Loading document...
Apartment 1 And 2 Eskdale Apartments<br>Queens Drive West<br>Ramsey<br>Isle of Man<br>IM8 2JD
PA Reference 20/01227/C
Prepared on behalf of the Planning Authority by Senior Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah, B.Tech (Hons), MSc, MRTPI
1.1 The site is the curtilage of Apartment 1 and 2 Eskdale Apartments, Queens Drive West, Ramsey, situated on the northern side of corner of Queens Drive West and about 200 m from the junction between Queens Drive West, Beaumont Road, Queens Pier Road and Brookhill Road. The property is a five storey building with projecting bays on the both sides of the entrance door. The property was previously a hotel which was later converted to apartments. 1.2 This property which is situated about 340 m from the Ramsey Town Centre has Holly Bank on its western boundary, Tides Reach on its eastern boundary, Tramman on its northwest boundary, while Tower View and Shomarjon are situated on the north-eastern boundary of the site. The property has the twelve garages serving the apartments situated on its northern boundary while the car parks serving the apartments are situated on the boundary with Tides Reach on the eastern boundary, separated by a 1.8 m hedging which runs along the boundary with this neighbouring property and at the rear of the building. There is unrestricted on-street parking on this section of Queens Drive West and there is a bus stop directly in front of the property.
2.1 The application seeks approval for the change of use from tourist accommodation to residential accommodation. The application does not propose any alterations or modifications to the property. 2.2 The internal configuration for each of the apartments provide for a living room/kitchen, two bedrooms (one has an ensuite), a bathroom and a long hallway. The apartment has a dedicated detached garage (within a group of garages) and access to a parking area situated at the rear of the property.
3.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is within an area recognised as being Predominantly Residential use under the Ramsey Local Plan Order 1998. Map No. 2 (South), and the site is not within a Conservation Area. The following policy within Planning Circular 2/99, the written statement that accompanies the Local Plan is considered to be specifically material to the assessment of this planning application.
9.25 Town centre parking standards for offices at 1 space per 50 sq.m.nett shall be applied to all new development/redevelopment and conversion schemes. If necessary, consideration maybe given to acceptance of a lesser standard for development proposals within the designated Conservation Area. Elsewhere, discretion may be applied if this can be justified by specific site constraints. 3.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this application; 3.3 General Policy 2 (GP2) (in part) 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; (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 unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; (j) can be provided with all necessary services;
8.13.1 There are in the Island, and particularly in Douglas, many substantial buildings which, because of their size or form, are no longer suitable for the originally intended use as either single dwellings or holiday accommodation, but which are still structurally sound. The Department has for many years encouraged the conversion of such buildings, where appropriate, into flats. 8.13.2 The size, layout, occupancy, etc., of flats are controlled by the Housing (Flats) Regulations 1982. However, all flats should also have a good external environment, characterised by; (a) a pleasant, clear outlook, particularly from the principal room(s) of the flat and (b) access to external space for the purpose of clothes-drying, refuse storage, car-parking, and general amenity. 8.13.3 Many buildings which are generally suitable for conversion into flats not only have very little space around them, but also have an annex or "outlet" at the rear. The Department may require the demolition, in total or in part, of such "outlets" even where the immediate use of the cleared space may not be possible, for example where more than one rear annex may be needed to be removed to gain access or highway work such as road widening may be required to make the cleared space useful. Such demolition will: (a) remove accommodation which has a poor environment and limited outlook; (b) permit the creation of parking space; and (c) assist in admitting light and air to the rear of the building proper.
Where such demolition is not so required, the accommodation must generally be organised so that every flat has an outlook from the front of the building, and so that no flat is contained entirely within an "outlet". Exception may be made to this general approach where the environment at, and the outlook from, the rear are pleasant and open. 3.5 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.
"The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards."
"High levels of car ownership have led to an increase in the level of parking expected for residential development, and outside of town centre locations, these standards should not be relaxed. 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 ...... the Department will consider reducing this requirement having regard to: (a) the location of the housing relative to public transport, employment, and public amenitis; (b) the size of the dwelling; (d) the impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area."
