Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
19/00713/B Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 19/00713/B Applicant : Mr Owen Jones Proposal : Creation of off road parking Site Address : 61 Port E Chee Avenue Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 5EU
Planning and Enforcement Assistant: Miss Vanessa Wilson Photo Taken : 15.08.2019 Site Visit : 15.08.2019 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 30.09.2019 __
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. By virtue of its design, size and materials proposed the proposal would unacceptably harm the characteristics of the existing property and the character of the surrounding area. The proposal would result in overlooking to the neighbouring property. Therefore the proposal conflicts with General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 61 Port E Chee which is a split storey detached single storey bungalow situated to the north western side of the highway.
1.2 The property to the north of 61 Port E Chee, 63 Port E Chee is higher than 61 Port E Chee and the property to the west of 61 Port E Chee, 59 Port E Chee is lower than 61 Port E Chee. All the properties are set back from the roadside with a steep incline up to the road, which is in itself on an incline.
1.3 To the front of the property there is a small garden and a staircase to the south of the front elevation.
1.4 Currently the property in question has no on site car parking available with all parking being on the street.
==== PAGE 2 ====
19/00713/B Page 2 of 5
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The current planning application seeks approval to create an off road parking space on a raised platform which is to be 4.2m by 5.7m. This is to include a staircase down to the property and a bin store to the right hand side of the parking bay. The raised platform is going to be between 1.74m to 1m above the ground floor level with a 0.33m thick base and railings to 1.15m high. An estimate of the overall height is 3.2m high facing towards 63 Port E Chee and 3m high towards 59 Port E Chee.
2.2 The new staircase is to be formed from galvanised steel with open risers, the handrail is glass balustrade infill with stainless steel handrail and posts, with the overall structural frame constructed out of structural concrete topping over supported on steel frame and posts.
PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The previous planning applications are not considered to be specifically material in the assessment of the current application.
PLANNING POLICY 4.1 The site lies within an area zoned as Predominantly Residential on the Douglas Local Plan 1998, Map 2.
4.2 Of specific relevance to the assessment of this application is General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 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: 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; g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them;
REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services do not oppose the proposal on highway grounds and have made several comments with regards to the structural design. Highway Services have requested that a condition be attached to the application which is not a Planning Issue as such the condition cannot be attached.
5.2 Douglas Corporation have considered the proposal and have no objection (24.07.19).
ASSESSMENT 6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of the planning application are the potential impacts of the proposal on the character and appearance of 61 Port E Chee and the wider street scene.
6.2 Due to the nature of the works, the Department does not have specific guidelines on what would be accepted and what wouldn't as such I have looked at several different aspects including roof terraces, extensions to the front of the property and parking within my report. Character and Appearance
6.3.1 Port E Chee is a large estate within the Douglas boundary which includes several different types of houses. Within the surrounding area of 61 Port E Chee Avenue to the western side that 61 Port E Chee Avenue is on is mostly split level bungalows, with only the top level mainly showing on the roadside. To the eastern side of 61 Port E Chee Avenue the roadside is dominated by two storey semi-detached dwellings.
==== PAGE 3 ====
19/00713/B Page 3 of 5
6.3.2 When looking at 61 Port E Chee Avenue the property is defined by the bay windows to the front and the sloping, overhanging roof. To the front is a small garden which is raised above the property level and mature hedging along the boundary line facing the roadside. The proposed raised car parking aby is to have a concrete pad with galvanised steel with open riser's stairs and a railing mainly of glass and galvanised steel, all of which are very modern in styling compared to the existing property.
6.3.3 The Department has recently published the Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) which addresses incorporating modern design approaches to a property stating "All extensions and alterations, particularly those incorporating modern design approaches, should be considered holistically with the original/main building and its setting in the landscape/townscape to avoid an awkward jarring of materials and forms... However, where inappropriately designed, located and finished, such approaches can be harmful to the character of a building and its surrounds, and become a local eyesore."
6.3.4 Whilst it is noted that the raised car parking bay is not an extension in the main sense, the same guidelines can be put on the raised car parking bay as it is directly in front of the existing dwelling and will be seen as an attachment to the property. The use of modern materials in this instance would look out of place with the general outlook of the property and would be detrimental to how it is viewed within the streetscene. The property itself has mature hedging which currently hides the property from the streetscene, with the raised parking bay the hedging would mostly still be in place as such when driving/walking down the hill past 61 Port E Chee Avenue the main part you would see would be the modern design. There is the possibility that with the creation of the raised parking bay, to assist with viewing traffic that the removal of the hedging could happen. This would create an even more substantial detrimental outlook to the application site.
6.3.5 The roadside to 61 Port E Chee, Avenue is directly at roof level as such the raised car parking bay is at roof level. This will create a very overbearing aspect to the overall property and would be detrimental to the property as a whole.
Neighbouring Properties
6.4.1 One aspect of the properties along the eastern side of Port E Chee surrounding the application site is to note that they are on a hill which slopes from north to south as such 59 Port E Chee Avenue has a garden level of around 1.7 to 2 meters below the application site when measured on the drawing given. The roof level of 59 Port E Chee will be only 10cm higher than the railing of the proposed raised car parking area. It was noted during my site visit that there was hedging between the properties but due to the variances between levels the overlooking to the front was possible.
6.4.2 Currently at the moment there is a possibility of overlooking to the front of No. 59 Port E Chee Avenue and whilst No.59 Port E Chee Avenue have not commented on the application, The Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) suggest a screening of 1.8 meters from the level of the "decking" to minimalize any overlooking aspect. This could potentially minimalize any overlooking to No.59 Port E Chee Avenue but there would still be the issue of an already overbearing aspect being detrimental to both the application site and its neighbouring property.
Wider Street Scene
6.5.1 The Department has recently published the Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) which addresses the issue of an extension to the front of the property stating "An extension to the front of a property can have the greatest impact upon the individual dwelling and/or the street scene...Any extension should normally appear as if it were designed with the original building and not look out of place in the street."
==== PAGE 4 ====
19/00713/B Page 4 of 5
6.5.2 When driving down Port E Chee Avenue, to the area surrounding the application site there are no extensions to the front of the property. As stated above, an addition to the front of any property should fit within the streetscene, the use of modern aesthetics in this proposal would look severely out of place within the streetscene.
6.5.3 There have been a few properties which have added parking onto the front of their properties; these are mostly on the eastern side of the street with a couple being done prior to 61 Port E Chee and a couple afterwards. 6.5.4 When looking at the wider streetscene it can be seen that No.63 Port E Chee Avenue has installed a similar car parking arrangement, whilst no Planning Permission can be found for this, the car parking space fits in within the streetscene. No.63 Port E Chee Avenue car parking area was built directly next to the parking area of No.65 Port E Chee Avenue which is in line with the roadside, as such the impact of these parking spaces together on the streetscene is minimal.
6.5.5 It is important that the design of a driveway maintains a balance between hard and soft landscaping and contributes positively to the streetscene. The front boundary of the property is defined by the hedging which provides an important physical; boundary between property and the public realm.
6.5.6 The possibility of the raised decking area setting president within the estate is something that needs to be noted, whilst this would not be a major reasoning for refusal, the likelihood if the proposal was approved would create a substantial detrimental effect on the overall streetscene within the surrounding area of the application site. Each property from north to south are around 1.7m lower than the neighbouring property as such the overbearing aspects on each property is substantial. The use of the modern materials would also substantial alter the way the street scene is viewed.
6.5.7 The proposed parking space is for one off road parking space, which with a drop curb will remove one parking space from the street, The Department has recently published the Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) which addresses this stating "The creation of an off street space normally requires the provision of a new access, which can result in the loss of at least one on street parking space. Proposals which do not result in a net benefit are unlikely to be supported." 61 Port E Chee is a 4 bedroomed dwelling as such the likelihood of the property only having one car is minimal as such the creation of one parking space will only create a neutral benefit for the street, during my site visit it was noted that even though there were several cars along the eastern side of Port E Chee where 61 is situated there was still several areas of space to park a car on the road side, especially directly outside the application site.
CONCLUSION 7.1 The proposal therefore conflicts with the appropriate policies within the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and the Department's published Residential Design Guidance (March 2019).
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:
==== PAGE 5 ====
19/00713/B Page 5 of 5
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 the Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.
Decision Made : Refused Date : 01.10.2019
Determining officer
Signed : S BUTLER
Stephen Butler
Head of Development Management
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