Planning – Application Comments

Consultation Date: Fri 30 Jun 2023

Consultation Date: Fri 30 Jun 2023

Consultation Date: Fri 30 Jun 2023

Consultation Date: Fri 30 Jun 2023

Consultation Date: Fri 30 Jun 2023

Comment Date: Mon 11 Dec 2023

PLYMOUTH CITY COUNCIL CONSULTEE COMMENTS FOR A PLANNING APPLICATION.

APPLICATION SUMMARY
PLANNING APPLICATION: 23/00959/FUL
ADDRESS: 97-99 Mutley Plain Plymouth PL4 6JJ
DESCRIPTION: Change of use and rear extension to form 6no. flats (Class C3) above commercial space, inc. basement car parking, cycle parking, and bin storage, plus additional car parking in rear yard

CASE OFFICER: Sam Lewis (Planning Officer)
Development Management, PCC Strategic Planning & Infrastructure, Floor 2 Ballard House PL1 3BJ

CONSULTEE: Gary Lester (Transport Officer)
PCC Strategic Planning & Infrastructure, Transport Planning Team, Floor 2 Ballard House PL1 3BJ

Date: 1st December 2023

ADENDUM COMMENTS:
Following the previous reply from the Local Highway Authority (LHA) dated 21st July 2023 (with those comments largely reiterated), the proposal at the application property 99 Mutley Plain, has been amended. Amended to now include within the red - line of the application one additional car parking space shown located next door, in the gated rear yard of the neighbouring property at number 97, although it is noted that aside from the additional car parking space, the remainder of property itself (97) falls outside of this application.

However, even with taking a parking space from next door (where allowing for the gate to open and close there would only seem to be enough space to park 2 cars), there would still remain a considerable shortfall in the (off-street) car parking provision with only three spaces being provided, compared to the Councils Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) indicative parking level of in this case up to eight parking spaces overall, to serve the 6 in number flats that comprise of, 2 x 2-bed flats, plus 4 x 1-bed flats.

Furthermore, it would seem that taking a car parking space in the gated rear yard of the neighbouring number 97 has apparently been proposed without consideration or explanation for the loss of parking serving number 97. Where it would seem, from a notice that has been displayed on the rear gate and side wall of number 97, that the adjacent rear yard and parking area is reserved and in the control of the ground floor business use there. With the attached notices stating: - 'Brunel Mortgages ' private parking - CCTV in operation'.

Moreover, it also appears that an earlier planning consent for the neighbouring number 97 only, conditionally reserved the three car parking spaces in the rear yard for use by the occupiers of the student accommodation at the property. Under applications - 03/01124/FUL, described as, 'Change of use and conversion of lower ground floor and rear part of ground floor to student accommodation, in association with the approved use of upper floors as student accommodation - Including as permitted under application 03/00369'.

Although planning permission was granted (18 July 2018) under application 18/00602/FUL for alterations to both properties jointly at 97-99 Mutley Plain, it does not seem to have been implemented. That proposal (referred to in the PS) being described as the 'Extension, alteration and conversion of existing shop, office and residential accommodation. To shop, office, and 8 apartments, with ancillary basement accommodation'. The eight apartments comprised of two x 2-bdroomed, plus six x 1 bedroom. That application which was granted on balance by the Local Planning Authority, provided a total of four car parking spaces, in two lots of tandem spaces, with those two banks of parking spaces intended to serve the two 2-bedroom flats. Incidentally, although planning permission was granted on balance by the LPA, the LHA had been unable to justify and support the proposal in policy terms, due to what was considered a significant shortfall in (off-street) car parking provision, and concerns over the resultant overspill car parking occurring in the local streets.

The Further details provided in the revised Planning Statement (PS) dated 9th November 2023 seems to largely rely on the accessible location of the application site in apparently contending that off-street parking is unnecessary, suggesting in paragraphs: '

5.1 that, 'providing car parking can prevent the effective use of land and stifle sustainable development'.

5.3 that, 'this is a sustainable location and parking provision should not be actively encouraged'.

However, that view expressed in the PS is not in accordance with the advice contained within the Councils SPD, for a balanced assessment of each application based on its own merits. That along with consideration of there being sufficient parking restrictions in the surrounding local streets, that there is always likely to be a level of demand for necessary car use that would need to be met (maybe using electric vehicles) perhaps for wider journeys or employment, which is reflected in the SPD car parking standards. In this case, as considered in the LHA previous reply, the parking restrictions in the local streets are just part-time for a short period of the day which is insufficient to prevent over-spill car parking occurring (for which almost full-time parking restricts would be needed). Where a failure to achieve the right car parking balance is likely to give rise to indiscriminate over-spill car parking in the local streets.

Whilst it is acknowledged that the PS goes on to quite properly talk about balancing parking provision with accessibility and car ownership levels. It also apparently contends that the inclusion of full cycle provision can be used as a reason to reduce car parking provision. However, again referring to the SPD, adequate cycle provision is in any case a necessary policy expectation in order to encourage sustainable cycle use. But in policy terms cycle parking cannot justifiably be considered as an equivalent substitute for inadequate car parking provision.

SUMMARY:
This is a 'windfall' site, and as such there would be a reasonable expected that any development proposal would largely be able to meet the reasonable balanced planning policy expectations, including in respect of providing adequate off-street parking provision.

In this case and on balance it is considered the amended application has failed to properly consider the impacts and harm of the car parking shortfall, including the annexing and the proposed loss of the use of a parking space at adjacent property number 97. That on the face of it would seem to be simply robbing Peter to pay Paul. Furthermore, in practice it is unclear just how this could be properly managed and secured.

Therefore, on balance the LHA remains unable to support the amended proposal that would be likely to further exacerbate the already high demand for parking in the local streets, giving rise to concerns over highway safety and public amenity. Reiterating the recommendation that the application is refused for having insufficient (off-street) car parking provision (however, should planning permission be granted then it is recommended that appropriate planning conditions are included to secure the EV charging points, cycle and car parking): -
Inadequate Provision of Parking:
No adequate provision is proposed to be made for the parking of cars of persons residing at or visiting the development. Vehicles used by such persons would therefore have to stand on the public highway giving rise to conditions likely to cause: -
(a) Damage to amenity.
(b) Prejudice to public safety and convenience.
(c) Interference with the free flow of traffic on the highway.
Which is contrary to Policy DEV29 of the Plymouth & Southwest Devon Joint Local Plan 2014-2034. And contrary to The National Planning Policy Framework paragraphs 107 & 130

INFORMATIVE: RESIDENT PARKING PERMIT SCHEME
() The applicant should be made aware that the property lies within a resident permit parking scheme. Therefore, in accordance with current Council policy should the development be realized then the property would be excluded from obtaining permits and purchasing visitor tickets for use within the scheme.


Gary Lester
Transport Planning Officer
Officer authorised to sign on behalf of the Service
Director for Strategic Planning & Infrastructure

Comment Date: Mon 24 Jul 2023

PLYMOUTH CITY COUNCIL CONSULTEE COMMENTS FOR PLANNING APPLICATION

APPLICATION SUMMARY
PLANNING APPLICATION: 23/00959/FUL
ADDRESS: 99 Mutley Plain, Plymouth, PL4 6JJ
DESCRIPTION: Change of use and rear extension to form 6 in number flats (Class C3) above commercial space, including basement car parking, cycle parking, and bin storage.

CASE OFFICER: Sam Lewis (Planning Officer)
Development Management, PCC Strategic Planning & Infrastructure, Floor 2 Ballard House PL1 3BJ

CONSULTEE: Gary Lester (Transport Officer)
PCC Strategic Planning & Infrastructure, Transport Planning Team, Floor 2 Ballard House PL1 3BJ

Date: 21st July 2023


COMMENTS:
The Local Highway Authority (LHA) is unable to support the proposed Change of Use of existing accommodation along with first & second floor rear extension to form six in number flats (Class C3) above the retained commercial space, at 99 Mutley Plain.

The proposal would extend and intensify the use of the property to create 6 in number flats comprising of, 2 x 2-bed flats, + 4 x 1-bed flats. In the basement provision would be made for: - one in number off-street car parking space with an EV charging point, plus twelve in number cycle parking spaces with cycle EV charging points, along with space to store twelve refuse bins. Proposed facilities that would be expected to be secured by way of associated planning conditions.

From the planning history the application property has been previously been subject of similar proposals to extend and provide flats, albeit in conjunction with the adjacent neighbouring number 97. Together the two addresses 97-99 Mutley Plain were granted planning consent in 2018 under (application number 18/00602/FUL, for 'Extension, alteration, and conversion of existing shop, office, and residential accommodation. To form a shop, office, and 8 apartments with ancillary basement accommodation.

More recently there was also a pre-application enquiry for the two addresses combined, 97-99 Mutley Plain, considered as one site, under application 22/01317/MOR. For the retention of existing commercial space, and 7-bed HMO, plus extension to form 4 in number additional flats, and associated ancillary space. To which the LPA considered that whilst there were no in-principle objections to converting the property into flats subject to certain requirements, one of the main concerns was the lack of on-site parking proposed. Concluding that, for a future scheme to be considered acceptable, the applicant would need to address the parking situation and provide some off-street parking. Whilst Officers are prepared to accept less than the SPD recommends, the applicant would need to go some way to address the shortfall ' particularly given the levels of parking already present in the area.

The LPA reply to the pre-application enquiry further considered that - Whilst there is a Controlled Parking Zone nearby, it is only in operation between 8am and 10am to deter commuter parking ' so would not likely stop those living in the flats from parking nearby. It is noted that the roads around the site, particularly Connaught Avenue, are already heavily parked. The Highway Authority consider, therefore, that the site could not be considered as car free (due to the part 'time parking restrictions).

The supporting Planning Statement refers to similar previous applications at both the subject property, and also a nearby property at 79 - 81 Mutley Plain, all being subject of similar proposals and planning consents, despite the LHA being unable to support the proposals due to significant parking shortfalls. Although the LPA reply to the associated pre-application enquiry has apparently not been taken into account.

It should not simply be assumed that because the application property is in a sustainable location with good transport links that occupiers would not have need of a car, a premise that contradicts the reality of the heavily parked local streets. In particular when many public services appear to be generally in decline, and where for some journeys (including employment) car use may be the only practical option.

Referring to paragraphs 8.6, 8.7 & Table 30 Indicative Parking Provision, of the Councils Supplementary Planning Document (SPD), which supports policy DEV29.3 ' Parking provision: residential. Paragraph 8.6 '' Car parking standards for new residential development are important to avoid adverse impacts of inadequate parking such as excessive on-street parking or illegal parking and to protect the amenity of surrounding residential areas and ensure safety of the highway network'.

The Councils SPD provides guidance on the considerations for Car Free development in paragraphs 8.12 & 8.13 ' To be considered on a case-by case basis, with considerations including: - Location - Accessibility Existing residents parking schemes - Public Transport ' Cycle Links - Potential for overspill parking and the potential impact on the surrounding areas - Measures or features of the development designed to enable and ensure that car-free living can be achieved throughout the design life of the development.

This high density scheme would create an off-street car parking short fall of 7 car parking spaces when considered against Table 30 of the Councils SPD indicative parking provision that suggests I car parking space per one-bedroom dwelling, and 2 car parking spaces for each two-bedroom dwelling (although a lesser number would be acceptable). The resultant significant off-street parking shortfall would inevitably be expected to give rise to overspill car parking within the already heavily parked local streets. Where the existing short part-time operating hours of the permit parking scheme that applies for just two hours a day, between the hours of 08:00 ' 10:00 hrs, Monday to Saturday, would fail to prevent overspill car parking occurring from the proposed development. To the detriment of local amenity and existing occupiers parking demand.

It should be noted that in accordance with Council Policy should the development be realised then the application property would be excluded from the entitlement of on-street parking permits within the parking zone.


SUMMARY:
On balance the LHA is unable to support the proposed development that would extend the property and further intensify the use, but without being able to provide adequate off-street car parking to mitigate the associated expected increase in parking demand. Further exacerbating the already high demand for parking in the locals streets, giving rise to concerns over highway safety and public amenity.

Therefore the LHA recommends that the application is refused for having insufficient off-street car parking provision: -


Inadequate Provision of Parking:
No adequate provision is proposed to be made for the parking of cars of persons residing at or visiting the development. Vehicles used by such persons would therefore have to stand on the public highway giving rise to conditions likely to cause:-
(a) Damage to amenity;
(b) Prejudice.to public safety and convenience;
(c) Interference with the free flow of traffic on the highway
which is contrary to Policy DEV29 of the Plymouth & Southwest Devon Joint Local Plan 2014-2034. And contrary to The National Planning Policy Framework paragraphs 105,124 & 127

INFORMATIVE: RESIDENT PARKING PERMIT SCHEME
() The applicant should be made aware that the property lies within a resident parking permit scheme. Therefore in accordance with current Council policy the development will be excluded from obtaining permits and purchasing visitor tickets for use within the scheme.


Gary Lester
Transport Planning Officer
Officer authorised to sign on behalf of the Service
Director for Strategic Planning & Infrastructure

Comment Date: Fri 21 Jul 2023

LLFA consultation response 23.00959.FUL.pdf

Comment Date: Thu 20 Jul 2023

946068 Consultation Response 2.pdf

Comment Date: Wed 19 Jul 2023

The Natural Infrastructure Planning Team will not be providing comments for this application. Please use the new Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan Supplementary Planning Document, Adopted July 2020 for guidance.

If this application involves additional bedrooms, please complete an HRA02. If the application may have a direct impact to the European Marine Site (a full assessment HRA01), please consult the team through an HRA consultation.


Kind Regards,