35653

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                                 15/00137/B
                                 Page  1  of  4

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 15/00137/B Applicant : Fistard Property Investments Limited Proposal : Change of use of part of first floor office suite into a self contained apartment, external alterations including replacement of air handling plant serving kitchen Site Address : Ports Of Call Bay View Road Port St. Mary Isle Of Man IM9 5AE

Case Officer : Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken : 20.02.2015 Site Visit : 20.02.2015 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation

Officer’s Report

THE SITE 1.1 The site is the footprint of the Ports of Call development, a mix of shops, restaurants and residential accommodation. Some of the units have a frontage onto Bay View Road and others are contained within the building accessed through an internal hallway.

1.2 The building is partly single storey, partly one and centrally the building has three storeys with attic accommodation. The building is a mix of Victorian architecture in the central part complete with sliding sash windows and dentilled cornicing but the more modern first floor annexes have contrasting concrete pilasters in the top of the front walling and the ground floor has projecting bow windows, exaggerated dentilled cornicing and a contrived roughcast rendered finish. The sides of the building have a handrail around the length of the side of the building alongside The Co-op, the front part of which is visible from the front and almost its entirely is visible from the rear lane.

THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The proposal concerns the first floor and proposes the conversion of a number of office rooms to two self-contained residential units, one of which already has approval under a previous application but has yet to be implemented. The apartment would have two bedrooms, a bathroom, kitchen, lounge and utility room. The unit would look out over Bay View Road and to the rear through a gap towards Cronk Road and the rear of two residential properties, Malew and Mevania.

2.2 Access to the new apartment will be the main stairwell which also provides access to the offices and the other approved apartment.

2.3 Alterations to the building include the blocking off of windows at the rear, side windows to be replaced by uPVC framed units. The existing balustrade/handrail along the side of the building is to be replaced with a timber fence 1500mm high and with curved top.

2.4 Finally, proposed is the replacement of the existing ventilation system on the rear of the first floor. The existing system is in the same place and serves the food related premises on the ground floor. The proposed system is narrower. The changes to the building will remove a door which currently opens right next to the vent.

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                                 15/00137/B
                                 Page  2  of  4

PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South adopted in 2013 as Mixed Use and is also within the proposed Conservation Area, hence the inclusion in the application of the replacement of the existing side windows which would otherwise have been permissible without planning approved under the terms of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012.

3.2 The Area Plan for the South adopted in 2013 does not oppose the use of upper floors within Mixed Use areas, rather, it states that office use may be accepted in areas not used for residential purposes (paragraph 6.5.3).

3.3 The application should therefore be considered in respect of General Policy 2 and Housing Policy 17:

General Policy 2: "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 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."

Housing Policy 17: "The conversion of buildings into flats will generally be permitted in residential areas provided that: (a) adequate space can be provided for clothes-drying, refuse storage, general amenity, and, if practical, car-parking; (b) the flats created will have a pleasant clear outlook, particularly from the principal rooms and (c) if possible, this involves the creation of parking on site or as part of an overall traffic management strategy for the area."

3.4 Car parking standards as set out in Appendix Seven of the Strategic Plan require that offices provide one car parking space per 50 s qm of office floor space and residential properties have two parking spaces for each unit which has two or more bedrooms. The current arrangement of offices would require one space and the proposed use two spaces. There are no on-site parking spaces available to the property.

PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 Planning approval was granted for the conversion of the other side of the first floor to an apartment under PA 13/91079/B.

REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services and Port St. Mary Commissioners indicate that they do not oppose the application (03.03.15 and 06.03.15 respectively).

5.3 Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture Environmental Health Division recommend that the development must be registered within their legislation (16.02.15). This is not a material planning issue and should not be referred to in the planning decision notice.

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                                 15/00137/B
                                 Page  3  of  4

ASSESSMENT 6.1 The issues in this case are whether the proposal would result in unacceptable increases in on street car parking, whether the physical changes to the building have a negative impact on the streetscene, whether the apartment has adequate amenities in itself, whether there is any adverse impact on those in neighbouring residential property and finally whether the change in ventilation system will adversely affect the amenities of those in the building alongside.

6.2 Whilst the proposed use would increase the requirement for car parking, the times when this parking is required would be at different times to the existing situation and when there is generally more parking available - ie when many of the village commercial units are not operational - a point noted in the previous application which was not opposed by the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services.

6.3 The physical changes to the building are minimal as viewed from the front - the only perceivable change being the installation of timber fencing on the small return at first floor level but this is set back slightly so should not be a prominent feature in the streetscene. The fencing will be much more visible from the rear although what can currently be seen is not particularly attractive. As such, it is considered that the fencing, like the alterations to windows and doors, will have a neutral impact on the appearance of the building.

6.4 Whilst a new ventilation system is to be installed, and one which does not appear to discharge emissions higher than the building alongside, this is no different from the existing system and in fact the apparatus is slightly smaller. The system is very close to the first floor offices but does not seem to have caused a problem for the operation of the offices and as such it is not foreseen that it would cause an issue for the residents of the new apartment. This was not an issue when the apartment on the other side of the first floor was being considered. The building is owned by the same company and as such, if there is a detrimental impact, the owner is both on the receiving end and responsible for the remediation of the situation. The Public Health Act is a more effective method of controlling any nuisance from the operation of the flue than the planning process in this case.

PARTY STATUS 7.1 The local authority is, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, paragraph 6 (4) (e), considered "interested persons" and as such should be afforded party status.

7.2 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services is granted interested party status under the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 paragraph 6 (4) d.

7.3 Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture does not raise material planning issues and as such should not be afforded interested person status.

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 10.03.2015

Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                                 15/00137/B
                                 Page  4  of  4

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal O : Notes attached to refusals

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. Prior to the installation of any replacement air handling equipment as indicated in the plans, further details and plans must be approved by the Department illustrating the location, height, projection and materials of the equipment.

Reason: insufficient details have been included in the submitted plans.

--

This approval relates to the site and location plans and drawings 1185.30, 1185.31, 1185.32 and 1185.33 all received on 6th February, 2015.

I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control /Head of Development Management/ Senior Planning Officer.

Decision Made : Permitted Date : 17.03.2015 Determining officer (delete as appropriate)

Signed :... Chris Balmer

Senior Planning Officer

Signed :... Sarah Corlett

Senior Planning Officer

Signed :... Michael Gallagher

Director of Planning and Building Control

Signed :...J CHANCE... Jennifer Chance

Head of Development Management