Loading document...
Application No.: 09/01288/A Applicant: JK Ltd Proposal: Approval in principle to erect six dwellings (discharging means of access and siting) Site Address: - Palatine Garages - Rear Palatine Road - Douglas - Isle Of Man - IM2 3BQ ### Considerations Case Officer: Ms Henrietta Hopkins Photo Taken: 03.11.2009 Site Visit: 03.11.2009 Expected Decision Level: Senior Planning Officer ### Written Representations - 23 Palatine Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 3BQ | Objects to the proposal - 3 Withington Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 3BG | Objects to the proposal - 27 Palatine Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 3BQ | Objects to the proposal - 29 Palatine Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 3BQ | Objects to the proposal - 21 Palatine Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 3BQ | Objects to the proposal - 1 A Withington Court Withington Road Douglas Isle Of Man | Objects to the proposal - 17 Palatine Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 3BQ | Objects to the proposal - Glebe Cottage Maughold Isle Of Man IM7 1AS | Interest expressed - Chairman Isle Of Man Art Society Thie Ellyn Off Withington Road | Objects to the proposal - Cranford Nursery School 116 Woodbourne Road Douglas Isle Of Man | Objects to the proposal - Hazeldene 25 York Road Douglas Isle Of Man | Objects to the proposal - 5 Palatine Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 3BQ | Objects to the proposal ### Consultations {{table:484707}} Consultee: Highways Division Notes: Consultee: DOUGLAS CORPORATION Notes: DEFER till after 16th September 2009. 02.10.09 - objection Consultee: Drainage Services Manager Notes:** No objection in principle subject to:- ## Consumer Consultee : Manx Electricity Authority Notes :
The site, subject of this application, is located within an established residential area. The site could be described as 'backland' as it is located to the rear of dwellings 114 - 132 Woodbourne Road; 1925 York Road; 3 - 39 Palatine Road and 1-8 Withington Road. There is no frontage onto the adopted highway. The site currently consists of garages which are proposed to be demolished to make way for residential development. There are four existing access points to the site; two lead off Withington Road and two lead off York Road.
The application is seeking an approval in principle for six dwellings on the site to the rear of these dwellings. The application is discharging the siting and means of access. Indicative plans have been submitted on the appearance of the dwellings. The proposed means of access to the dwellings will be via two lanes which lead off Withington Road and York Road.
The site is within an area zoned as 'Predominantly Residential' in the Douglas Local Plan 1998. Within the adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007, the following policies are considered to be relevant in the determination of this application: General Policy 2, Environment Policy 42, Housing Policy 6, Community Policy 7, and Transport 1, 4, 6 and 7.
General Policy 2 states: "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:
Environment Policy 42 states that "New development in existing settlements must be designed to take out of the particular character and identity, in terms of buildings and landscape features of the
immediate locality. Inappropriate backland development, and removal of open 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 the Area Plans."
Housing Policy 6 states "Development of land which is zoned for residential development must be undertaken in accordance with the brief in the relevant area plan, or, in the absence of a brief, in accordance with the criteria in paragraph 6.2 of this Plan. Briefs will encourage good and innovative design, and will not be needlessly prescriptive."
Community Policy 7 states that "The design of new development and the extension and refurbishment of existing buildings and development must, as far as is reasonably practical, pay due regard to existing best practice so as to help prevent criminal and anti-social behaviour."
Transport Policy 1 states that "New development should, where possible, be located close to existing public transport facilities and routes, including pedestrian, cycle and rail routes."
Transport Policy 4 states that "The new and existing highways which serve any new development must be designed so as to be capable of accommodating the vehicle and pedestrian journeys generated by that development in a safe and appropriate manner, and in accordance with the environmental objectives of this plan."
Transport Policy 7 states that "The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards."
PLANNING HISTORY There have been no previous planning applications submitted which are considered relevant to the assessment of this application. REPRESENTATIONS The Manx Electricity Authority has taken a neutral stance on this planning application.
The Department of Transport Highway Division have raised the following comments:
"The existing use of at least 15 garages has the potential to generate approximately 30 traffic movements per day based on 1 movement to and from each garage. The proposed use will generate a similar number of traffic movements therefore there is no impact on the capacity of the network."
"This proposal is accessed by 4 back lanes varying in width between 3.0m and 3.6m while none of these accesses is of a suitable standard to be used as an access to a residential development, the fact that there is more than 1 access goes some way to ameliorate this. The lanes have suitable visibility, and parking standards have been met. With refuse vehicles they appear to already use the lanes to service vehicles. There is also sufficient width at the proposed houses which would allow fire engines to access their equipment. On balance the proposal does not pose an unacceptable risk to highway safety."
The Drainage Department raised standard comments. They have raised no objection in principle to the proposed development subject to conditions.
The Public Works Committee of Douglas Borough Council have objected to the application on the following grounds: 1) the development would constitute unsatisfactory backland development; 2) The siting and massing of the development would not reinforce or respect the existing development pattern in the area, nor improve the existing pattern of buildings, nor maximise the opportunities for creating an attractive and interesting environment; 3) The proposal would result in an unsatisfactory residential environment being provided by reason of the inadequate private amenity space. The amenity spaces being provided are very limited in size, are enclosed on three sides by three storey high structures, and contain no soft landscaping; 4) The accesses are narrow and have limited visibility splays where they enter on the surrounding road network; 5) These service lanes may be
4 February 2010
09/01288/A
further limited in width by the placing of refuse bins in the lanes, or blocked due to the parking of vehicles.
The Isle of Man Art Society of Thie Ellyn, which is located adjacent to the site, have raised the following concerns: 1) Limited access into lanes for emergency service vehicles to/from York Road and Withington Road, 2) No passing points in lanes for vehicles, 3) Heavy transport vehicles during development may cause damage to building's foundations, 4) Illegal parking and obstruction of vehicles for Art Society Members to/from Society, 5) Increase traffic flow causing an impasse for members of the Society, 6) Already difficult emergence of vehicles from site to main roads will increase the danger and risk of accidents, 7) Residents of proposed new development will add to noise and disrupt peaceful activities to member of the Society, 8) Increased danger to over 300 members of the Art Society and also local residents to accidents by motorised traffic, 9) Possible damage to sewage and drainage during development of proposed plans.
The Ballaquayle Action Group (79 Woodbourne Road) have expressed the following comments: 1) There is concern regarding water pressure and the requirement of the Fire Service if attending the site in an emergency, 2) Cranford Nursery applied to the planning department some time ago for improvements and was refused due to a proposed increase in volume of traffic to the area, 3) Houses in the area are not underpinned and damage to properties is a likelihood during any major building construction, 4) The development will block light to existing properties and cause an excess of noise to babies and children already resident in the area, 5) Rear walls of existing properties have been reduced by owners in order to create additional parking area for cars. This action was for the sole use of owners of properties and should not be used by site workers, neighbours or new residents to the area, 6) Access from the site into York Road is already precarious, 7) Residents are concerned about the safety of their children with additional traffic into the site, 8) There is no pavement area, 9) No passing areas for road traffic, 10) Illegal parking.
The Ballaquayle Action Group has also put forward alternative uses for the site. Mrs Cannel MHK (House of Keys) wishes to support her constituents in their objection to the application and has made the following comments: 1) the development is excessive in size and scale and has insufficient off street car parking provision, 2) No visibility onto York Road and Withington Road. 3) Both York Road and Withington Road have direct link onto both Ballaquayle and Woodbourne Road, which are heavily used main arterial routes into the town, as such any increase in volume of traffic at these junctures would be both unwise and dangerous, 4) There would be a negative impact to the houses situated in Palatine Road at the rear in terms of light and privacy with a potential for overlooking, 5) A precedent has been set with regard to any development in this back lane particularly in view of the refusal given to Cranford Nursery School, situated on Woodbourne Road, of reasons which included an undesirable increase in the volume of traffic should approval be given, 6) The dwellings would have very poor amenity together with very small living space as this type of living accommodation needs to be discouraged as appropriate for today needs.
The owner of Cranford Nursery School, who operates from and lives at 116 Woodbourne Road, has objected to the application on the following grounds: 1) the bin collection lane will be a road and that the government will takeaway some of their land to make the alley bigger. This will ruin their business as they sell their business with a large garden (used as a playground for the nursery). If the business is effected then their homes is under threat 2) Loss of privacy, 3) increase pollution from traffic and noise, 4) pedestrian safety, 5) Parking problem will be exacerbated.
There have been 22 other objections received from 114, 118 and 124 Woodbourne Road; 2, 4, 5, 13, 17, 19, 21, 23, 27, 29, 31 and 37 Palatine Road; 21 and 25 York Road; 1A Withington Court, 1 Withington Road, 2 Withington Road and 3 Withington Road; and Glebe Cottage. The objections can be summarised as:
-Limited access arrangements for emergency and refuse vehicles
They also object on the following grounds below, which are considered not to be planning matters. Material considerations must be general planning considerations, i.e. they must be related to the purpose of planning legislation, which relates to the development and use of land.
The principal issues in assessing this application are a) Land use, b) Highway issues, c) Impact on the surrounding residential properties and d) Land contamination. The following paragraphs deal with these issues in the above order.
The development is zoned as 'Predominantly Residential' within the Douglas Local Plan. Whilst there is a presumption in favour of development in accordance with General Policy 2, the proposal would need to satisfy other policies within the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007. Housing Policy 6 states that "development of land which is zoned for residential development must be undertaken in accordance with the brief in the relevant area plan, or, in the absence of a brief, in accordance with the criteria in paragraph 6.2 of this Plan." Paragraph 6.2 relates to General Policy 2 which was highlighted earlier within this report.
The properties fronting Woodbourne Road are in a Conservation Area, but the garages themselves are not. As the proposed houses will not be seen from within the Conservation Area it is considered that the proposed residential development will not be visually detrimental to the Conservation Area. However, within the 'Woodbourne Road Conservation Character Appraisal' it does state that "traffic movement through the area is generally heavy and on-street car parking continues to be a problem. Unfortunately, the presence of so many vehicles on the streets does detract from the special quality of the place and sense of ease which is more evident, say on Sunday mornings when traffic is at a lower end." The proposed development is considered to have a different nature to what currently exists which would result in an increase of vehicular activity. This will have an impact on the
character of the Conservation Area. This is further explained below under the 'Highway Issues' section.
Whilst the Department of Transport have raised no objection to the proposed development because they consider the proposed use will generate a similar number of traffic movements and there are suitable visibility splays, it is considered that from a land use planning perspective that the residential development is of a different nature to what currently exists. It is not known how many of the garages are in active use for the parking of vehicles; but it is realistic to expect that residential dwellings will have regular vehicular activity i.e. parents with children, postmen, visitors, and other casual callers, throughout early morning to late evening. Furthermore, not only are the accesses substandard for vehicles, but there are no footpaths. The proposal is therefore considered not to provide a safe means of access for residents (including the disabled) and this is considered unacceptable. In addition, there is only one street light along the lanes, next to the Arts Society building, which further exacerbates pedestrian safety. Existing residents also leave their bins within the narrow lanes.
Contact was also made with the Fire Services Department. They stated that the width of lanes would have to be 3.7 metres to gain access. Although one lane measures approximately 3.6 metres which would be substandard in width; the other lane which also provides access to the dwellings is 4 metres in width which will be satisfactory and therefore the Fire Services Department has raised no objection. Furthermore, the Fire Services Department commented that they would normally require a turning circle but commented that as they can drive straight through the access lane they have no objection.
The proposed development would be situated in close proximity to existing dwellings along Woodbourne Road, York Road and Palatine Road. Although the plans are indicative, they are intended to demonstrate whether or not residential development is acceptable. As indicated on the plans, there would be a minimum distance of 10.2 metres from the outriggers of the existing and proposed residential dwellings fronting Palatine Road, and a maximum distance of 20.1 metres maintained from the rear wall of the proposed properties to the rear wall of the dwellings along Palatine Road.
The new properties would have a height of 9.2 metres to the rear, as shown on the indicative drawings, which would be situated approximately 6 metres to the rear boundary walls of 7 - 23 Palatine Road. It is considered that the proposed development would have an overbearing and dominant impact upon the dwellings along Palatine Road and would also create loss of light from 3pm onwards in the summer months. The proposal would therefore be contrary to General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007.
Even though the height of the proposed buildings shown on the indicative drawings would be less in relation to the properties fronting Woodbourne Road, with a height of 6 metres to the eaves and 8 metres to the ridge, the occupiers of the properties along Woodbourne Road would be looking at one solid building construction line (over 37 metres in width) which is considered would severely undermine existing levels of amenity.
The proposed residential development is considered to be sub standard for future occupiers and would therefore be contrary to General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan for the following reasons:
The kitchen/dining rooms are located on the lower ground floors, below street level. The eye level of future residents in the kitchen/breakfast area would therefore be below ground level although two small vertical windows for the kitchen/dining area are provided just above street level. Due to the rooms being proposed below street level and only two small windows provided, it is considered that
the future living conditions would be substandard, where they would be adversely affected by lack of an adequate amount of light. The amount of light received would be further reduced by the fact that the siting of the car park is proposed to the front of these small vertical windows and the 'tunnelling effect' provided to the rear of the proposed properties. Furthermore, the outlook from the windows would be onto the proposed parking area, small yard area, and narrow alleyways, which would be less than satisfactory.
The design of the proposal includes a 3 storey outrigger projecting by approximately 6 metres to the rear of each dwelling. This is considered to produce a tunnelling effect - reducing available light and outlook, and would have an overbearing effect on the living conditions of future occupiers. One of the best approaches to determine sunlight/daylight is by ensuring that development does not cross a line drawn at 45 degrees from the centre of the nearest window to a habitable room in a neighbouring property, in the horizontal plane, or subtend an angle drawn upwards from the same point at 25 degrees. Compliance with the 45 degree code is a common way of ensuring that a neighbouring dwellings outlook is not unacceptably compromised. The proposed dwellings rear extensions would obstruct this area which would result in a dominating and gloomy effect to future occupiers. Even though the plans showing the design of the buildings are indicative, reducing this to two-storey would still result in loss of outlook and sunlight/daylight.
The lack of amenity space provided for the future occupiers of the proposed houses was another objection raised. While private garden sizes are often matters deemed to be for the most part between developers and their customers, developments intended for families and with limited amenity space may well be thought to be so lacking that it becomes a matter for wider public concern and can therefore provide a planning ground for refusal. The proposed residential development indicative drawings show three bedrooms which can appeal to families. Although the garden spaces provided are similar in size to those surrounding the site (proposed garden spaces measure approximately and existing gardens surrounding the site measure approximately ) it is not considered that reduced standards are acceptable in this proposed new development as it would result in over intensive development.
In conclusion, it is considered that the proposed development could not provide a satisfactory standard of living environment for future occupiers. The development would result in a harmful reduction in the amount of sunlight and daylight and have an overbearing and dominant impact on neighbouring properties. The roads proposed are also considered too small for safe vehicular and pedestrian access, including available space for street lights to help give natural surveillance for safety and help to reduce crime.
As the garages are not industrial but for domestic use it is considered by the land contamination officer that there will be no contamination issues on the site.
With regards to the existing sewerage and drainage system not being able to cope with more residential development in the area, the Drainage Department have been consulted on the proposed application; they have raised no objection in principle subject to conditions.
It is recommended that the application be refused for the above reasons.
The Department of Transport and the local authority are, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (c) and (d), considered "interested persons" and as such should be afforded party status.
114 Woodbourne Road 116 Woodbourne Road (Cranford Nursery)
118 Woodbourne Road 124 Woodbourne Road 1A Withington Court 1 Withington Road 2 Withington Road 3 Withington Road 21 York Road 25 York Road 5 Palatine Road 13 Palatine Road 17 Palatine Road 19 Palatine Road 21 Palatine Road 23 Palatine Road 27 Palatine Road 29 Palatine Road 31 Palatine Road 37 Palatine Road Isle of Man Art Society Douglas Corporation Manx Electricity Authority Department of Transport and Drainage Division It is considered that the following should not be afforded interested Party Status: 79 Woodbourne Road (Ballaquayle Action Group) Glebe Cottage 4 Palatine Road 2 Palatine Road Mrs Cannell MHK (House of Keys)
Recommended Decision: Refused
Date of Recommendation: 02.12.2009
R 1 . It has not been adequately demonstrated that residential development of the site could be satisfactorily accommodated. The illustrative development by reason of its height, bulk, mass, depth and close proximity to the boundaries of the site would result in an overbearing and unneighbourly form of development, detrimental to the amenities of the occupiers of the nearby properties. It would thereby be contrary to policies General Policy 2 and Housing Policy 6 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007.
R 2. The proposed development is considered to be sub standard for future occupiers and is therefore contrary to General Policy 2 and Housing Policy 6 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007.
R 3. The proposal would not provide for adequate and safe access for users of the highway, both vehicular and pedestrian, and would therefore be contrary to General Policy 2, Transport Policy 4 and Transport Policy 6 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007.
I confirm that this decision accords with Government Circular No 10/09, Delegation of Functions (Development Procedure), GC No 11/09 (Advertisements) and GC No 12/09 (Registered Buildings) all to the Senior Planning Officer
Decision Made : Refused Date : 412.10
Signed : Senior Planning Officer
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown