Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
18/00446/B Page 1 of 6
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 18/00446/B Applicant : Marathon Court Nursing And Residential Home 1989 Ltd Proposal : Alterations and extensions including conversion of existing utility/plant room to accommodation block, and yard alterations including creation of decked/ramped area and relocation of parking Site Address : Marathon Court Victoria Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 4RQ
Planning Officer: Mr Owen Gore Photo Taken : 10.07.2018 Site Visit : 10.07.2018 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 11.09.2018 __
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. The proposed residential accommodation is constrained; it will provide a sub-standard level of accommodation and will not provide satisfactory level of amenity for the future occupant(s). The proposed apartments will not have a pleasant clear outlook. The proposal is therefore contrary to General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
THE SITE 1.1 The application property is part of the wider application site which encompasses the whole of Marathon Court Nursing and Residential Home. The property is a former utility room approx. 2.8m wide and 5.15m long measured internally. It is the end room attached to a row of terraced residential units that face out onto the parking area.
==== PAGE 2 ====
18/00446/B Page 2 of 6
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The proposal is to convert a utility room into residential accommodation and includes the addition of a small, flat roofed, front extension that will house a shower room. In addition, a ramped access/decked area that runs along the front elevation of this and the adjoining residential units; this comprises of a low level rendered block wall with a steel balustrade.
PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site is shown on the Douglas Local Plan Order 1998 map No.2 as being within the local plan area and the property is designated within an Area of Predominantly Residential Use. The application site is not within a Conservation Area; however the sider site shares a boundary with the Douglas Promenades Conservation Area and to the north of the site is the Olympia Conservation Area.
3.2 The Strategic Plan 2016 contains policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this planning application.
3.3 Strategic Policy 1 stipulates the need to make the best use of resources by optimising the use of previously developed and under-used land; using sites efficiently by including access, landscaping, open space(1) and amenity standards etc.; and being located so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services. Strategic Policy 2 states that new development will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages.
3.4 General Policy 2 applies to proposals that are in accordance with the land-use zoning and states that development will normally be permitted where it: - (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; (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;
3.5 Housing Policy 1 identifies how the housing needs of the Island will be met and Housing Policy 3 identifies the Island's housing need and the distribution across the North, South, East and West. Housing Policy 4 states that 'New housing will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages'.
3.6 Housing Policy 17 applies to the conversion of existing buildings into flats, which is not strictly applicable to the proposal; however the criteria set out in this policy provides some insight into 'satisfactory amenity standards' as stated in part (h) of General Policy 2. The criterion is as follows: -
(a) adequate space can be provided for clothes-drying, refuse storage, general amenity, and, if practical, car-parking; (b) the flats created will have a pleasant clear outlook, particularly from the principal rooms and (c) if possible, this involves the creation of parking on site or as part of an overall traffic management strategy for the area.
3.7 Transport Policy 7 sets out the requirement for new development to provide adequate parking in line with the parking standards set out in Appendix 7 Strategic Plan.
==== PAGE 3 ====
18/00446/B Page 3 of 6
3.8 Consideration has also been given to the Housing (Standards) Regulations 2017, made by DEFA under section 11 of, and Schedule 1 to, the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2011, which was approved by Tynwald on the 25 April 2017 and was brought into operation on the 1 May 2017.
PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The previous planning applications are not considered to be specifically material in the assessment of the current application.
REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 Representation from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division reviewed the proposal, in the response dated 30 May 2018. The comments refer to the accuracy of the submitted details; however concludes that 'the parking area would have 7no. spaces each of size 2.5 x 5m which complies with the minimum bay size in the MfMR. A car park aisle width of 6m would be provided which is sufficient to allow cars to turn into and out of the spaces'.
5.2 The comments advised that time should be allowed for highways services to complete a site visit; however it is not known if this was carried out.
5.3 Douglas Borough Council has been consulted on this application and at the time of writing, no comments have been received.
5.4 The proposal includes the removal of several trees, as noted on the submitted drawing No.18/2696/03A - Proposed Site Plan. The DEFA Arboricultural Officer has been consulted on this application and has stated that they do not object to the loss of these trees.
ASSESSMENT
6.1 The key issues of this application are the principle, the standard of accommodation provided, the impact to the character and appearance of the area, the potential impact on neighbouring properties, and parking and highway safety.
Principle 6.2 The proposal is to convert a single utility room into residential accommodation following the erection of a small, flat roofed, front extension. The proposal also includes a ramped access/decked area that runs along the front elevation of this and the adjoining residential units. The main element of the proposal is to convert an existing room into a new residential unit.
6.3 The application site is within an Area of Predominantly Residential Use and therefore basic principle for an extension to an existing residential apartment building to provide additional units, is acceptable; however this is subject to the other considerations identified below.
Standard of accommodation 6.4 GP2 includes several tests of which part (h) 'provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself' is one. Housing Policy 17 applies to the conversion of existing buildings into flats, which is not strictly applicable to the proposal; however the criteria set out in this policy provides some insight into 'satisfactory amenity standards'. This policy provides criteria for the assessment of the proposal.
6.5 Part (a) of HP17 requires adequate space be provided for 'clothes-drying, refuse storage, [and] general amenity'. The accommodation is shown as the former utility room, which is approx. 13.5m2 (5m long by 2.7m wide) and the proposed front extension, which is approx.
==== PAGE 4 ====
18/00446/B Page 4 of 6
2.9m2 (1.88m long by 1.54m wide); the total floor area is approx. 16.4m2. Within that space the shower room and W/C occupies the proposed extension and the bedroom and living accommodation occupies the remaining space.
6.6 Although the application form states that the accommodation is part of the wider care home use, the submitted information does not indicate that there is any other accommodation or shared facilities available to the occupant and therefore the proposal is being considered as a new self-contained residential unit. The submitted plans show three additional units that make up this row; the plans indicate that these have not be surveyed and therefore floor plans are not available. However these three units are approx. 5.4m wide, almost double the width of the bedroom and living accommodation of the proposed unit.
6.7 The Housing (Standards) Regulations 2013, Schedule 1, Part 2, 'Minimum Sizes and Maximum Occupancy for Flats' provides maximum occupancy based on Net floor area for both permanent and tourist accommodation; as such it provides a sound indication for acceptable levels of accommodation for self-contained residential units. This legislation states that less than 30m2 is not suitable accommodation for any occupants on a permanent basis and less than 17m2 not suitable accommodation for any occupants for tourist use. Between 30m2 and 45m2 is suitable for 1 occupant.
6.8 The total floor area is approx. 16.4m2 which is less than the acceptable level of accommodation for tourist use and just over half of that required to be considered an acceptable level of accommodation for any occupants on a permanent basis.
6.9 Part 1 of the same legislation refers to 'Minimum Room Sizes and Maximum Occupancy for Houses in Multiple Occupation' which notes the minimum size for a bedroom as 8.5m2; this would be suitable for 1 person. The proposed accommodation is greater than this; however Houses in Multiple Occupation refer to property with communal rooms, including a kitchen and a lounge or dining room, reasonably accessible and available to multiple units.
6.10 Part (b) of HP17 requires new units to 'have a pleasant clear outlook, particularly from the principal rooms'. The submitted plans show two windows on the front elevation as well as the door; one window serves the shower room and will presumably be obscure glazed, the other is the main window for the bedroom and living space. The only outlook available to the proposed unit is a view of the tarmac car park and any vehicles parked in the spaces shown on the submitted drawing No.18/2696/03A - Proposed Site Plan.
6.11 The proposal will create an unsatisfactory level of accommodation when considered in conjunction with its location and is considered to not provide a satisfactory level of amenity, or a pleasant clear outlook.
Character and appearance 6.12 The application site is located within the site boundary of the care home and the proposed unit is part of the existing structure that makes up the existing row of residential accommodation. There is a front extension which will be visible from the highway in front of the access to the west of the building, but the scope to see this building is minimal, as is the size and scale of the extension. Due to its location the proposal is not considered to significantly harm the character of the site and surrounding area.
Impact on neighbours 6.13 The proposed unit is mostly a change of use on an existing utility room to residential accommodation, which is generally in keeping with the immediate adjoining use. The proposed extension to the front of the building is away from the closest adjoining unit and. The proposed new window will face onto the car parking area.
==== PAGE 5 ====
18/00446/B Page 5 of 6
6.14 Due to the above consideration, it is unlikely that the proposal will have any significant impact on any neighbouring properties.
Parking and Highways 6.15 Comments from the DoI Highways Division noted that the parking area complies with the minimum bay size in the MfMR and that a car park aisle width of 6m would be provided which is sufficient to allow cars to turn into and out of the spaces.
6.16 Due to the nature of the use and the size of the unit proposed it is unlikely that the proposal will have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways.
Trees 6.17 The proposal includes the removal of several trees, as noted on the submitted drawing No.18/2696/03A - Proposed Site Plan. The DEFA Arboricultural Officer has been consulted on this application and has stated that they do not object to the loss of these trees.
CONCLUSION 7.1 The proposal will provide sub-standard level of accommodation, in terms of the unsatisfactory level of amenity and lack of a pleasant clear outlook. The proposal is therefore contrary to General Policy 2.
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: (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested; (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
8.2 The decision maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and o whether there are other persons to those listed in Article 6(4) who should be given Interested Person Status.
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 can confirm that this decision has been made by a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.
Decision Made : Refused Date: 14.09.2018
Determining officer
Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett
Principal Planner
==== PAGE 6 ====
18/00446/B Page 6 of 6
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal