Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
24/91056/B Page 1 of 9
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 24/91056/B Applicant : Mr Conor Bradley Proposal : Conversion of part of existing ground floor to create a self- contained apartment Site Address : Eaton Court 5 - 6 Palace Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 4LD
Planning Officer: Paul Visigah Photo Taken : 09.10.2024 Site Visit : 09.10.2024 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 31.01.2025 __
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 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 2. Prior to the occupation of the apartment hereby approved, a plan which provides details of the allocation of the existing parking spaces within the garage for all the apartments shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The parking areas designated as being reserved for the apartments within the garage shall be marked out on the parking areas, and shall not be used for any other purpose other than the parking and turning of vehicles associated with the development. These parking areas shall remain free of obstruction for such use at all times unless otherwise approved in writing by the Department.
Reason: To ensure that provision is made for off-street parking for the existing apartments and the new self-contained apartment in the interest of highway safety.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. Overall, it is considered that although the shortfall in parking provision weighs against the proposal (as it would fail to fully comply with the requirements of Transport Policy 7), it is concluded that the proposals would be acceptable from a design standpoint, and would ensure that the character of the site and immediate locality is not adversely impacted. Whilst there is shortfall of onsite parking provision, the site is within close proximity to the town centre, close to services and shops, and close to public transport links, such that the lack of off street parking provision in this case is acceptable. The development, therefore, accords with Strategic Policy 5, Strategic Policy 1 and 11, General Policy 2, and Housing Policies 1 and 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016), as well as the Area Plan for the East.
==== PAGE 2 ====
24/91056/B Page 2 of 9
Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the documents and plans received 16 September 2024, and Parking Survey documents received 27 November 2024. __
Right to Appeal
It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal: o DOI Highways Division - no objections o Douglas Borough Council - no objections
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given the Right to Appeal as they have submitted an objection that meets the specified criteria: o Flat 3 Fullwood Court, Palace Road, Douglas
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should NOT be given the Right to Appeal because: o Flat 1 Falcon Cliff Apartments, 9 - 10 Palace Road, Douglas Objection identifies land that is owned or occupied by the objector that would be impacted on, but such land is not within 20 metres of the site (and no Environmental Impact Assessment is required) (A10 (2) (b)) __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site is the curtilage of Eaton Court, which is a residential development of 12 2-bedroom apartments contained within a 4 storey building situated on the western side of Palace Road, Douglas. The first, second & third floors each house four apartments, while the ground floor of the building provides 18 car parking spaces (which is a provision of 1.5 parking spaces per apartment), bin storage and lift & stairs.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Planning approval is sought for Conversion of part of existing ground floor to create a self-contained apartment. The works which will involve changes to car parking spaces 13 to 16 will allow for the creation of a new one bedroom apartment on the ground floor. The apartment would feature a bedroom with ensuite bathroom, and an open plan kitchen/breakfast/lounge area with the total floor area of the apartment measuring 52sqm.
2.2 Externally, the main changes would include the removal of two windows on the projected bay window areas on this part of the building elevation, lowering of the window cill and the installation of two new white UPVC doors within the openings. The door installed on the bedroom elevation would serve as a fire exit door. There would also be physical works to partition part of the garage to create the floor area for the new apartment with new party walls.
2.3 The new dwelling would be connected to the existing foul water drains for the site.
2.4 As the scheme would result in a loss of four parking space provisions for the site, the applicants have provided additional information (parking survey accompanied with photos) which indicates the following: 1. The property has on the ground floor level a garage for vehicles to park. 2. The garage on site was observed at around 7am, 10am, 1pm, 4pm and 7pm on Friday 15th November 2024 to Thursday 21st November 2024. 3. During the observations, only 6 vehicles were ever encountered in the garage that holds 18
==== PAGE 3 ====
24/91056/B Page 3 of 9
Vehicles. It was also observed that that there was storage of equipment throughout this time in a couple of the parking spaces. 4. On Wednesday 20th 2024, the island experienced snowstorms with a yellow weather warning in place and police advising not to travel unless required. This showed an increase in vehicular activity parked in the street, however, did not increase the number of vehicles within the garage and street parking was still significantly high as shown in IMG_6137 which is an Image of the street about 10-20 yards from Eaton Court. 5. On every day, it was observed that there were multiple spaces available for on-street vehicular parking and it was estimated that around 20 more vehicles would be able to park within the street on most days.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 Site Specific: 3.1.1 The application site is located within an area of Mixed Use under the Area Plan for the East (Map 4 Douglas), but the site is within a Conservation Area. The site is not prone to flood risks.
3.2 Area: The Area Plan Written statement contains the following that are relevant to the site: 1. Section 9.11 Development in areas of 'mixed use' "9.11.1 There are a number of areas of 'mixed use' outside of Douglas town centre. Some are identified by a site number on the Maps and others are not, for instance Village Walk in Onchan does not have a site number.
9.11.2 Development types within areas of mixed use generally comprise a variety of different but compatible uses. Appropriate new uses may include a mix of shops and some services (financial and professional), food and drink, office and light industry, research and development, tourist and residential uses, and other uses such as clinics or health centres, childcare or education, community facilities, and places of assembly and leisure. Uses which are not compatible with residential development will generally not be supported within the areas of mixed use."
3.3 National: STRATEGIC PLAN 3.3.1 The following policies from the 2016 Strategic Plan are considered pertinent in the assessment of this application; 1. Strategic Policy 1 - Efficient use of land and resources 2. Strategic Policy 2 - Development focussed in existing towns and villages 3. Strategic Policy 3 - Development to safeguard character of existing towns and villages and to avoid coalescence 4. Strategic Policy 5 - Design and visual impact 5. Strategic Policy 10 - Sustainable transport 6. Strategic Policy 11 - Housing needs 7. General Policy 2 - General Development Considerations 8. Environment Policy 42 - Designed to respect the character and identity of the locality 9. Housing Policy 1 - Housing needs 10. Housing Policy 2 - Adequate supply of housing through Area Plans 11. Housing Policy 3 - Provision of 2,440 homes in East area during 2011-2026 plan period 12. Housing Policy 4 - New Housing to defined existing towns 13. Transport Policy 1 - Proximity to existing public transportation services 14. Transport Policy 7 - Parking Provisions 15. Community Policy 7 - Designing out criminal and anti-social behaviour 16. Community Policy 10 - Proper access for firefighting appliances 17. Community Policy 11 - Prevention for the outbreak and spread of fire
4.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 Residential Design Guide (2021)
==== PAGE 4 ====
24/91056/B Page 4 of 9
4.1.1 This document provides advice in Section 7 deals with impact of developments on neighbours. Paragraph 7.2.2 defines the various tiers of rooms and windows on a dwelling, and this includes the following: o Primary Habitable Rooms: Living Rooms, Dining Rooms, Kitchens which includes dining facilities and Conservatory; o Secondary Habitable Rooms: Bedrooms and kitchens; and o Non-Habitable Rooms: these include bathrooms, utility rooms, hallways/corridors, stairs/landings, garages, porches, and storage.
5.0 PLANNING HISTORY 5.1 The following previous applications relating to this site are judged to be relevant to this application: 1. The existing apartments were approved under PA 00/01663/B by the Planning Committee on 26 January 2001. The scheme was approved to allow for 1.5 parking provisions for each apartment.
PA 08/00971/B for Creation of balconies to Apartments 5 - 12 (Approved). This scheme was, however, not implemented.
6.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.
6.1 DOI Highways Division have stated that they find the proposal to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and/or parking as the proposals are converting the existing part building, is in a sustainable location in Douglas centre and the site has parking for residents (27 September 2024).
6.1.1 Following review of the submitted parking information. DOI Highways have made the following comments in their consultation dated 3 December 2024: 1. Highway Services HDC have reviewed the updated information for application 24/91056/B dated 2 Dec 2024 online and the Applicant appears to address any concerns on the loss of parking within the development to facilitate the self-contained apartment. 2. The site is in a sustainable location in Douglas centre with all amenities within walking or cycling distance, the development's car park was never observed to be more than 50% full when surveyed, there was on-street parking available adjacent to the development when surveyed, and there is further on-street parking available up the hill on Empress Drive/Palace Road if needed. 3. Accordingly, HDC continue to not oppose (DNO) the application.
6.2 Douglas Borough Council has made the following comments on the application (4 October 2024): 1. They ask that the applicant to contact the Council's waste services management team to discuss the existing bin/recycling arrangements and any additional requirements to accommodate the proposed new apartment. 2. They state that should this application be approved, it may be beneficial to consider providing communal recycling for all residents as part of the proposed development. 3. They state that as the applicant intends to reduce the number of car parking spaces to accommodate the proposed new apartment, there may be a requirement to mitigate this reduction by way of providing some secure cycle storage.
6.2.1 In response to the comments made by Douglas Borough Council, the applicants have provided documentation submitted 20 January 2025, which refers to correspondence form DBC in October 2024 where Douglas Borough Council indicated that they were content that there is enough space for another bin at the site, and that the DBC Waste Services would have no objection to the additional bin requirement at the site for the new apartment.
==== PAGE 5 ====
24/91056/B Page 5 of 9
6.3.2 Further to reviewing the correspondence from the applicant, Douglas Borough Council has provided further consultation comments dated 20 January 2025: "All bins will need to be removed from the internal bin storage area by either the tenants/owners of the apartments or by a management company. The Council's waste team will not be entering the building to pull bins up the slope for collection. The bins must be placed at the curtilage of the property for collection before 6am on the day of collection and then returned on the same day for storage inside the curtilage of the building. If bins are left on any pavement after collection day the Council could reserve the right to take enforcement action either against the individual owner of an apartment or against the management company. We accept that the 2017 Housing Regulations cannot be retrospectively applied to the existing apartments but would advise that they will apply to any new apartment within the property. Should the application be approved there will be a requirement to register the new apartment and although flat registration does not form part of the planning process, it would be in the applicant's best interest to ensure that the apartment complies with these regulations. As it appears that the building will be an owner occupier property, the applicant may wish to consider incorporating a storage area for recycling bins."
6.3 The owner/occupier of Flat 3 Fullwood Court, Palace Road, Douglas, have made the following comments on the application (17 October 2024): 1. Removing 4 parking spaces from Eaton Court would mean that an additional 5 spaces would need to be found on the street. Reducing to 14 spaces would mean each flat would have 1 space, with only one spare or guest space remaining for the whole block. 2. The proposed development would reduce the available on-street parking which is sometimes very pressured, given there are hotels at the bottom of the one way system and on Empire Terrace, the boxing club, and a large office at the top of Palace Road (Stonehage Fleming). 3. Eaton Court original planning application was approved in 2001, with 12 apartments and 1.5 spaces per apartment. This adaptation reduces on-site parking by 22%. 4. Appendix 7 of the Strategic Plan Parking Standards, states that for apartments, 1 space must be provided for a 1 bedroom flat, and 2 for a 2 bedroom flat. Developing here takes away existing off-street parking to create 1 additional flat. 5. Presumably the rest of the 12 flats have 2 bedrooms each and would not meet current 2016 guidance in the strategic plan, for 2 spaces per 2 bedroom flat. Removing 4 spaces takes Eaton Ct further away from meeting current guidance and the proposed development would not meet current parking standards when taken as a whole with the 12 existing apartments. 6. While from the photos it looks like not all 18 spaces are currently used by cars, as there is a considerable amount of junk stored in the ground floor of Eaton Ct - lack of use by cars is not a justification to remove current parking from an area where the on-street parking is in high demand from office workers, residents and visitors. 7. Any reduction in parking in this area has an impact on traffic as well as parking as once in the -way system looking for a parking space, a driver needs to go onto Victoria Rd in order to go round again. Emergency services vehicles often find it difficult to get into this one-way street due to parking pressures.
6.4 The owners/occupiers of Flat 1 Falcon Cliff Apartments, 9 - 10 Palace Road, Douglas, have made the following comments on the application (18 October 2024): 1. To remove parking from Eton Court will put further strain on Palace Road parking situation. We have cars parked from Mona Drive, Empire Terrace, Castle Mona and the Ascot Hotel. 2. We have found that the fire service when required has great difficulty with attendance due to how closely cars are parked on Empire Terrace junction.
7.0 ASSESSMENT 7.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment and determination of this application are:
==== PAGE 6 ====
24/91056/B Page 6 of 9
1. The principle of converting part of the garage to an apartment; 2. Impact of the character or appearance of the site and area; 3. Impact upon highway safety/parking provision; and 4. Adequacy of private amenity for future occupants.
7.2 The Principle (GP2, HP 17, STP 1 & 11) 7.2.1 In assessing the principle of the proposed development, it is considered that the site lies within an area designated as Mixed Use, and within the defined settlement where the proposed development would be judged to be in conformity with the adjoining uses. Likewise, the site is within an area with relatively high density on the island. Therefore, the increase in density over the existing situation would not unduly change the density of the area.
7.2.2 It is also considered that the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 seeks to locate new housing and employment close to existing public transport facilities and routes, or where public transport facilities are, or can be improved, thereby reducing the need to use private cars and encouraging alternative means of transport, and it is considered that the site would meet this goal given that it sits close to an existing route within Douglas. While this does not signify a presumption in favour for all forms of housing development, it points to the fact the proposal would generally accord with the Strategic Plan goals for new housing on the Island. Therefore, in terms of the acceptability of the proposed conversion, it is concluded that the proposal basically accords with the goals of Strategic Policy 1 and Housing Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
7.2.3 Based on the foregoing, it is considered that as the application aligns with the zoning of the area within the Area Plan for the East, and the proposed conversion of part of the garage would be acceptable in principle. It is, however, worth noting that the factors highlighted above do not in any way denote automatic approval for conversion of the garage, given that the development of the site would have to be appropriate for the existing site character, character of locality and not result in adverse impacts on other attributes of the site, such as highway issues and impacts on neighbouring amenity. Therefore, it still remains necessary to assess the proposed development against other relevant planning policies and the physical constraints of the application site.
7.3 Character and Appearance (GP2, STP 3, & EP 42) 7.3.1 In terms of the visual impacts of the proposed development on the site character and character of the immediate vicinity, it is noted that the only changes to the external appearance of the property is the introduction of new doors as replacement for the existing windows to the central bay areas. Granting the proposed changes will be visible from public vantage points when viewed from the street scene, the design and proportion of the alterations would be broadly in keeping with the existing property, and as such it is not considered that the proposal would result in harm the characteristics of the existing building or the character of its surroundings.
7.3.2 Overall, when the physical alterations to the property is assessed within the extant site context and appearance of the area, it is considered that there would be no adverse impacts from the scheme, given the design which aligns with existing features of the building and the scale of the proposed change which is considered minimal. In this respect, the proposal complies with GP2, EP42, and STP 3 (b) of the IOM Strategic Plan.
7.4 Potential Impact upon Parking/Highway Safety (TP 7 & STP 10) 7.4.1 In terms of possible impacts on parking and highway safety, it is considered that the scheme would result in reduction of the existing parking provision on site by about 22 percent, which is sizable given that the site already operates on a 1.5 parking spaces per dwelling which is below the Strategic Plan parking requirements, and this weighs against the proposal.
==== PAGE 7 ====
24/91056/B Page 7 of 9
7.4.2 Despite the shortfall of about 11 parking spaces when the proposed parking provisions are compared with the requirements of Transport Policy 7 (as detailed in Appendix 7) of the Strategic Plan, the current scheme would only result in the loss of 4 parking spaces. It is also considered that the site has operated successfully with a reduced parking requirement as evident in the parking survey submitted with the application which shows that most of the spaces are unoccupied for lengthy periods. The site visit also yielded evidence that there is minimal demand for all the parking spaces as evident in the placement of unused vehicles and personal effects within some of the parking spaces, with visual evidence to show that these have been insitu for long periods.
7.4.3 Moreover, the site is situated close to a major public transport corridor within Douglas, where future occupants can rely sufficiently on public transport. This is exemplified in the fact that it would take only about five minutes to get to the nearest bus stop along the Promenade, or 10 minutes to get to the nearest taxi rank.
7.4.4 Further to the above, the advice offered by DOI Highways who are the professionals tasked with providing professional advice on parking and highway safety concerns confirm that the scheme is acceptable, on the basis that site is in a sustainable location in Douglas centre with all amenities within walking or cycling distance, the development's car park was never observed to be more than 50% full when surveyed, there was on-street parking available adjacent to the development when surveyed, and there is further on-street parking available up the hill on Empress Drive/Palace Road if needed.
7.4.5 The comment made by the neighbours who question the reduction in parking provisions below the stipulated Strategic Plan parking standards when the potential still exists for increased pressure on on-street parking in the area is noted. However, visits to the area has shown that whilst there is parking pressure along the southern sections of the Palace Road, due to the presence of multiple entry and exit points for vehicles along the adjoining streets, there is limited pressure further north and around the application property due to the one way system for this part of the road. Hence, it is not considered that the loss of parking in this case would be so adverse as to result in refusal of the scheme for the reasons that have been highlighted above.
7.5 Potential Private Amenity for Future Occupants (HP 17 and GP2) 7.5.1 As outlined within Housing Policy 17 each apartment needs to have a "pleasant clear outlook, particularly from the principal rooms". In this case, the windows serving the bedroom and the principal room for the created flat (kitchen/breakfast/lounge area) would have pleasant clear outlook, as these windows would have views over Palace Road. Accordingly, it is considered that the outlook would be acceptable in this case.
7.5.2 It is also worth noting that the new apartment, as with the existing apartments would have a dedicated bin storage area with sufficient space for bin storage/recycling, which will be of huge benefit to the occupants of the new apartment. It is also noted that the scheme has been assessed by Douglas Borough Council who considered that there is enough space for another bin in their correspondence with the applicants dated 16 October 2024 and as such the provision for the new apartment is considered sufficient.
7.5.3 While no outside drying space has been provided, this generally hasn't been considered as unacceptable in a number of similar applications throughout the Island, as it is generally accepted that tumble dryers are an acceptable alternative.
7.5.4 Furthermore, there is ease of level access to good public open space that would provide an added degree of amenity provision in the area, namely Douglas promenade and the beach and other leisure areas off the promenade. These would together ensure that the proposal would comply with Housing Policy 17 and General Policy 2 (h & j) of the Strategic Plan.
==== PAGE 8 ====
24/91056/B Page 8 of 9
7.6 Other Matters 7.6.1 Recycle provision The comments made by Douglas Borough Council regarding the consideration for incorporating a storage area for recycling bins in their most recent consultation comment is noted. However, the site has an area of bin storage/recycling at the ground floor level which currently serves the existing apartments and has been operational since the property was occupied. Moreover, the scheme was considered to be acceptable by the refuse and recycling team of Douglas Borough Council who noted that there was no objection to the scheme. Thus, it is considered that this element of the scheme has been addressed by the submissions.
7.6.2 Cycle provision The comment made by Douglas Borough Council suggesting that the applicant consider incorporating a storage area for recycling bins is noted. However, DOI Highways have stated that no further action is required to mitigate for the loss of parking for the reasons articulated in the comments dated 3 December 2024. As such, it is not considered that there is sufficient basis for this requirement in the current case, although this provision would be a welcomed addition should the applicants consider such improvements to the site.
8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 For the reasons outlined above it is considered that the planning application is in accordance with aforementioned policies of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and the Area Plan for the East, and it is therefore recommended that the planning application be permitted.
9.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE 9.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted).
9.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to: o applicant (in all cases); o a Local Authority; Government Department; Manx Utilities; and Manx National Heritage that submit a relevant objection; and o any other person who has made an objection that meets specified criteria.
9.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10.
9.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required): o any appellant or potential appellant (which includes the applicant); o the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, the Department of Infrastructure and the local authority for the area; o any other person who has submitted written representations (this can include other Government Departments and Local Authorities); and o in the case of a petition, a single representative.
__
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 and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status, and/or rights to appeal.
Decision Made : Permitted Date : 04.02.2025
Determining Officer
==== PAGE 9 ====
24/91056/B Page 9 of 9
Signed : S BUTLER
Stephen Butler
Head of Development Management
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/customers and archive record.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal