Loading document...
Application No.: 08/01550/B Applicant: Heritage Homes Ltd Proposal: Conversion of former hotel into nine apartments Site Address: - The Rowany - 10 Empress Drive - Douglas - Isle Of Man - IM2 4LQ --- ### Considerations Case Officer: Mr Ian Brooks Photo Taken: - Site Visit: - Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee --- ### Written Representations - Sea View Hotels 12/13/15 Empress Drive Douglas Isle Of Man - Objects to the proposal - Insufficient parking - Too much noise --- ### Consultations - Consultee: Highways Division - Notes: Object, see below - Consultee: Douglas Corporation - Notes: No objection - Consultee: Estates And Housing Directorate - Notes: Affordable Housing memo sent 19.08.08. - PT - Consultee: Chief Environmental Health Officer - Notes: Comments received - Consultee: The Architects (DOLGE) - Notes:** Comments received. ---
7 January 2009 08/01550/B Page 1 of 7
The application site comprises the former Rowany Hotel, which is located on a corner plot on Empress Drive. The site is zoned as mixed uses (Tourism/Residential/Office) within the Douglas Local Plan 1998 and it is also located within the Douglas Promenades Conservation Area.
The application is seeking planning permission to convert the building into 9 apartments. The following additional works are part of the conversion: 1) the installation of replacement windows, 2) the erection of a bin store and 3) the installation of an external staircase.
Within the adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007, the following policies are considered to be relevant in the determination of this application: Strategic Policy 4, General Policy 2, Environment Policies 32, 33, 35 and 39, Housing Policies 5 and 17.
Environment Policy 35 states that "Within Conservation Areas, the Department will permit only development which would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the area, and will ensure that he special features contributing to the character and quality are protected against inappropriate development."
Environment Policy 39 states that "The general presumption will be in favour of retaining buildings which make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area."
Housing Policy 17 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan states that "The conversion of buildings into flats will generally be permitted in residential areas provided that:
Section 18 (4) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 states that "Where any area is for the time being a conservation area, special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing it character or appearance in the exercise, with respect to any buildings or other land in the area, of any powers under this Act."
The following previous applications are considered relevant in the consideration of this application: 00/00993/B - Conversion of hotel into 10 apartments - granted on appeal 6th June 2001 98/01125/B - Installation of white uPVC windows and doors to replace existing - granted 28th October 1998
87/01372/C - Change of use from guest house to offices - refused
Douglas Corporation does not object to the application. Highways Division of the Department of Transport object on the grounds that no parking is being provided and therefore it does not comply with the Isle of Man Strategic Plan standards.
Estates and Housing Directorate of the Department of Local Government and the Environment have commented that 2 apartments for first ftime buyer purchase would be appropriate.
Environmental/Public Health Unit of the Department of Local Government and the Environment have commented that the proposed works must comply with the Housing (Flats) Regulations 1982.
The occupiers of Sea View Hotels is concerned about the following issues: 1) the inconvenience it will cause to their guests, 2) the affect of dust and grime, 3) increased parking problems, 4) noise nuisance from construction phase, 5) the effect on refuse collections and deliveries to their premises and 6) who will reimburse them financially if guests prefer to stay elsewhere.
The principal issues in assessing this application are a) Land use, b) Residential amenity, c) Impact on the Conservation Area, d) Impact on the neighbouring property Glencoe, e) Parking provision, and f) Affordable housing. The following paragraphs deal with these issues in the above order, followed by consideration of other matters of detail.
The Local Plan zoning of the site is for mixed uses (Tourism/Residential/Office). The development is compatible with the area since the area is zoned for residential purposes in the Douglas Local Plan. It is considered the principle of developing the site for residential use to be acceptable in this locality.
The apartments on the ground, first, second and third floors would have an adequate residential environment with a pleasant outlook from the apartments. In respect of the lower ground floor apartment, the lounge windows are set between approximately 1.2 m and 2.5 m away from a retaining wall; while the bedroom window is 1 m away from a retaining wall. All of the windows to the apartment are set below street level and would provide little light into the rooms. It is considered that the lower ground floor unit would not provide a satisfactory residential environment for future occupiers of the apartment; however, it should be noted that in 2001 planning permission was granted for the conversion of the hotel into 10 apartments, which included the conversion of the lower ground floor into two apartments. At the time, Planning Circular 2/88 required flats to have a "pleasant clear outlook, particularly from the principal rooms of the flat", which the approved flats on the lower ground floor did not necessarily provide. The current layout for the proposed lower ground floor apartment is not too dissimilar to one of the approved flats. Housing Policy 17 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan now offers the relevant guidance and its wording in respect of outlook is almost identical to that of Planning Circular 2/88 in that "the flat created will have a pleasant clear outlook, particularly from the principal rooms...". As such there has been no material change in policy and therefore it would be unreasonable to refuse the application on the grounds that the apartment would not provide a satisfactory residential environment.
In respect of the impact on Glencoe, the neighbouring property is set to the south east of the application site and is currently used as an hotel. The only aspect of this proposal which would impact on Glencoe is the proposed external staircase, which would project 4.7 m to the rear of No. 10 Empress Drive and would project in front of the bedroom windows of the rear outrigger of Glencoe. The proposal would impact on the outlook from the rooms; however, the existing outlook is currently poor. Since the building is used as an hotel and not as flats, it is considered this proposal would not cause any significant harm to the existing outlook.
The application is also proposing to erect an external staircase between the rear outrigger of the application site and Glencoe. The staircase would not be visible from Empress Drive and it is considered that the staircase would have a neutral affect on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
The proposed bin store would be built off the existing walls which are white painted render. The bin store would be rendered and painted; however, it has not been indicated whether it is to match the existing walls. If the walls of the bin store were to be painted white to match the existing walls the impact of the bin store on the visual amenities of Empress Drive would be minimal. It is considered this matter can be controlled by condition. The application is proposing to use reconstituted slate for
the roof of the bin store. Ideally, the roof of the bin store should have natural slate so to match in the existing slates of the building. The applicant believes it is not uncommon for reconstituted slate to be acceptable in a Conservation Area. They do not feel that natural slate is necessary in this location and the proposal remains for reconstituted slate. However, if the Committee feels that only a slate roof will be acceptable, it has been indicated that they would probably accept a condition requiring the bin store to be roofed in natural slate.
The application is also proposing to replace the existing windows, which are timber sliding sash windows, with uPVC windows; however, the plans do not indicate whether the windows are to be sliding sash or casement windows. The replacement windows should be sliding sash windows in order for them to comply with Planning Circular 1/98. It is recommended that a condition be attached requiring the replacement windows to replicate the method of opening as the existing windows.
The building is currently vacant and this proposal would bring a redundant building back into use, which would help to prevent any further decay of the building. The building currently impacts adversely on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and therefore this proposal would help to enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
The car parking standards set out in Appendix 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 require 1 space for 1 bedroom apartments and 2 spaces for larger units. This application is proposing six one bed apartments and two three bed apartments which would equate to a requirement for 12 car spaces; however the development would not provide any parking on site.
The Isle of Man Strategic Plan states within paragraph A.7.1 "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 sound in condition will outweigh the drawback of any shortfall in parking provision.
The rear of the property could be accessed by vehicles but this would require the clearance of part of the rear outrigger; however, the rear outrigger provides a principal elevation onto Empress Drive, which contributes to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. If the outrigger were to be partially demolished it would impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. It is considered the demolition of the outrigger would be unacceptable and would impact the visual amenities of the street scene. The site is within walking distance of the town centre and a bus route. The conversion of the building is particularly important in this case due to its location within a Conservation Area. It is considered the need to bring the building back into use outweighs the lack of parking for this scheme.
In respect of the concerns about parking within the locality, it should be noted that the previous planning permission (00/993) for 10 units was appealed by the Department of Transport, who were concerned about lack of parking for the scheme and its impact on parking situation within the area. However, following consideration of the Inspector's report, the Minister indicated that: "(a) whilst consultation between the relevant Authorities may prove to be of some help, it is unlikely to solve the basic problem of finding parking spaces for users of these buildings; and (b) it would be unreasonable, and, indeed, unfair to refuse this application just a few months after approving a very similar proposal in respect of a nearby property.
Furthermore, it was indicated "In these circumstances, and having regard to the need to find a use for buildings of this sort and also to the current demand for accommodation for small households, the Minister does not accept the recommendation that the appeal should be allowed. Accordingly, he has directed that the Planning Committee's decision to grant approval should be confirmed."
Empress Drive is heavily parked and this proposal could further exacerbate that situation. The parking situation needs to be addressed in a wider context through a traffic management scheme by the appropriate Authorities, which can not be done through this application and therefore it would be unreasonable to refuse the application due to the on lack of parking and its impact on the surrounding area.
Housing Policy 5 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan states that "In granting planning permission on land zoned for residential development or in predominantly residential areas the Department will normally require that 25% of provision should be made of affordable housing. This policy will apply to development of 8 dwellings or more."
In accordance with the policy, the proposal would generate a requirement to provide 2 units. The applicant has indicated that they are willing to provide 2 units to be sold in accordance with the House Purchase Assistance Scheme and they are willing to enter into a legal agreement so as to ensure that 2 of the units are set-aside for affordable housing in line with the Housing Policy 5 of the Strategic Plan.
The occupier of Sea View Hotels has raised concerns about inconvenience to their guests, effects of dust and grime, noise from the construction works and the financial impact of the proposed works on their property. These are temporary issues which might occur during the construction phase and some of the issues are not material to the consideration of this application. Furthermore, the objectors are on the opposite side of the road where the impact from noise, dust and grime would be minimal. It is considered these issues do not outweigh any of the other material considerations to warrant a refusal.
It is recommended that Planning Committee delegate to officers the granting of planning permission subject to the satisfactory completion of a Section 13 Agreement and subject to conditions in the attached schedule.
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.
The occupiers of Sea View Hotels opposite to the application site and have commented on planning matters. It is therefore recommended that they should be afforded party status.
Estates and Housing Directorate and the Environmental/Public Health Unit are part of the Department of Local Government and the Environment and should not be afforded separate party status in this instance.
In summary, it is considered that the following parties, who submitted comments, accord with the requirements of Planning Circular 1/06 and are therefore, afforded interested party status:
Accordingly the following parties are not afforded interested party status:
Estates and Housing Directorate of the Department of Local Government and the Environment. Environmental/Public Health Unit of the Department of Local Government and the Environment
Recommended Decision: Defer Legal Agreement
Date of Recommendation: 07.01.2009
C 1. The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
C 2. This permission relates to the conversion of a former hotel into nine apartments as shown in drawing numbers 100, PL101, PL/102 (part superseded by planning officer), PL/103 Rev 1, PL/104 (part superseded by planning officer) and photographs date stamped 6th August 2008, drawing number BR/105 date stamped 11th November 2008.
C 3. The replacement windows to be installed must be sliding sash. C 4. The rendered walls of the bin store must have a white finish. C 5. No residential unit hereby permitted shall be occupied until the bin storage facilities have been provided in accordance with the approved plans, and those facilities shall thereafter be kept available at all times for their designated purpose.
C 6. No facing material for the bricking up of openings shall be used other than materials which match those used on the existing building.
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the Town and Country (Development Procedure) 2005
Decision Made : Digns. 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Committee Meeting Date : 16/1/09
Signed :
Reporting Officer
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown