Officer Report 12/01674/B

Planning Report And Recommendations {{table:26513}}

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 four dwellings on the application site. It is proposed to demolish the existing public house and erect four two-storey detached dwellings with associated car parking on the overall site. A central gap between the dwellings provides access to a rear parking area that combines with other parking to the side of dwellings to give nine overall car parking spaces. Eight existing trees are shown as being removed to facilitate the proposed development.

Planning History

1. The application site has been the subject of a number of previous planning applications, one of which is considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application:

1. Planning application 12/00749/B sought planning approval for the erection of six dwellings with parking to replace existing Public House. This previous planning application was refused on the 20th September 2012 for the two following reasons:

Reason for refusal 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."

Reason for refusal 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."

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 recommend that the planning application be approved.

1. The Department of Infrastructure Highways Division objects to the planning application. They state that whilst the proposed junction meets current standards of visibility and there are sufficient car parking spaces to meet parking standards the size and layout of those spaces does not meet current standards. Specifically, the spaces are approximately 4.9m long with 5m between them, which results in a car park with insufficient manoeuvring space that may lead to an increase in accidents or vehicles being parked on the highway against the interests of highway safety. As such, they conclude that the application does not provide adequate parking and manoeuvring space in contravention of GP 2(h) of the IOM Strategic Plan.

1. The Isle of Man Water and Sewerage Authority do 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 Glebe Cottage, which is located in Maughold, expressed an interest in the planning application and highlighted the lack of a proposed layout within the planning application. This matter was addressed by the submission of an additional drawing.

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 regarding the loss of trees and the car parking provision. They also 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. As 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.

1. 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 greater than the minimum requirement of

eight spaces to accord with the provisions of Transport Policy 7. However, whilst the number of spaces meets stated requirements the size and layout of those spaces does not meet current standards. As highlighted by the Department of Infrastructure Highways Division the spaces are approximately 4.9m long with 5m between them, which results in a car park with insufficient manoeuvring space that may lead to an increase in accidents or vehicles being parked on the highway against the interests of highway safety. This raises questions over the safe and viable use of the proposed development. It is concluded that the proposed development is contrary to the provisions of General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 insofar as it does not provide adequate parking and manoeuvring space.

1. A representation has 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; 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;
• The Manx Electricity Authority; and
• The owners and/or occupants of Glebe Cottage.

Recommendation
Recommended Decision:	Refused
Date of Recommendation:	04.02.2013

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.

Whilst the proposed development provides sufficient number of car parking spaces the size and layout of those spaces does not meet current standards. Specifically, the spaces are approximately 4.9m long with 5m between them, which results in a car park with insufficient manoeuvring space that may lead to an increase in accidents or vehicles being parked on the highway against the interests of highway safety. As such, the proposed development fails to provide adequate parking and manoeuvring space and is thereby contrary to the provisions of General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007.

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: 4-2-13

Determining officer (delete as appropriate)

Signed: _________________________ Anthony Holmes Senior Planning Officer

Signed: _________________________ Michael Gallagher Director of Planning and Building Control

Signed: Samoult Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer

Signed: _________________________ Jennifer Chance Development Control Manager