Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
23/01136/B Page 1 of 8
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Application No. : 23/01136/B Applicant : Mr Luke Dillon-Mahon Proposal : Conversion and erection of extension to existing offices to provide residential accommodation and additional use for tourist accommodation / long term lets, and improvements to parking apron Site Address : 6 Kingswood Grove Douglas Isle Of Man IM1 3LX
Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken : 11.12.2023 Site Visit : 11.12.2023 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 05.03.2024 __
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. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or operated until the parking apron has been provided in accordance with the approved plan (Drawing No. 1678.2). The parking apron 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.
N 1. FOR YOUR INFORMATION Please be aware that a ban on the installation of fossil fuel heating systems in any new building(s) and or extension(s), will come into force on 1st January 2025.
You therefore are encouraged to ensure that your proposed development includes alternatives to fossil fuel heating systems if you believe that such works will not be completed by that date.
To this end, if you propose an alternative, such as air source or ground source heat pump(s), or any other heating system that would require planning approval, the details of this should be
==== PAGE 2 ====
23/01136/B Page 2 of 8
addressed now. This may require you to resubmit your planning application to accommodate the alternative permitted heating system proposed.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. On balance, the application is considered to meet the tests of section 18 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 and Environment Policy 35 within the IOM Strategic Plan 2016, as the character of the Conservation Area is being preserved. The proposals are also judged to comply with General Policy 2, Strategic Policy 4, Transport Policies 4 and 7, and Environment Policy 4, and the principles promoted by the Residential Design Guide, as the works would not affect adversely the character of the locality or surrounding townscape, or parking and highway safety, and no significant adverse impacts on neighbouring amenity would result from the proposal.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to Drawing Nos. 1678.1 and 1678.2 received 4 October 2023, and the Manx Bat Group's Bat Survey received 24 January 2024.
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The site is 6 Kingswood Grove, a mid-terrace property within the Windsor Road Conservation Area. The property forms part of a late 19th century terrace with three storeys below eaves level (with a fourth storey within the roof space), slate pitched roofs, painted smooth render wall finish, masonry chimney stacks on the party walls, sliding sash windows in a regular pattern, and painted timber doors with fanlights above.
1.2 The properties that form the terrace to which the application site belongs are set back from the highway with front gardens enclosed by dwarf walls and painted metal railings. These properties also have rear outriggers which project towards the rear lane, with space for the rear yards created between the narrow gaps afforded at the rear.
1.3 The rear yard of the application property opens up towards the rear lane and has poorly formed single storey rear outriggers enclosing a narrow rear yard. Part of the rear yard is currently used as a parking apron.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Planning approval is sought for conversion and erection of extension to existing offices to provide residential accommodation and additional use for tourist accommodation/long term lets, and improvements to parking apron.
2.2 The internal re-configuration of the property would create new five bedroom dwelling with living room, dining, kitchen, pantry, porch, and hallway on the ground floor; two bedrooms, a bathroom and WC on the first floor; two bedrooms (one serving as a home office/bedroom), a dressing area and bathroom on the second floor; while the third floor would house a bedroom with ensuite, and playroom.
2.3 The proposal would provide for parking space with electric charging point, and a shed to serve as cycle storage, with the bin storage area retained at the rear of the site. The hardstanding area forming the parking area would be resurfaced.
==== PAGE 3 ====
23/01136/B Page 3 of 8
2.4 Other works proposed include: a. Demolishing the single storey rear outlet to enable the works. b. Altering the existing lean-to roofed store at the rear to create a new flat roofed kitchen extension at the rear. This extension would be housed below insulated warm flat roof system with raised parapet wall detail enclosing the roof, and would have external walls finished in painted cement render.
2.5 The applicants have also indicated that they seek additional use of the dwelling for tourist accommodation/long term lets.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the East 2020 as predominantly residential and within the Windsor Road Conservation Area. The site is not prone to flood risks.
3.2 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1999 3.2.1 S18 Designation of conservation areas (4) Where any area is for the time being a conservation area, special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing its character or appearance in the exercise, with respect to any buildings or other land in the area, of any powers under this Act.
3.3 National policy: THE ISLE OF MAN STRATEGIC PLAN 2016 a. Environment Policy 35 - Seeks to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of Conservation Areas. b. Environment Policy 34 - expresses a preference for the use of traditional materials in the maintenance, extension or alteration of pre-1920 buildings. c. Environment Policy 42 - character and need to adhere to local distinctiveness. d. General Policy 2 - General Development Considerations. e. Strategic Policies 1, 2, 5 - relate to re-use of existing sites, location of new development within existing towns, and good design. f. Strategic Policies 3 - promote use of local materials and character. g. Strategic Policy 4 - Seeks to Protect or enhance the fabric and setting of Conservation Areas (etc.). h. Strategic Policy 8 - Supports tourist development proposals where they make use of existing built fabric of interest and quality. i. Business Policy 13 - Supports the use of private residential properties as tourist accommodation. j. Transport Policy 4 - Highway capacity and safety considerations. k. Transport Policy 7 - Parking considerations/standards for development. l. Environment Policy 4 - protection of ecology and designated sites/protected species. m. Environment Policy 5 - In exceptional circumstances where development is allowed which could adversely affect a site recognised under Environmental Policy 4, conditions will be imposed.
3.4 Planning Policy Statements: 1/01 POLICY AND GUIDANCE NOTES FOR THE CONSERVATION OF THE HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT OF THE ISLE OF MAN 3.4.1 POLICY CA/2 - Special Planning Considerations
3.5 THE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDE (July 2021) also contains guidance in Section 5 for Architectural Details, impacts on neighbours in 7.0 and the need to follow local distinctiveness in 3.1.
3.6 CENTRAL DOUGLAS MASTER PLAN, 2015 3.6.1 One of the key drives of the plan is to increase residential population in Central Douglas as it seeks to create a number of housing opportunities around the town centre.
==== PAGE 4 ====
23/01136/B Page 4 of 8
3.6.2 One of the key drivers identified on the Master Plan (page 9) is to "increase the residential population within Central Douglas.
3.7 WINDSOR ROAD CONSERVATION AREA CHARACTER APPRAISAL (2013). "REAR ELEVATIONS AND BACK LANES 5.8 It is typical that care and attention to details were taken to a high level on the major principal elevations but did not apply to the rear of buildings. Perhaps this was the domain of the servants and as such this does not apply in our modern world. Perhaps the sense of theatre was applied to the front elevation and was not seen as necessary to the rear of the property. Some of the rear lanes produce a confusing assortment of rear external alterations and editions, walls of varying heights and materials, electricity poles, overhead lines and bins."
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 There are numerous applications on the property related to alterations of the building and changes to its use. They include: o PA 85/00315/A for Approval in principle to convert premises into four permanent flats - Refused. o PA 85/00693/B for Internal and external alterations to upgrade premises - Approved. o PA 91/01539/B for Renovation and upgrading of residential accommodation and stores - Approved. o PA 11/01758/LAW for Application for a Certificate of Lawful Use for the use of property as an office - Approved. o PA 18/00909/C for Change of use from commercial unused offices to a residential property - Approved. o PA 20/01273/B for Installation of replacement windows - Approved.
4.2 The application form indicates that the property is being converted from office to residential use, which implies that the approval for change of use as a residential property has not been taken up. As no document has been provided to show that the approval granted under PA 18/00909/C was commenced, it is considered that the 2018 approval would have lapsed, given that it was approved on 3 October 2018, with four year commencement period expiring on 3 October 2022.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 DOI Highways note that the proposal raises no significant road safety or highway network efficiency issues. Accordingly, they raise no objection to the proposal subject to all access arrangements to accord to Drawing No. 1678.2 (30 October 2023/29 January 2024).
5.2 Douglas Borough Council have no objection to the application. They however, request that the development must not prohibit the refuse bins from being removed from the highway. (20 October 2023).
5.2.1 Further to their previous consultation comments, they ask that the applicant provides evidence that suitable space is available within the curtilage of the development that meets the satisfaction of the Council's waste service management team, as the Council had previously requested further details from the applicant in relation to their bin and recycling storage arrangements, although they maintain that there is no objection to the principal of this development (2 February 2024).
5.3 DEFA Ecosystem Policy Team state that the Manx Bat Group's Bat Survey for the site is in order and that suitable level of assessment has been undertaken. They request that the roof tiles for the outhouse be removed by hand before demolishing the building, in case bats are
==== PAGE 5 ====
23/01136/B Page 5 of 8
sheltering underneath as there is low potential for bats to reside underneath the roofs (25 January 2024).
5.4 No comments have been received from neighbouring properties.
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The main issues with the current application are: a. The principle of the proposed development; b. Whether the proposed development would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the property and Conservation Area in which the property sits; c. Whether there would be any impacts on neighbouring amenity; d. Impacts on Parking and Highway safety; and e. Impacts on biodiversity
6.2 THE PRINCIPLE 6.2.1 Principle of Conversion from Office to Residential/Long Term Lets (GP2, HP 4, and STP 2) 6.2.1.1 In assessing the principle of the proposed residential use of the office, it is considered that the application site is located within an area zoned as predominantly residential use on the Area Plan. The planning history of the area also provides clear evidence that the change of use of office and commercial buildings to residential use have been broadly supported in the area.
6.2.1.2 It is also vital to note that the Central Douglas Master plan, 2014 and the Area Plan for the East both support the drive to create a number of housing opportunities around the town centre to be achieved through "a mix of uses throughout the town". This indicates a need to attract more uses and to encourage residential use back into the town centre, through the utilisation of redundant floors which would serve to add to the vibrancy and out of hours use. This proposal would align with these goals as the proposed use would serve to attract more residential uses to the town centre, while utilising underused offices which could add to the vibrancy of the town centre, and facilitate the maintenance of existing buildings which the Area Plan seeks.
6.2.1.3 Likewise, a number of the nearby properties and those in the immediate vicinity are used for short and long terms lets, which the proposed additional use of the property for long term lets would be aligned with. As such, the principle of the proposed additional use as long term let would also be in accordance with General Policy 2.
6.2.1.4 Accordingly, in terms of the principle of the building being used for residential use/long term lets/tourism purposes, there are no objections.
6.2.2 Principle of the Tourist Use (BP 13, STP 8) 6.2.2.1 With regard to the principle of the proposed tourist use, it is considered that the dominant use of the immediate locality is for residential use, which would be compatible with the proposed tourist use. It is also important to note that there is clear support for the use of residential properties for tourist use. In fact, Business Policy 13 set out a general presumption in support of additional use of private residential properties for tourist accommodation provided it does not compromise the amenity of neighbours.
6.2.2.2 Further to the Strategic Plan policies, the existing Tourism strategies and documents for the Island are clear in their support for the use of existing residential accommodation for tourist uses, as they seek to maximise the potential benefits of an expansion on non-serviced accommodation on the Island. This is particularly important for the types of non-serviced accommodation identified as being in short supply, including those that cater for families which the property will adequately cater for, and represent. Therefore, it is considered that the scheme as proposed aligns with the tourism strategies for the Island. Moreover, the site is
==== PAGE 6 ====
23/01136/B Page 6 of 8
within a sustainable area, situated close to shops, services and public transport links, as well as tourist sites along the promenade with easy links to other parts of the island.
6.2.3 Based on the foregoing, it is considered that the principle of the proposed development (use as residential accommodation/long term lets/use as tourist accommodation), would be acceptable in regards to principle. However, this is not an automatic reason to allow development as further material planning matters as indicated above need to be considered.
6.3 CHARACTER AND APPEARANCE (GP2, SP4, EP35, PPS 1/01) 6.3.1 In assessing the impact of the proposed works to the rear of the existing building, it is first considered that the proposal would not conflict with Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act which requires that special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a Conservation Area in the exercise, with respect to any buildings or other land in a Conservation area.
6.3.2 Likewise, it is not considered that the proposed change of use of the building from an office use to residential/tourist use would be in conflict with the requirements of section 18 of the Act. This is hinged on the fact that although the change of use would alter the intensity of use of the building, this would be in the interest of the existing building and area, given the considerably higher number of employees and potential clients the building in its current use would receive per day relative to the residential/tourist use of the building. His change is considered to be in the interest of the site and area as the regular/periodic arrivals and departures of employees/clients, is considered to be more detrimental than the proposed residential use which would be more in keeping with the essentially residential character of the immediate area which is a very highly valued element of this part of the Windsor Road Conservation Area, which the Character Appraisal considers to be a key feature of the area, together with the tourist use which is also considered as vital element of the area. In this case, therefore, the change of use proposed would, serve to preserve the character of the Conservation Area seen as a whole. The above is further reinforced by the fact that the property was previously residential, with previous use also in keeping with the character of the area.
6.3.3 Turning to the impact of the proposed works to remove the single storey rear outriggers and erection of the rear extension, it must be remembered that a proposal should, under established Conservation Area policy, preserve or enhance the special character of that Area in order to be recommended for approval. In this regard, whilst there is a Character Appraisal accompanying the Windsor Road Conservation Area where assessment is made of the features that serve to define its special character and appearance, it is noted that the rear of the properties do not contribute to its special character, with Paragraph 5.8 of the Character appraisal noting that the care and attention to details were taken to a high level on the major principal elevations did not apply to the rear of buildings. Paragraph 5.8 goes further to reinforce the above position by noting that "Some of the rear lanes produce a confusing assortment of rear external alterations and editions, walls of varying heights and materials, electricity poles, overhead lines and bins."
6.3.4 The current scheme proposes a flat roofed rear extension, which may not be considered appropriate in situations where the rear lanes is particularly noticeable or serve to contribute to the character of the area. However, the rear of the application property consists mainly of a mix of poorly formed rear outriggers and boundary walls, which the proposed rear extension would be an improvement over, given that it would tidy up the rear of the property and be finished to match the finishing of the main dwelling. It is also noted that in the case of the application property, there are no public views towards the rear elevation and those changes proposed would be limited to the occupiers of adjacent properties and viewable only from their rear elevations.
==== PAGE 7 ====
23/01136/B Page 7 of 8
6.3.5 Granting the Residential Design Guide is clear that flat roofed extensions will rarely be considered an acceptable form of extension especially if publically viewable, unless the existing property has a flat/low pitched roof design. In this case, it is considered that the dwelling has almost flat roofed outriggers which are in poor form with the proposed flat roofed extension offering an improved appearance over the existing. Moreover, the proposed flat roofed rear extension would integrate parapets, finished in matching material, and be well-suited to this partly enclosed rear yard, whilst positioned where there would be no views from the major thoroughfares in the immediate vicinity.
6.3.6 Overall, it is considered that the changes at the rear, including the erection of the new flat roofed extension would not be so significantly adverse as to detract from the overall appearance of the rear elevation, with the flat roof remaining subservient to the main pitched roof. More so, the containment of this change to the rear, and within the partly enclosed rear yard would ensure that the overall character and appearance of the Conservation Area is preserved in line with EP35.
6.4 IMPACT ON NEIGHBOURING AMENITY (GP 2) 6.4.1 With regard to impact on neighbouring properties, it is noted that the extension would be confined within the partly enclosed rear outrigger, with the two storey rear outrigger of No. 4 Kingswood Grove to the north, and the boundary wall with No. 8 Kingswood Grove to the south, which would sit taller than the proposed single storey rear extension, serving to ensure that there are no adverse impacts on neighbouring amenity, in terms of overshadowing or overbearing impacts. It is also considered that the window proposed to the rear of the extension which is a new feature at the rear would be at ground floor level and would not offer views into any neighbouring windows. As such, it is considered that the proposed extension would not impact on the neighbouring amenity for the abutting dwellings.
6.5 POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON HIGHWAY SAFETY/PARKING PROVISION (GP2, TP4 & TP7) 6.5.1 The proposed alterations to the rear would see improvements to the existing parking apron, with improvements to visibility from the single off road parking space available to the property which would be in the interest of highway safety and parking. The regrading of the parking surface would also prevent the direct discharge of surface water to the rear lane which is currently in a poor state.
6.5.2 The scheme would also feed into the existing highway network which serves the area and is capable of accommodation the associated traffic generation, making it comply with Transport Policy 4.
6.5.3 Additionally, Highway Services have assessed the proposal and note that the proposal raises no significant road safety or highway network efficiency issues, subject to all access arrangements according to Drawing No. 1678.2. As such, it is considered that the scheme as proposed would be in accordance with GP2 (h & i), and Transport Policies 4 and 7.
6.6 IMPACTS ON BIODIVERSITY (GP2, EP4 & EP5) 6.6.1 In terms of impacts on ecology or biodiversity within the site, it is important to establish that if any real harm would result with respect to ecological and environmental concerns, it would only relate to the removal of rear outriggers which hold the potential to house bats. In this case, the scheme is supported by a Bat Survey which notes that there is low potential for bats to reside underneath the roofs. This report has been commented on and accepted by DEFA Ecosystems Officer and in this respect it is felt that the application has satisfied the principles of Environment Policy 4.
6.7 OTHER MATTER 6.7.1 Bin Storage 6.7.1 Whilst the comments from Douglas Borough Council regarding bin storage is noted, there is ample space provision within the rear yard to provide for bin storage and storage of
==== PAGE 8 ====
23/01136/B Page 8 of 8
recycling for the property. Likewise, there is sufficient circulation space within the rear yard to cater for a single parked car and circulation, which would allow easy movement of the bin when required. As such, it is not considered that the scheme as proposed would prohibit the refuse bins from being removed from the highway.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 It is judged that the proposals meet the tests of Section 18 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999, and General Policy 2, Strategic policy 4 and Environment Policies 34 and 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 as they will protect and preserve the character of the Conservation Area, and that the character of the surrounding townscape is not being adversely affected. The application is therefore recommended to be approved.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.
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 above 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 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
Decision Made : Permitted Date : 05.03.2024
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