Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
16/00281/B
Page 1 of 4
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 16/00281/B Applicant : Central Pacific Services Limited Proposal : Erection of two dwellings with on-site parking Site Address : Garage And Plot Gellings Avenue Port St. Mary Isle of Man
Case Officer : Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO CONCERNS REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF PARKING STANDARDS
THE SITE 1.1 The site is a piece of land situated towards the higher, western end of Gellings Avenue. Gellings Avenue has a modern block of apartments on the other side from the application site which lies on the north western side of the road, which sits alongside the local authority public conveniences. On the other side of the road, where the application site sits is a terrace of three two storey houses with dormer accommodation in the roofspace. These are relatively modern properties, built under PA 98/01877/B.
1.2 Planning approval was granted for the development of the application site under Planning permission was finally granted for the principle of the erection of a pair of semi-detached properties under PA 05/92275. The conditions of that approval required that the roofs of the properties are stepped to take account of the changing ground level and that the height of the properties may not exceed the relative height of the terrace of three dwellings to the north east. Reserved matters approval was granted under PA 09/00128/REM and this was extended until 2014 but not implemented.
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Approval is now sought for the development of two semi-detached dwellings on the site. The scheme is similar to that granted under PA 09/00128/REM albeit that there are no longer integral garages and the parking is arranged side by side on the driveway with the dwellings set back a further 900mm to allow more space. The elevations now include slightly larger windows in the main living areas and there will be stone cladding to the ground floor of the front elevation with the remainder of the walling finished in painted render. The roof will be finished in Marley Rivendale slate like tiles. The dormer eaves level window will be finished in timber cladding with a stained varnish finish.
2.2 The houses are similar but not identical to those alongside, with a stepped ridge and eaves level dormers which are slightly wider than those alongside. There are no chimneys on the proposed dwellings, nor are there any on the dwellings alongside.
2.3 The parking area in front of the dwellings will be 4.7m and up to 5.4m in length and 2.3m wide as originally shown. Following discussions with the applicant, and concerns raised about the available parking space, the applicant has clarified the position in respect of parking and confirms
==== PAGE 2 ====
16/00281/B
Page 2 of 4
that there will be two spaces - one 4.8m long and the other 5.7m long, the shorter one restricted by a wall which provides protection of the front door. The drawing illustrates that the adjacent property has a 4.8m long parking space.
PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area of Residential use on the Area Plan. As such, the proposal should comply with the provisions of General Policy 2 as follows:
b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the space around them; c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; 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 adverse 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".
PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 In addition to the applications referred to above, planning permission was refused for the construction of a children's day nursery under PA 90/01223/B, refused for reasons relating to traffic problems. Planning permission was also refused for the erection of a dwelling, refused as there was inadequate space between the proposed property and that the rear and inadequate space to the front.
4.2 Planning approval was granted for the erection of the adjacent houses under PA 98/01877/B.
REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services initially objected to the proposal on the basis that the parking spaces provided do not meet today's standards of 3.25 x 6 metres per car parking space. From the drawings provided the parking spaces measure 2.45 x 4.8 per car parking space which will result in vehicles parking in this space overhanging the public highway causing an obstruction to pedestrian (18.03.16). Further to the submission of further information referred to in paragraph 2.3, DoI Highways Services indicate that they no longer object to the application as the proposal layout will not adversely affect the safety or amenity of the occupants (12.07.16).
5.2 Port St. Mary Commissioners indicate that they have no objection to the application (30.03.16).
5.3 The owner of 1, Gellings Avenue which lies alongside to the north west expresses concern at the impact on light from the proposed dwellings being stepped back further than his property (07.04.16).
5.4 The owner of 7, Victoria Road which lies to the rear of 2, Gellings Avenue and around 16m from the proposed rear elevation objects to the proposal on the basis that the rear elevations are not in line with 1-3, Gellings Avenue (05.04.16).
ASSESSMENT 6.1 The previously approved scheme showed two spaces per dwelling, one of which was a garaged space measuring 5m by 3.6m and the other a space on the driveway measuring 4.8m by around 5.7m. What is now shown is similar to this, with the shortest length of parking being 4.8m unimpeded by doors which is equivalent to a standard parking bay and therefore capable of accommodating a full length vehicle. This appears to be in accordance with what has approval alongside.
==== PAGE 3 ====
16/00281/B
Page 3 of 4
6.2 The neighbour has concerns that the property will overshadow hers due to a stepping back of the property by around 900mm. However, this set back is so slight, it is not considered that the new building will affect the sunlight to any of the rear window and only a slight impairment of sunlight to the rear elevation and rear garden. Similarly, it is not considered that the occupants of 7, Victoria Avenue will be so adversely affected by the slight set back so as to warrant refusal of the application for this reason.
6.3 The proposal is considered to be a suitable use of brownfield land within a sustainable location and as such the application is recommended for approval. Due to the limited size of the site, it is considered appropriate to limit the ability to extend the properties without further control and as such it is recommended to restrict the application of the Permitted Development Order.
PARTY STATUS 7.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, 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, in this case Department of Infrastructure Highway Services and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
In addition to those above, article 6(3) of the Order requires the Department to decide which persons (if any) who have made representations with respect to the application, should be treated as having sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application.
In this instance, it is recommended that the following persons have sufficient interest and should be awarded the status of an Interested Person in accordance with Government Circular 0046/13:
the owner of 1, Gelling's Avenue which is adjacent to the site the owner of 7, Victoria Avenue which is close to the site.
With effect from 1 June 2015, the Transfer of Planning & Building Control Functions Order 2015 amends the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 to give effect to the meaning of the word 'Department' to be the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture unless otherwise directed by that Order.
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 12.07.2016
Conditions and Notes for Approval: C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
C 1.
==== PAGE 4 ====
16/00281/B
Page 4 of 4
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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 2. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no extension, enlargement or other alteration of the dwelling(s) hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, shall be carried out, without the prior written approval of the Department.
Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.
This decision relates to drawings 1603/01, 1603/02 both received on 9th March, 2016 and the parking layout as shown in the drawing attached to the applicant's letter of 30th June, 2016 with one space being 4.8m long and the other 5.7m long.
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: 18.07.2016
Signed : S E Corlett 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
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