Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
19/00655/B Page 1 of 7
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 19/00655/B Applicant : Broompark Ltd Proposal : Erection of dwelling with parking Site Address : Land To Rear Of Bay View 38 Victoria Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 4HE
Planning Officer: Mr Nick Salt Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 19.07.2019 __
Conditions and Notes for Approval
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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 2. The parking area to the north of the dwelling hereby approved shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking and turning of vehicles associated with the development and shall remain free of obstruction for such use at all times.
Reason: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for off-street parking and turning of vehicles in the interests of highway safety.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This decision relates to the following plans and drawings, date stamped received on 4th June 2019:
o DRG NO. B/773/1(A) - Location Plan, Site Plan as proposed, ground and first floor plans o DRG NO. B/773/2(A) - Attic and basement plans as proposed, section plan of basement, elevations plans __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
==== PAGE 2 ====
19/00655/B Page 2 of 7
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 6(4):
Ealing Court Management, 11 Woodville Terrace, Douglas, as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (July 2018). __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is a parcel of land located to the south east of Bay View which has been converted into self-contained flats, located on the south western side of Victoria Road. The site also immediately adjoins the curtilage of 11 Woodville Terrace which has also been converted to flats. The site is accessed via the lane which runs between the rear of Woodville Terrace and the rear of properties which front onto Victoria Road.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 This application seeks approval for the erection of a two storey dwelling on the site identical to that approved via 15/00856/B. The applicant has sought planning approval again as the original approval has a condition requiring work to commence within 4 years, and this will soon expire.
2.2 The property would be accessed via the rear land although it is proposed to create a pedestrian access within the wall which faces onto Woodville Terrace. The submitted drawings show that part of the building would be attached to the side elevation of 11 Woodville Terrace. Three car parking spaces are proposed to be created to the rear of the proposed dwelling.
2.3 The design of the building takes inspiration from the buildings on Woodville Terrace having clear references to their Victorian architecture, particularly the front elevation which would be characterised by the use of a double height central bay and vertically proportioned windows. The building would however be significantly lower than and would be set at an angle to the terrace. A pitched roof dormer on the front elevation would provide access onto a balcony.
2.4 Internally the building would provide accommodation consisting of three ground floor bedrooms and a bathroom. The first floor would contain a lounge and kitchen with breakfast area whilst the roof space would contain a study, games room and eaves storage. The entrance door to the property would be in the side elevation. A garden area would be provided in the south eastern end of the plot.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 Planning approval was granted in 2012 under PA 12/00409/B for the erection of a dwelling. Subsequently, 15/00856/B was approved for an application comprising alterations to the initial approval. The following conditions were attached:
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.
The parking area to the north of the dwelling hereby approved shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking and turning of vehicles associated with the development and shall remain free of obstruction for such use at all times.
Reason: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for off-street parking and turning of vehicles in the interests of highway safety.
==== PAGE 3 ====
19/00655/B Page 3 of 7
3.2 Planning approval was sought under PA 08/01065/B for the erection of a dwelling. This previous planning application was refused for the following reasons:
R 1. The proposed development would be contrary to General Policy 2, Housing Policy 6 and Environment Policy 42 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 by reason of its siting, design and external appearance in that it:
(a) would not respect the character and identity of the buildings within the immediate locality and would be detrimental to the visual amenities of the locality; and
(b) would adversely affect the outlook, the privacy and the amount of private amenity space for the existing occupiers of No.38 Victoria Road resulting in a poor residential environment for the existing occupiers of No.38 Victoria Road.
R 2. The proposed development would be contrary to General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 in that the rear lane which would provide vehicular access to the site is inadequate for this purpose.
R 3. The proposed development would be contrary to General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 in that the proposed car parking provision is inadequate to the needs of the development and the existing occupiers of No.38 Victoria Road which would lead to increased on street parking within the locality.
4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is located within an area zoned as Predominantly Residential under the Douglas Local Plan 1998.
4.2 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 contains seven policies that are considered materially relevant to the assessment of this current planning application:
Strategic Policy 1 states: "Development should make the best use of resources by: (a) optimising the use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and under- used land and buildings, and re-using scarce indigenous building materials; (b) ensuring efficient use of sites, taking into account the needs for access, landscaping, open space(1) and amenity standards; and (c) being located so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services."