Where new dwellings are created by the conversion of existing buildings, parking space should be formed by the clearance of outbuildings and low-grade annexes or 'outlets' if it is reasonable and practicable so to do. However, in general, the need to find a use for redundant buildings which are in sound condition will outweigh the drawback of any shortfall in parking provision." 3.6.2 Appendix 7.6 states typical residential dwelling should have " 1 space for 1 bedroom; 2 spaces for 2 or more bedrooms". The same requirement applies to apartments.
These standards may be relaxed where development: (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."
4.1 The following planning applications are considered to be materially relevant in the assessment and determination of the current application: 4.2 The application for conversion of hotel to 12 apartments, Communal Eskdale, Queens Drive West, Ramsey under PA 02/00191/B was refused in July 2002. 4.3 Application for the conversion of hotel to 12 apartments, Communal Eskdale, Queens Drive West, Ramsey under PA 02/00921/B was also Refused on Review. 4.4 The above applications (PA 02/00191/B and PA 02/00921/B) sought to convert the lower ground floor (basement) and other floors of the former hotel into apartments, however, the applications were refused on the grounds that the outlook, light and amenities available to the proposed lower ground floor flats would be unsatisfactory and would not comply with the provisions of Planning Circular 2/88 - Conversion of buildings into flats. As such, it was concluded that the proposed apartments at the basement would have a severely limited outlook and poor outlook that will have limited natural light and poor amenity space, and for these reasons the applications were refused. 4.5 The subsequent application to the above application PA 02/01849/B for the conversion of hotel to 10 apartments was approved in February 2003, resulting in the conversion of the hotel to 10 apartments (excluding the basement). 4.5.1 A condition of this approval was that the basement should be used for storage purposes for residents only. 4.6 PA 04/00611/B for conversion of the lower ground floor of former hotel to two apartments, Communal Eskdale, Queens Drive West, Ramsey. This was refused on review by the Planning Committee in September 2004.
4.7 PA 07/00163/C for Change of use of basement apartments to tourist accommodation, Communal Eskdale, Queens Drive West, Ramsey. This was approved in April 2007 and has enabled the flats to operate as tourist accommodation.
"General amenity As stated previously the site has received a number of refusals to convert the two basement areas to permanent living accommodation, as the proposals would not comply with Planning Circular 2/88. This application however would be for tourist use only, and whilst the living environment is still an issue that needs thought, I consider the proposed use as tourist accommodation would be acceptable, as the already converted units do provide a reasonable living environment for tourist units which in the main would be used for only one to two weeks at a time.
Parking provisions The previous applications indicated the parking provisions to the rear of the application site, however they were not within the ownership of the applicant and therefore outside the control of the application. However this application includes this part of the site within the ownership of the Applicant and therefore I would agree with the Highway Division that there are more than adequate parking provisions for the proposed two tourist units and for the existing 10 apartments".
Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only. 5.1 Representation from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division confirms that they 'do not oppose' in the letter dated 13 November 2020. 5.2 Ramsey Town Commissioner have stated that they have no objection to the application in a letter dated 20 November 2020.
6.1 The key issues to consider with regard to the current application are the principle of converting the tourist accommodation to flats, the residential amenities for future occupiers, and parking.
6.2.1 The application site is situated within an area designated as predominantly residential and within close proximity to the Ramsey Town centre which allows for both residential and tourism use. As such, it considered that the location of the property would ensure its suitability for residential purposes given that the proposed residential use complies with the land use
designation. In addition, the site is within close proximity to shops, services, amenities, and employment opportunities and is therefore in a sustainable location for residential development. Based on the foregoing, it is considered that the principle of converting the tourist accommodations to residential accommodation at this location would be acceptable. 6.2.2 There are however other material considerations to be taken into account in order to determine whether the proposed development is acceptable and these would be discussed in the following sections of the report. Therefore, the resulting impact or the outcome of the assessment of the other material planning considerations encompassing every element of the scheme would determine the suitability of the proposed scheme for the application site.
6.3.1 Whilst it has been noted that the location of the site and its proximity to the town centre would bode well for the proposal, it is considered that what is currently proposed under the current scheme would create flats within the basement level for which previous refusals have been given on the grounds stated in sections $4.3,4.6 .1$ and 4.7.2 of this report. Although Planning Circular 2/88 "Conversion of Buildings into flats" is no longer an active document guiding development on the Island, section 8.13 of the Strategic Plan for which Housing Policy 17 is integral reinforces the principles promoted by Planning Circular 2/88. 6.3.2 From review of the application documents, and existing policies guiding the conversion of buildings into flats, it is noted that the conditions for which previous refusals have been given with regard to the application properties has not changed; as there has been no change in circumstances since the previous decisions were made with regard to the layout and fenestrations on the primary rooms within the basement apartments. In particular, the natural illumination provided by the basement windows for the proposed apartments would be poor, and the outlook from the primary windows would be very limited since the windows are positioned such that the top of the windows serving the living room/kitchen would be at the kerb level. Granting there is a stairwell, in front of the windows which would improve the level of lighting getting to these rooms, the flats created will not have a pleasant clear outlook from the principal rooms and as such the application would fail to comply with Housing policy 17 (b).
6.4.1 With regard to the adequacy of the available parking for the created apartments, it is noted that there are 12 garages on the site with onsite parking provision also provided within the curtilage for the existing apartments. It is however not clear from the application documents if provisions have been made to provide onsite parking for the new flats proposed for the basement floor, although the marked parking area at the rear would accommodate two additional cars in addition to the serving existing cars parked here. It is also noted that the site is within a public transport corridor; within close proximity to the city centre; and on a street with unrestricted on-street parking. As such, it is considered that whilst garages cannot count to provide the required parking provision unless the use can be conditioned to be retained for the storage of a motor car, there seems to be a sufficient number of off-street parking spaces to meet the requirement of the proposed flats since the application site is within a short walking distance of public transport routes, employment opportunities, retail outlets, recreational facilities, and other services. Thus, it would be relatively easy to live in these apartments without using a private car. 6.4.2 Correspondingly, the parking standards in Appendix 7 of the Strategic Plan indicate that the parking standards may be relaxed, having regard to the location of the development relative to public transport and public amenities; or where it can be demonstrated that a reduced level of parking will not result in unacceptable on street parking in the locality; a condition which the proposed scheme would meet.
7.1 The proposed development would be in keeping with the residential designation of the area, and the impact of the development on parking and highway safety would be acceptable. However, the proposed would fail to provide the required amenity standards for the occupants of the property, and as such does not comply with the parameters stipulated in General Policy 2 and Housing Policy 17 for such development. Since Planning Officers cannot recommend split decisions on planning applications, even though the area designation and position of the proposed apartments in relation to available services, and impacts on parking and highway safety would be favourable, the whole application is recommended for refusal due to the lack of a pleasant clear outlook from the principal rooms. 7.2 For these reasons, the proposal is considered to be contrary to the provisions of HP17 (b), and General Policy $2(\mathrm{~g} \& \mathrm{~h})$ of the Strategic Plan and is recommended for refusal.
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 which 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.
In terms of its layout and design the proposed development fails to ensure that the new basement flats will have a pleasant clear outlook, particularly from the principal rooms. The proposed layout and design would ensure that the outlook, light and amenities available to the proposed flats contained in the basement would be unsatisfactory and as such the proposal would be contrary to General Policy $2(\mathrm{~g} \& \mathrm{~h})$ and Housing Policy 17 (b) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
The proposal would result in the loss of two tourist units for which a need has previously been argued, accepted and subsequently proven. The tourist units at Apartment 1 and 2 Eskdale
were granted approval as an exception to policy on the basis that the impact of the poor living environment on occupants would be minimized by the infrequent use of the units by tourists. The planning application fails to demonstrate how circumstances have changed to the extent that there is no longer a need for tourist purposes, and that the apartments should be used as residential accommodation.
PART 2 - Aerial Photograph (2018) {{image:154236}}
9.1 Further to the Officer's report, the case of this application falls to whether the quality of the proposed accommodation, in terms of natural lighting, outlook and amenities available to the proposed flats contained in the basement would be satisfactory; when assessed against General Policy $2(\mathrm{~g} \& \mathrm{~h})$ and Housing Policy 17 (b), and paragraphs 8.13.1 and 8.13.2 of the Strategic Plan. Similarly, the loss of the tourist units where there is insufficient information to justify the need for the proposed change is also considered, given the growth in local tourism on the Island in light of the prevailing restrictions on off island tourism. 9.2 The principle of the proposed development is considered to be acceptable as the Strategic Plan, clearly supports the change of use of substantial buildings which previously
served as holiday accommodation or hotels which are no longer suitable for tourism use to residential. The support for the principle is also manifest in the number of similar planning applications which have been approved in recent times. While normally it would have been beneficial to ascertain if efforts have been made to ensure that the tourist units remain functional givei the current growth in local demand for such units, the appicants did not provide any supporting information in this regard and as such it was judged that there is insufficient information to support such change. The suitability and acceptability of the proposed scheme on the site would be dependent on the resulting impact or the outcome of the assessment of the other material planning considerations, with particular attention to be paid to the parking situation of the area and the level of amenity that would be afforded to the newly-provided flats. 9.3 Granting the applicants have now provided supporting information to justify the need for the proposed change as grounds for an appeal, this could have been provided in a revised submission to address the gaps in the original submission for the current application, without an appeal of the decision. As such, given that the Planning Authority did not consider any revised submissions, the position of the department is that the appeal be assessed on the basis of the original scheme as the Planning Authority did not consider the supporting information when decision was made regarding the application. This is built on the premise that the applicants are always afforded the opportunity to amend schemes that have failed the planning tests as a means to improve original schemes, so that they conform to existing policies guiding development. Additionally, no supporting information has been provided to show that various approaches have been taken to make the tourist units viable (in light of the applicants circumstances), before the decision to convert them into residential accommodation. 9.4 Besides, the additional information provided does not address the key concerns for the development relating to the quality of the proposed accommodations on the basement floor. Whilst it is noted that the level of lighting available to the principal rooms (living room, dining room, kitchen and dining facilities) as defined by the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development and Change of Use) (Amendment) Order 2020, would be sufficient, the level of outlook available from these rooms would be unsufficient and would fail to meet the requirements stipulated in Housing Policy 17 (b), paragraph 8.13.2 and General Policy 2 (g) of the Strategic Plan. 9.5 Evaluation of the window positions when assessed against the street level (for the windows on the front elevation and the dwarf wall enclosing the lights wells on the side (for the bedrooms windows) would reveal that the outlook from these windows would be significantly constrained as there would be limited views over these barriers. As such, it is not considered that the outlook form these rooms would be appropriate. The site history with regard to conversion to residential accommodation is also vital in this respect, given that all attempts to create residential accommodation from the units have failed due to the poor quality of the rooms, particularly the principal rooms for the proposed accommodations. PA $04 / 00611 / B$ for conversion of the lower ground floor of former hotel to two apartments is particularly relevant given that it is the most recent attempt to convert the basement flats to residential accommodation. The key concerns bordered on the quality of the living environment in these apartments; conditions which have not improved since the previous refusals as there has been no alterations or addition of fenestrations to improve the lighting and outlook from these basement flats. 9.6 Whilst reference has been made to personal circumstances of the applicant in the appeal request; an issue that was not presented with the initial application submissions. Section 10(4) (d) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 allows the Department to take into account "all other material considerations", which includes personal circumstances, in dealing with planning applications. In this case, the personal circumstances of the applicant (particularly as it relates to age) are a factor that can be material to the assessment of the application. However, this was not integral to any decision taken as no weight was given to this
circumstance in this case, given that there was no information upon which such conclusions could be based. Besides, the fact that the applicant is currently limited in their ability to manage the tourist units, resulting in conflicts of management for the management company and/or conflicts between residents and tourists is no justification to set aside the policies that regulate the conversion of properties to residential accommodation; a condition that would result in creating accommodation that would be detrimental to future occupants.
The proposal as it stands would result in the creation of living accommodation with principal living spaces (Secondary habitable rooms) that do not have clear outlook and would fail to comply with Housing Policy 17 (b), paragraph 8.13.2 and General Policy 2 (g) of the Strategic Plan. On balance, it is judged that the proposal is contrary to the aforementioned Policies of the Strategic Plan and does not meet all the tests for the conversion of a tourist accommodation to flats.
The following are a set of conditions to be considered by the Inspector should they be minded to recommend approval for the application.
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.
Prior to the occupation of the apartments hereby approved, the details of the siting of the bin storage as well as the parking allocations for both apartments shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department and thereafter the development shall only be carried out in accordance with the details as approved.
Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development and of the amenities of the area and to ensure adequate bin storage and parking provision within the site.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown