Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
15/00351/B
Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 15/00351/B Applicant : James David Woolford Proposal : Conversion of existing dwelling into four self-contained apartments Site Address : 18 Castlemona Avenue Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 4EH
Case Officer : Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken : 23.04.2015 Site Visit : 23.04.2015 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Officer’s Report
THIS IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO THE PLANNING HISTORY OF THE AREA
THE SITE 1.1 The site is the curtilage of 18, Castlemona Avenue, a terraced three storey building with dormer served attic accommodation and a basement, situated on the seaward side of Castlemona Avenue towards its southern end. The property backs onto a building which fronts onto Esplanade Lane and there is a lane leading out from the rear of the property to Esplanade Lane. The building is currently laid out as a single dwelling or guest house with a kitchen and sitting room on the basement level, lounge on the ground floor, two bedrooms with bathroom on the second and first floor and something described as a bed sitter in the attic although this has no toilet or bath facilities on this floor.
1.2 The front garden area has decking upon it with two polycarbonate light wells serving the basement level.
1.3 The building is suggested by the applicant to have been used previously as five flats under the provisions of an earlier application and retains four key type electricity meters. The application indicates that the building's current use is for a single dwelling or guest house and Douglas Borough Council indicate that there has not been any approval granted under the Building Regulations or Housing (Flats) Regulations for a subdivision. As such, the application is being considered on the basis of the building's current authorised use as a single dwelling or guest house as is indicated in the submitted plans.
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Initially the proposal was for the conversion of the building to five apartments. This was amended before a decision was taken to propose four units of accommodation, effectively combining the basement and ground floors to form one flat. The flats having between around 30 sq m and 58 sq m net floor area measured approximately from the plans. The Flats Regulations do not allow units of less than 30 sq m to be occupied permanently and the flats on floors 1, 2 and 3 could be occupied only by a single person due to their size. The unit split between the basement and the ground floor is large enough for up to 3 persons to occupy this unit.
2.2 No parking provision is available on site.
==== PAGE 2 ====
15/00351/B
Page 2 of 5
2.3 The ground floor and basement will be combined into a larger apartment with lounge and study on the ground floor, accessed from the hallway leading from the front door which also serves the main stairwell which provides access to and from the three other flats to the front. No access is available to the upper floor units to or from the rear and bin storage will be provided in the front garden area. An additional screen wall is shown as being provided inside the existing wall but this is not shown in the proposed elevations. An average wheeled bin is around 1m in height: the existing wall is around 600mm tall and there is a fence behind it. The applicant has explained that the existing decking will be removed from the front yard, lowering the level of the front yard area and that there will be 130mm between the top of a wheeled bin and the top of the fence which will, in their view, adequately screen the bins.
2.4 The lower ground floor bedroom and bathroom have no outlook as they are served by the light wells which feed up into the patio area in the front yard, and the kitchen on this floor looks out onto the lower rear yard area where this apartment's bins will be stored.
2.5 The ground floor units look out at the front onto the decked front area where three bins will be stored and the rear study looks out over the rear yard a floor below.
PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 This property was the subject of a previous application - 87/04331/B for the conversion of the building to five flats but does not appear to have been the subject of a similar application under the Building Regulations. There have been a number of other applications for relevant similar developments in the vicinity including the following:
3.2 PA 13/90956/B - conversion of 108, Castlemona Avenue to four apartments. This was refused at appeal as the Inspector was not satisfied that the proposal would not result in a demand for car parking which could not be acceptably provided for within the vicinity of the site.
3.3 PA 13/00025/B proposed the conversion of a guest house to two apartments at number 19, a three storey building in Castlemona Avenue. This was approved.
3.4 PA 12/00962/B proposed the conversion of 3/4 storey building at 26, Castlemona Avenue to 3 apartments and was refused at appeal for reasons that the standard of outlook and light in the lower front room would fall short of what ought to be required and the proposed parking spaces were too narrow and would take away any space for bin storage, outside amenity or clothes drying.
3.5 PA 10/00091/B proposed the creation of an apartment in the lower ground floor of 114, Castlemona Avenue and was refused at appeal for reasons of amenity for the occupants of the proposed unit.
3.6 PA 06/01917/A proposed the principle of the creation of a basement apartment at 16, Castlemona Avenue and was refused for the level of amenity available to the occupants of the flat.
PLANNING POLICY AND STATUS 4.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Douglas Local Plan as Predominantly Residential. The site lies outside of the Douglas Promenades Conservation Area or any other Conservation Area. As such the appropriate Strategic Plan policy to be applied is as follows:
4.2 "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;
==== PAGE 3 ====
15/00351/B
Page 3 of 5
(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."
4.3 Parking is also dealt with at Appendix Seven of the Strategic Plan as follows: the Plan requires there to be one parking space provided per single bedroom apartment and two parking spaces for apartments each with two or more bedrooms.
Appendix 7: "New built residential development should be provided with two parking spaces per dwelling, at least one of which should be within the curtilage of the dwelling and behind the front of the dwelling, although the amount and location of parking will vary in respect of development such as terracing, apartments, and sheltered housing. In the case of town centre and previously developed sites, the Department will consider reducing this requirement having regard to: a) the location of the housing relative to public transport, employment and public amenities, b) the size of the dwelling, c) any restriction on the nature of the occupancy (such as sheltered housing) and d) the impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area (paragraph A.7.1). This goes on to recommend that one space is provided for a one bedroomed apartment, 2 spaces for two or more bedrooms but that "These standards may be relaxed where development: a) would secure the re-use of a Registered Building or a building of architectural or historic interest; or b) would result in the preservation of a sensitive streetscape, or c) is otherwise of benefit to the character of a Conservation Area d) is within a reasonable distance of an existing or proposed bus route and it can be demonstrated a reduced level of parking will not result in unacceptable on street parking in the locality" (A.7.6).
REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services opposes the application for the following reason:
In accordance with the IOM Strategic Plan 5 off road parking spaces should be provided with this application. Applicant is providing no off road parking.
Castlemona Avenue is a congested avenue with very limited on road parking. This proposal will intensify the current situation (10.04.15). These comments were made in respect of the proposal for five apartments.
5.2 Douglas Borough Council consider that the proposal for five apartments is contrary to Housing Policy 17 and Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan in terms of inadequate parking which would harm the amenity of the surrounding area by reason of adding to the existing kerbside congestion (26.05.15). The amended plans address some of the issues regarding amenity but there are still objections on the basis of inadequate car parking (18.06.15)
5.3 Manx Utilities Authority seeks consultation regarding the provision of electricity supplies to the development which is not a material planning consideration (03.04.15).
5.4 Environmental Health Division of Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture have written to the applicant indicating that the flats will need to be registered under the Housing (Registration) Regulations 2013 (27.05.15). This is not a material planning issue as it refers to other legislation.
5.5 Residents of 49 and 53, Castlemona Avenue object to the application (10.04.15, 25. 05.15 and 14.06.15 respectively). They are concerned that the proposed additional living units will create a demand for car parking which will not be accommodated within the area and will add to existing congestion, particularly at night time, resulting in a dangerous situation where
==== PAGE 4 ====
15/00351/B
Page 4 of 5
emergency vehicles are unable to access the whole of the street and vehicles are parking on both sides of the street and sometimes on the pedestrian footway.
ASSESSMENT 6.1 The issues in this case are whether the proposed flats will have an adequate level of amenity (storage and bin space and outlook) and whether the lack of parking will result in adverse highway conditions.
6.2 In terms of amenity the amended plans improve the amount of light available to the ground floor and basement flat as a whole and whilst not ideal as the ground floor bedroom and bathroom effectively has no windows, it is considered that this is not a reason for refusal and will be taken into account in the registration of the flats in due course.
6.3 Whilst all the flats now have access to an externally stored bin, this has resulted in the storage of bins in the front garden area. Any fencing to screen them would itself be out of character with the area. This results from an inability for the upper floor flats to gain access to the rear area. The applicant has suggested that the removal of the decking and lowering of this front yard area will result in the tops of the bins a little lower than the height of the existing front wall and fence and as such not prominent in the streetscene. Whilst this is not ideal from a visual perspective, it is not considered sufficiently adverse to warrant refusal of the application for this reason.
6.4 The lack of parking will lead to an increased demand for very few spaces in an already congested area. Visits to the area reveal that at certain times there are relatively few spaces free and it is easy to see how vehicles parked on both sides of the carriageway will lead to congestion and potentially dangerous situations if emergency vehicles cannot get access. The applicant has suggested that three of the units would be occupied on a single person basis and that given the proximity to the town centre and public transport services this will not result in an adverse impact on local highway conditions. However, it is not believed that there is evidence to demonstrate that this will not result in unacceptable on street car parking in the vicinity or that such would be acceptable particularly having regard to other planning decisions in the locality. On this basis and particularly having regard to the objections from two local residents, the highway authority and the local authority, it is considered that the application should be refused on this basis.
PARTY STATUS 7.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, 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, in this case Department of Infrastructure and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
7.2 Manx Utilities Authority does not raise any material planning issues and as such should not be afforded interested person status in this case.
7.3 In addition to those above, article 6(3) of the Order requires the Department to decide which persons (if any) who have made representations with respect to the application, should be treated as having sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application.
==== PAGE 5 ====
15/00351/B
Page 5 of 5
In this instance, it is recommended that the following persons have sufficient interest due to the potential impact on car parking and highway safety and should be awarded the status of an Interested Person in accordance with Government Circular 0046/13:
The residents of 49 and 53, Castlemona Avenue, Douglas.
With effect from 1 June 2015, the Transfer of Planning & Building Control Functions Order 2015 amends the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 to give effect to the meaning of the word 'Department' to be the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture unless otherwise directed by that Order.
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 29.06.2015
Reasons and Notes for Refusal R : Reasons for refusal O : Notes attached to refusals
R 1. The proposal makes no provision for on-site car parking or any alternative. The general lack of parking in the area and the narrow nature of Castlemona Avenue has led to a situation where increased demand for parking spaces has and is likely to result in vehicles parking on the footway and such that the general movement of traffic is made more difficult and the access for emergency vehicles may be compromised. The development will add to this demand and is therefore unacceptable as it is contrary to the Isle of Man Strategic Plan Appendix Seven.
--
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.
Decision Made : Refused
Committee Meeting
Date:...10.08.2015
Signed : Sarah Corlett Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal