building Regulations, would still be required before any work on site could start. There is no planning related reason to believe that the excavation and retaining wall work could not be done, the actual engineering design would be subject of assessment under other non-planning legislation. It is therefore considered that whilst the planning application can legitimately consider the acceptability of the visual impact of the proposed retaining wall the structural impact of the wall, and the work to create it, is not a material planning consideration. As the proposed retaining wall would be mostly hidden from general view by the proposed dwellings it is considered that its visual impact would be acceptable.

Recommendation

1. It is recommended that the planning application be refused.

Party Status

1. It is considered that the following parties that made representations to the planning application should be afforded interested party status:

• Laxey Village Commissioners;
• The Isle of Man Water and Sewerage Authority;
• The owners and/or occupants of Yew Tree Cottage;
• The owners and/or occupants of Braeside;
• The owners and/or occupants of Rencell House; and
• The owners and/or occupants of Laurel Bank.

1. It is considered that the following parties that made representations to the planning application should not be afforded interested party status:

• The Department of Infrastructure Highways Division; and
• The Manx Electricity Authority.

Recommendation

Recommended Decision: Refused

Date of Recommendation: 12.09.2012

Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions

R : Reasons for refusal

• : Notes attached to refusals

R 1. The proposed development entails the removal of eight existing trees. The Laxey and Lonan Area Plan Order 2005 sets out a general presumption against the removal of trees within the plan area, including instances where this is proposed in order to facilitate development. These existing trees provide a pleasant green environment that is beneficial to the amenity of the street scene and overall area. As such, the loss of these trees would have an unacceptable adverse impact on public amenity and be contrary to the provisions of Policy L/OSNC/PR/6 of the Laxey and Lonan Area Plan Order 2005.

R 2. The proposed development fails to meet car parking requirements defined by Appendix 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007. Whilst car parking requirements may be relaxed in certain instances it is inappropriate to do so in this location as a failure to meet car parking standards will increase pressure on, and the likelihood of, on-road parking which would be harmful to highway safety in this location, especially as New Road is the main road and main coastal route through Laxey. As such, the proposal is contrary to the provisions of the General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007. Notwithstanding the first reason for refusal, the inability to provide sufficient on-site car parking to meet the requirements of the proposed development is considered to indicate that the proposal represents overdevelopment of the land in question.

I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control / Development Control Manager/ Senior Planning Officer.

Decision Made : Refused Date : 19.9.12

Determining officer (delete as appropriate)

Signed : Donald Anthony Holmes Senior Planning Officer

Signed : Donald Michael Gallagher Director of Planning and Building Control

Signed : Donald Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer

Signed : Jennifer Chance Development Control Manager