Strategic Policy 2 states: "New development will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions(2) of these towns and villages. Development will be permitted in the countryside only in the exceptional circumstances identified in paragraph 6.3."
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;
==== PAGE 4 ====
19/00655/B Page 4 of 7
(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."
Environment Policy 42: "New development in existing settlements must be designed to take account of the particular character and identity, in terms of buildings and landscape features of the immediate locality. Inappropriate backland development, and the removal of open or green spaces which contribute to the visual amenity and sense of place of a particular area will not be permitted. Those open or green spaces which are to be preserved will be identified in Area Plans."
Housing Policy 4 states: "New housing will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions(1) of these towns and villages where identified in adopted Area Plans: otherwise new housing will be permitted in the countryside only in the following exceptional circumstances:
(a) essential housing for agricultural workers in accordance with Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10; (b) conversion of redundant rural buildings in accordance with Housing Policy 11; and (c) the replacement of existing rural dwellings and abandoned dwellings in accordance with Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14."
Transport Policy 4 states: "The new and existing highways which serve any new development must be designed so as to be capable of accommodating the vehicle and pedestrian journeys generated by that development in a safe and appropriate manner, and in accordance with the environmental objectives of this plan."
Transport Policy 7 states: "The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Departments current standards."
Appendix 7 sets out the parking standards for different types of development. For typical residential: "2 spaces per unit, at least one of which is retained within the curtilage and behind the front of the dwelling."
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Douglas Borough Council have no objection to the proposal (20.06.19).
5.2 Ealing Court Management, Flat 4, 11 Woodville Terrace, Douglas have submitted a letter of objection to the proposal (11.07.19). The key points of objection are summarised thus, although the full letter is available online.
==== PAGE 5 ====
19/00655/B Page 5 of 7
o Application fails to address GP" (g,h,I,j and m)"The development's proposed angle is likely to restrict light on 50% of Ealing Court and the bay window which will affect privacy"; o Insufficient manoeuvring space, could result on more on-street parking; o Questions as to whether all required services could be provided from a service lane, legal right to access; o No public lighting on service lane increasing hazards of cars and pedestrians using it; o Under TP4 &6 of Strategic Plan, existing highways not suitable for increased vehicular or pedestrian access, ECM has not given approval for pedestrian access over their land onto Woodville Terrace as the road is not adopted; o Problems of using rear service lane such as restrictions for pedestrians, bins blocking access and emergency vehicles; o Insufficient information about how pathway would be improved; o No right of access over Ealing Court managements land; o Rights to proposed pedestrian access disputed, and the access for emergency vehicles as per Community Policy 10 of IOMSP; o Consideration needed for drainage arrangements; o Constitutes backland development, structural issues possible; o ECM has not been consulted by the developers.
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The planning approval granted under PA 15/00856/B does not expire until September 2019 and could still be implemented until that expiry. As noted, the proposal drawings and application in this case are identical to those approved in 2015. Therefore, as there have been no alterations to the land use zoning or the general aims of any updated planning policy in this area since, the acceptability in principle of the development has been established. The previous case office assessing the application for that currently extant approval made the following comments, and as this is an identical application, those comments are considered to apply also to the current application.
6.2 The key issues to be assessed in the determination of this application are the impact of the proposed development upon the visual amenity of Woodville Terrace and the effect of the proposed development upon the residential amenity of residents of the apartments of No. 38 Victoria Road.
6.3 As previously mentioned, the design of the proposed dwelling is largely traditional, having Victorian detailing, particularly the eastern elevation, which would be sympathetic to the dwellings of Woodville Terrace and other surrounding properties.
6.4 Whilst the rear two storey outrigger is not overly attractive, it would not be visible within the street scene and is therefore deemed acceptable in this instance.
6.5 In terms of private amenity space, the scheme would provide a yard of around 10 m by 10 m which is deemed acceptable. The surrounding area is characterised by terraces of Victorian properties, with some that are built the full length of the plots with minimal, or in some cases no amenity space. What can be achieved under this scheme is acceptable given the size and location of the plot.
6.6 It is considered that the proposed dwelling would not have an unacceptable impact upon the street scene of Woodville Terrace and it is therefore judged that the proposal accords with the provisions set out in General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 42.
6.7 The proposed dwelling would not be visible from Victoria Road and would therefore have a minimal impact upon the street scene of Victoria Road or public amenity in general.
6.8 Turning to the impact upon the amenity of No. 38 Victoria Road, the Department usually use a 20 metre separation distance between glazing to glazing as guidance regarding privacy. This guideline is set out in the Departments Residential Design Guidance (March 2019). The
==== PAGE 6 ====
19/00655/B Page 6 of 7
proposed dwelling would be approximately 20 metres from the rear of No. 38 Victoria Road and therefore the proposed dwelling is not considered to cause undue harm upon the residential amenity of No. 38 Victoria Road.
6.9 Impacts on the adjoining 11 Woodville Terrace are not considered likely to be significant. The rear elevation of the proposed dwelling would sit further forward than that of No.11 and would be angled away, reducing the likelihood of unacceptable levels of shadowing as per the Departments recently published Residential Design Guidance (March 2019):
"A development should not result in significant levels of loss of day light or overshadowing, especially to primary habitable rooms, or to private gardens. Applicants are advised to look carefully at the path of the sun throughout the day, and consider where shadows fall, using this information to help in considering the design, position and height of the extension. The impact of overshadowing will increase if the new property/extension is to the South of a neighbouring property (as the sun's orientation is East to West). When the windows affected serve habitable rooms then it will be necessary to assess the impact upon light reaching these rooms.
A simple check can be undertaken in relation to this issue. o A side view is drawn which includes the proposal site and the main face of the neighbouring property. o A point is identified which is 2 metres above ground level on the closest wall with a relevant window of the neighbouring building. o A line is drawn from this point at a 25 degree angle towards the application site. If no part of the proposal is above this line, there will still be the potential for good daylight to the interior."
6.9.1 In respect of overlooking, concern has been raised by No.11 about overlooking into the front bay windows from those in the proposed dwelling. Again, privacy is addressed in the Residential Design Guide, stating:
"The "20 metre guide" provides a useful way to identify where overlooking is likely to be a concern. It refers to the distance between elevations that contain windows serving habitable rooms that face each other - if this distance is over 20 metres, overlook is unlikely to be a concern. This distance can be relaxed where the design or orientation is such that privacy and amenity of a neighbouring property is not compromised. In dense urban areas where there is already a level of mutual overlooking a lesser standard may be acceptable. The required distance may need to be greater if there is a change in topography, which would result in an adverse effect on the privacy and amenity of a neighbouring property.
The presence of existing or proposed landscaping features (e.g. fences, walls and hedges) may help to mitigate overlooking at a ground floor level (depending on relative heights). Although the permanent retention of such landscaping cannot be guaranteed, it would be within the gift of both neighbours to retain/maintain/replace such landscape features." With the boundary wall between the two properties, ground floor underlooking is unlikely to be an issue. From the first floor, the level of overlooking between bay windows is unlikely to be above that normally experienced in such terraces. Given the angle of the respective windows, there would not be direct overlooking into the habitable rooms of No.11 with exception to the small bay window area from someone standing in the similar area of the proposed house. Additionally, the windows all front directly onto a public throughfare, from which loss of privacy is likely to be much more acute.
6.10 In respect of the car parking provision for the new dwelling houses, Transport Policy 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan states that "The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards." This requires two off road parking spaces for each dwelling. The plan shows that three parking spaces can be accommodated to the rear of the dwelling and would therefore accord with the provisions set out in Transport Policy 7.
==== PAGE 7 ====
19/00655/B Page 7 of 7
6.11 Concerns have been raised (5.2 of this report) concerning legal right of access and ownership. This is considered a civil matter and is not a material consideration in the assessment of this application.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 In summary, the proposal is considered to accord with the aforementioned policies of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan and the Local Plan and is therefore recommended for approval on the basis of the assessment above.
8.0 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. __
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 : Permitted
Date: 19.07.2019
Determining officer
Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett
Principal Planner
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