Loading document...
Application No.: 18/01158/B Applicant: Mr & Mrs David Christian Proposal: Replacement of existing commercial storage building with detached dwelling Site Address: Former St Olaves Mens Institute Adjacent to St Olaves School House North Shore Road Ramsey Isle of Man IM8 3DQ Planning Officer: Mr Owen Gore Photo Taken: 22.01.2019 Site Visit: 22.01.2019 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 16.04.2019 _________________________________________________________________ Reasons for Refusal R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons - R 1. It is not clear whether the proposed development would provide sufficient private amenity space for the new dwelling; however it is considered that due to proximity to the existing, neighbouring dwelling, the proposed development will have a poor outlook in terms of overbearing and in terms of being overlooked, which will have a harmful impact on the occupants. The applicant has also not adequately demonstrated that satisfactory access can be achieved. Therefore the principle for the proposed development is considered not to be acceptable in accordance with Policy R/E/P3 of the Ramsey Local Plan 1998 and Environmental Policy 42, General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. - R 2. The proposed dwelling, by virtue of its siting and the locations of the primary windows serving, habitable rooms, would adversely affect neighbouring residential amenity of the existing dwelling at St Olaves School House through direct overlooking between habitable windows. The proposed dwelling is therefore contrary to parts (g) and (h) of General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. _______________________________________________________________
It is recommended that the following organisation should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):
Manx Utilities as they do not own or occupy property that is within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of
the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy and they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (July 2018). _____________________________________________________________________________
Officer’s Report THE SITE
1.1 The application site is located to the north of North Shore Road and is accessed via the car park for the former St Olaves school house, which is now partly a residential property and partly a snooker club; the car park is in turn accessed via Hanley Villas/existing car park serving Close Ny Mooragh. - 1.2 The existing building is a long, narrow, detached, single storey, timber structure which is indicated as being St Olaves Men's Institute, but is understood to be a storage building. To south west of the existing building is the wider site is St Olaves School House, which is partly a snooker club and partly a dwelling; to the east of the site is north east is a parcel of woodland/open space that doesn't seem to be associated with any particular site adjacent and is unlikely to be part of any neighbouring property's residential curtilage. - 1.3 The existing building is thought to have been associated with the wider site and doesn't appear to have been used for a commercial use in its own right. THE PROPOSAL
2.1 The proposal is for the replacement of an existing storage building with a similar styled, detached dwelling. The proposed dwelling will be two bedrooms, with lounge/dining/kitchen, separate utility and a study; there will be a rear garden area to the north west of the site. PLANNING POLICY - 3.1 The site is designated within an 'Area of Predominantly Residential Use' under the Ramsey Local Plan 1998. The site is not within a Conservation Area.
3.2 General Policy 2 applies to development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning. Such proposals will normally be permitted, provided that the development:
3.3 Environment Policy 42 applies to new development in existing settlements; this states that proposals 'must be designed to take account of the particular character and identity, in terms of buildings and landscape features of the immediate locality. Inappropriate backland development, and the removal of open or green spaces which contribute to the visual amenity and sense of place of a particular area will not be permitted. Those open or green spaces which are to be preserved will be identified in Area Plans'. - 3.4 Paragraph 7.34.1 introduces Environmental Policy 42 and states that 'Every settlement in the Island has its own individual character and identity which needs to be conserved and enhanced. If such characteristics and qualities are not to be lost, any new development must
be appropriate to the locale in terms of scale, siting, design, relationship with other buildings and land uses….In terms of existing settlements, in both rural and urban areas, new development will be expected to follow the following design principles. Development will need to:
3.5 It continues by providing the following definitions and explanations, which are also defined in Appendix 1: -
3.6 Appendix 6 provides guidance on the provision of open space and states:
"A.6.1.1 Applicants are asked to note that all new residential development must provide adequate standards of residential amenity, including private open space such as gardens or shared amenity spaces for apartments, and bin storage areas. Meeting the open space requirements in this Appendix does not exempt applicants from providing adequate private open space".
3.7 The Department has recently published its Residential Design Guidance (March 2019). This document is not a Planning Policy Statement (as per Section 3 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999) but is capable of being an 'other material consideration' (as per Section 10(4) (d) of the Act). Section 7.0 'Impact on Neighbouring Properties' of this document contains two parts which in particular are considered to be relevant to this proposal. Parts 7.4 'Overbearing Impact upon Outlook' and 7.5 'Overlooking Resulting In a Loss of Privacy'.
4.1 The previous planning applications are not considered to be specifically material in the assessment of the current application.
REPRESENTATIONS 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 oppose the application, in the letter dated 11 March 2019. The comments continue: -
'…the parking would be accessed via the existing Hanley Villas car park which is outside the applicant's ownership and is not part of the adopted highway. The spaces in this car park are numbered and therefore appear to be dedicated to particular users although this is not confirmed. The applicant needs to demonstrate that they would have legal right of access to the proposed site parking, and that the land owner would be prepared to remove at least a couple of the existing car parking spaces to facilitate access to the site'.
5.2 Ramsey Town Commissioners have commented on this application and stated that they object, in the letter dated 23 November 2018. The comments continue: -
'It is considered that the proposed dwelling does not respect the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them as set down in General Policy 2 (b) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. In addition, it would affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality and result in a poor aspect and lack of private amenity space
The application provides car parking however it is not clear how access to the car park is provided. If access is through the existing car park serving Close Ny Mooragh, this car park is privately owned by Ramsey Town Commissioners.
Whilst the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 takes precedence over the Ramsey Local Plan 1998, the Local Plan is still valid and therefore Policy R/R/P3: Infill/Backland Sites applies. This states that 'Within areas zoned for Predominantly Residential use there will be a general presumption against the development of those sites which provide attractive, natural 'breathing' spaces between established residential buildings. These sites will often include trees, mature landscaping or simply green space'.
In addition, Policy R/E/P3 Backland Development and Development in Grounds of House states that 'There shall be a general presumption against backland development and development within the grounds of large houses on those sites which are well landscaped within ample tree coverage'.
5.3 Two sets of comments were received from Manx Utilities dated 28 January 2019 and 12 February 2019. The first comment had been added to the file in error due to the reference number being incorrect; the second comments related to the error and stated that 'Manx Utilities have reviewed the application from a flood risk perspective and have no objections'.
ASSESSMENT Principle of the development
6.1 The site is zoned as residential and therefore the principle for development to create a residential unit is acceptable in the broadest terms. However the principle of the creating a residential unit on this site is not automatic as any development on this site would fall within the definition of 'Backland development' which is specified in appendix 1 of the Strategic Plan as 'Development on land at the back of existing properties, usually on what were the back gardens, and often without a separate road frontage'.
6.2 Under Policy R/E/P3 there is a general presumption against backland development and under Environmental Policy 42 it states 'inappropriate backland development, will not be permitted', but continues to state that backland development may be acceptable in some circumstances, but only if satisfactory access can be achieved and if there is sufficient space to provide adequate amenity for both new and existing adjoining dwellings. - 6.3 The existing use of the site is a storage building which is believed to be under the same ownership as the dwelling portion of St Olaves School House; however the extent to which it falls within the curtilage of that dwelling is questionable and therefore the site is unlikely to benefit from householder permitted development rights.
6.4 The applicant has not provided a clear site plan showing the amenity space that will be available to the proposed dwelling and it is not clear to what extent it will be useable, as the levels on the site appear to alter dramatically to the east and to the north, with the existing and proposed buildings already raised above the ground level of the access and car park to the south and west of the site. - 6.5 The proposed dwelling will have windows on both the south west and north east elevations; the principle rooms are considered to be the two bedrooms, the study and the lounge/dining/kitchen. The larger of the bedrooms has three narrow windows facing south onto the parking area; the smaller bedroom has two windows looking at the adjacent property; the study has one window looking at the adjacent property; and the lounge/dining/kitchen has two windows on the south western side looking at the adjacent property, three windows on the north eastern side looking into the wooded area and a large patio door with side and top light on the north western side looking out of the rear garden area. - 6.6 The outlook from the smaller bedroom, study and the south west outlook lounge/dining/kitchen will be the side elevation of the neighbouring property and in particular the large ground floor and first floor windows and side door of this property. - 6.7 The Department has recently published its Residential Design Guidance (March 2019).
'Any development should ensure that existing residents can enjoy appropriate levels of comfort and enjoyment of their properties without their outlooks being impacted by an overbearing building/structure. The positioning, design and scale of an extension/new build dwellings should not be dominant or have an adverse impact on the primary windows of a primary habitable room or on the private garden that may be present in a neighbouring property…'.
6.8 Whilst this guidance is particularly aimed at protecting existing residents from new overbearing structures, it also applies in this case as guidance on outlook generally. The outlook for these windows is poor due to the existing two storey property that is located approx. 2m away. The proposal will also result in overlooking and a loss of privacy for both properties; this aspect has been assessed in the impact to neighbours section below. - 6.9 The standards for car parking for terraced residential property, referred to in the Strategic Plan indicates that parking spaces should not be provided in front of the dwellings where this would result in a poor outlook for residents and would detract from the amenity of the area. The standard for detached residential property is that car parking within the curtilage of the property should be behind the front of the dwelling. It the current proposal both parking spaces are immediately in front of the 'front' of the dwelling, which is the sole outlook for the main bedroom and is therefore likely to result in a poor outlook for the occupants. - 6.10 No new access appears to have been proposed and the redline boundary does not show where or how it will join the public highway. It appears that the applicant is relying on access through the existing car park for the snooker club, which is understood to be outside of the applicant's ownership and through the Hanley Villas/Close Ny Mooragh car park, which is understood to be privately owned by Ramsey Town Commissioners and is not part of the adopted highway. - 6.11 Under Policy R/E/P3 there is a general presumption against backland development and under Environmental Policy 42 it states 'inappropriate backland development will not be permitted', unless it can provide adequate amenities, such as private amenity space, good outlook and sufficient access. It is not clear whether the proposed development would provide sufficient private amenity space for the new dwelling; however it is considered that it will poor
outlook for the occupants and that they have not shown that satisfactory access can be achieved. Therefore the principle is considered not to be acceptable in this instance.
Character and appearance
6.12 The applicant has stated that the intention of the design of the proposed building was to reflect design features of the existing building; these features include the use of timber cladding. The existing building is dilapidated and incapable of conversion. Its main use appears to have been storage linked to the previous use of the St Olaves School House or possibly some other community use. The existing design is utilitarian in appearance and generally out of keeping with the surrounding property. - 6.13 However the building is not directly adjacent to the highway and views of it from a public vantage point would be limited. The design somewhat reflects the design of the existing building, therefore the visual impact on the character of the area is unlikely to be significant. Impact to neighbours - 6.14 The proposal is single storey; the neighbours to the north west are both approx. 24m away from the rear elevation of the proposed dwelling and therefore are unlikely to be impacted. There is no neighbouring dwelling to the north east of the site and this land doesn't appear to be linked to the residential curtilage of any nearby property. There are neighbouring properties to the south east, which include No.20 to No.23 and No.25 Close Ny Mooragh; however four of these properties are over 20m away and the closest (No.23, which is approx. - 15m away) is unlikely to be significantly impacted by the proposed bedroom window on the south east elevation due to the single storey nature of the building and the orientation of the two properties that will only create oblique views.
6.15 The proposed dwelling will have a number of windows on the south west elevation, including windows that serve three of the principle rooms, two of which only have windows on this elevation. The principle rooms are considered to be the smaller of the bedrooms, the study and the lounge/dining/kitchen. The smaller bedroom has two windows looking at the adjacent property; the study has one window looking at the adjacent property; and the lounge/dining/kitchen has two windows on the south western side looking at the adjacent property, which is less than 2m at its closest point. - 6.16 The outlook from the smaller bedroom, study and the south west outlook of the lounge/dining/kitchen will be the side elevation of the neighbouring property and in particular the large ground floor and first floor windows and side door of this property. - 6.17 The Department has recently published its Residential Design Guidance (March 2019).
Section 7.0 'Impact on Neighbouring Properties', part 7.5 'Overlooking Resulting in a Loss of Privacy' of this document is considered to be relevant to this proposal. Paragraph 7.5.1 refers to the "20 metre guide" and states that the guide 'provides a useful way to identify where overlooking is likely to be a concern. It refers to the distance between elevations that contain windows serving habitable rooms that face each other'.
6.18 There would be direct harm in terms of overlooking and a loss of privacy for both properties as a result of this proposal; the windows on the south west elevation will provide direct views into the ground floor of the existing dwelling as well as allowing direct views into the proposed dwelling from the ground and first floor of the existing property. This is considered to comprise a level of harm that is sufficient to warrant refusal in terms of the policy provisions set out in part (g) of General Policy 2 and the Department's published Residential Design Guidance (March 2019). Parking and highways - 6.19 As stated above, the application provides sufficient car parking to the south of the site; however no access appears to have been it has been created and the redline boundary does
7.1 It is not clear whether the proposed development would provide sufficient private amenity space for the new dwelling; however it is considered that it will poor outlook for the occupants and that they have not shown that satisfactory access can be achieved. The proposal would not unacceptably harm the characteristics of the existing building or the character of its surroundings; however it is considered that the proposed development would result in a significant adverse impact upon the living conditions of neighbouring residents. Therefore the proposal would not meet the requirements of Policy R/E/P3, Environmental Policy 42, General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan. INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons:
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.
Decision Made : Refused Date : 17.04.2019 Determining officer
Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown