COMMITTEE:
DEPARTMENT:
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL
DATE: 2 JUNE 2008
TOURISM AND REGENERATION DIRECTORATE
BREACH OF PLANNING CONTROL - THE ERECTION OF TIMBER GATES AND LION
STATUES ON EXISTING GATE POSTS AT 70 SOUTH PARK DRIVE, BLACKPOOL,
FY3 9PY (MARTON WARD) EC.07/8460
Introduction
Complaints have been received in relation to the erection of timber gates and lion
statues on each of the existing gate posts to the front of 70 South Park Drive. The
detached property is situated on the eastern side of South Park Drive, approximately
110 metres to the north of the junction with Preston Old Road and 60 metres to the
south of the junction with East and West Park Drives. The property is within an
established residential area and is situated in an area of No Specific Allocation within the
Blackpool Local Plan 2001-2016, adopted 9 June 2006.
The property is also within the Stanley Park Conservation Area. There is an Article 4
Direction (Town and Country Planning (General Development) Orders 1977 to 1981) in
force in relation to properties in the Conservation Area which removes permitted
development rights for extensions to, alterations to and the painting of properties in the
Conservation Area and importantly in this case with regard to the erection or
construction of gates, fences, walls or other means of enclosure and the maintenance
improvement or other alteration of any gates, fences, walls or other means of enclosure.
Investigation
A site inspection was carried out on 26 November 2007 which revealed the erection of
the gates and the lion statues. On 22 January 2008 the owner was advised by letter that
planning permission is required not only because of the Article 4 Direction but that they
also require planning permission due to their height being above the 1 metre allowed by
the General Permitted Development Order, had it applied in this instance. A site visit on
17 March 2008 revealed that the gates had been removed.
Subsequently a site visit was carried out on 19 April 2008 which revealed that the gates
had been re-erected. A further letter was sent to the owner on 12 May 2008 requesting
that they be removed by 19 May 2008. A response has subsequently been received
from the owner's agent claiming that the gates are perfectly satisfactory structures and
that in light of the appeal decision regarding the boundary fencing, that no action need
be taken regarding their removal. The overall height of the gates and lion statues
exceeds one metre in height.
No planning application has been submitted for the works.
Committee will have visited the site on 2 June 2008.
Assessment
The area is residential in character with detached and semi-detached properties' front
gardens enclosed by walls in the region of one metre in height. The height , materials
and design of the gates and lion statues represents an alien and discordant feature in
the streetscene of the Conservation Area and are significantly detrimental to visual
amenity due to their massing, scale and choice of materials. In particular the gates bear
no relationship to the gate posts to which they are attached .They project above the
coping on the gateposts and have a functional rather than decorative appearance by
being solid rectangular timber gates.This harm is emphasised by the fact that the
property is on a busy thoroughfare.
PPG 15 - Planning and the Historic Environment - emphasises that Local Planning
Authorities have a duty to preserve and enhance Conservation Areas. Policy ER3 of the
Regional Spatial Strategy places a similar requirement on the Local Planning Authorities
in the North West Region. Policy 21 of the Joint Lancashire Structure Plan requires the
manmade heritage of the county to be conserved and where appropriate enhanced.
The development is considered to be contrary to this guidance and these policies.
Policy LQ1 states that all new development will be expected to be of a high standard of
design and to make a positive contribution to the quality of its surrounding environment.
Policy LQ10 states that in relation to new development that the development must
preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, will need
to respect the scale, massing, proportions, materials and detailing of similar building
forms within the Conservation Area and that trees and other landscape features
contributing to the character and appearance of the area must be retained.
Policy LQ14 states the Council will accept proposals that are well-designed and are in
keeping with the scale and the character of the original building and neighbouring
properties. In considering extensions and alterations, the policy aims to ensure such
developments are acceptable and the materials and design are in character and
complementary to the existing building and adjoining properties.
Policy BH3 states that development will not be permitted which adversely affects the
amenity of those occupying residential and visitor accommodation by the scale and
design, and its effect on privacy and outlook.
The timber gates and lion statues are within 2 metres of the highway and are over 1
metre in height and therefore require planning permission.
The gates, because of their size, height, materials, solid appearance and prominent
location, appear as an alien and incongruous feature in the street-scene and are
detrimental to visual amenity. The lion statues appear incongruous because of their
height and prominence. It is considered that they detract from the character of the
property and the Conservation Area in general. The development is therefore contrary
to Policies LQ1, LQ10, LQ14 and BH3 of the Blackpool Local Plan 2001-2016.
Breach Alleged
Without planning permission, the erection of timber gates and lion statues on the existing
gate posts.
Steps to be Taken
Remove the timber gates and lion statues in their entirety, leaving the land in a clean
and tidy condition.
Reasons for Expediency
The construction of the gates and lion statues are detrimental to the residential
amenities of the adjacent residents and the visual amenities of the Stanley Park
Conservation Area, contrary to Policies LQ1, LQ10, LQ14 and BH3 of the adopted
Blackpool Local Plan 2001-2016, due to their location size, height , materials and
appearance
Human Rights Act
Under Article eight and Article one of the first protocol to the Convention on Human
Rights, a person is entitled to the right to respect for private and family life, and the
peaceful enjoyment of his / her property. However, these rights are qualified in that they
must be set against the general interest and the protection of the rights and freedoms of
others.
The retention of the development and the effect on the wider area, outweighs the
owner's right to the peaceful enjoyment of their property.
Recommendation
The Committee will be requested to authorise the Head of Development Control to issue
an appropriate enforcement notice to require the above steps to be taken, with the
period for compliance to be one month.
COMMITTEE:
DEPARTMENT:
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL
DATE: 2 JUNE 2008
TOURISM AND REGENERATION DIRECTORATE
BREACH OF PLANNING CONTROL - THE MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE OF THE
PROPERTY FROM A HOTEL TO A HOUSE IN MULTIPLE OCCUPATION ('HMO') AT
64 PALATINE ROAD (TALBOT WARD) EC. 08 / 8149
Introduction
Concerns have been raised in relation to the change of use of the property at 64
Palatine Road, formerly known as the "Windsor House Hotel." The allegations are that
the property has changed from a hotel providing accommodation for short stay
holidaying guests, into use as a HMO.
The property is situated on the north side of Palatine Road and is located within the
Resort Neighbourhood as defined in the Blackpool Local Plan 2001-2016, adopted 9
June 2006.
Investigation
A pre-arranged internal inspection of the property was carried out on 22 April 2008 which
revealed that the property comprised lounge, dining room, kitchen, 9 non self-contained
bedsits, communal shower rooms and communal W.Cs. At time of the inspection, 4 of
the 9 rooms were occupied by 4 tenants.
On 2 May 2008, colleagues in Housing Licensing confirmed there were 8 tenants at the
property and the property was therefore subject to the provisions of the Housing Act
2004 and required a HMO Licence.
This was further supported by various
correspondence received from local hoteliers. Due to the number of defects at the
property, colleagues in Housing Enforcement issued a schedule of fire safety measures
to be implemented at the property.
On 14 May 2008, the Council received a telephone call from the company which owns
the property advising that they would not be applying for a HMO Licence and would
ensure the property was emptied by 16 May 2008 so as not to continue to contravene
housing and planning law. Subsequently, the Chairman of the company which owns 64
Palatine Road sent an email on 15 May 2008, confirming that the existing tenants had
agreed to vacate the property by 16 May 2008 and it was to be reverted back to use as a
hotel.
An unannounced internal inspection of the property was carried out on 19 May 2008. 4
tenants were spoken to who confirmed their occupation of 3 of the 9 rooms. 2 rooms
showed signs of recent occupation (unmade beds, ashtrays, clothing), 1 room was
vacant and no access was possible to the 3 remaining rooms, although a tenant advised
that at least one of these rooms was occupied but the occupant(s) was out. There was
no caretaker / manager on site at the time of the inspection and there appeared to be no
control over the tenants.
All the tenants who were spoken to confirmed they had signed Assured Shorthold
Tenancy agreements; they paid £100 deposit and rent of £100 every fortnight. Most
paid cash but one had a Direct Debit scheme set up. A "To Let" board was displayed
outside the property, and a telephone call to the owners on 19 May 2008 enquiring about
rooms revealed that there was a £100 deposit/admin fee, £216 per calendar month
charge for rent and a bond of £216.
None of the required fire safety works had been carried out and colleagues in Housing
Enforcement are now pursuing further action in respect of this.
Assessment
The change of use from a hotel to a HMO constitutes a material change of use requiring
planning permission.
Such residential use is considered inappropriate in a Resort
Neighbourhood, a view reflected by Policies RR8, RR9, HN5 and BH3 of the adopted
Blackpool Local Plan 2001-2016.
Blackpool is a very well known seaside resort whose prosperity depends, to a large
extent, upon a successful tourist and holiday industry. This residential use at 64 Palatine
Road has resulted in a loss of holiday accommodation and its acceptance could set a
potentially damaging precedent, leading to the loss of other holiday accommodation in
this Resort Neighbourhood.
Whilst it could be argued that the change of use of one property would not, of itself, have
a significant impact on the holiday character of the wider area, the safeguarding of that
holiday character is dependent upon consistent application of relevant policies. The
retention of the current use of 64 Palatine Road would make it difficult for the Council to
resist future applications for changes from holiday accommodation to permanent
accommodation. Such incremental change would inevitably lead to a change of
character in the area which would fundamentally conflict with Policies RR8 and RR9 of
the adopted Local Plan and run counter to advice in the Good Practice Guide on
Planning for Tourism (published May 2006) which counsels that the conversion of hotel
stock to alternative uses can weaken a seaside town’s ability to retain its status as a
tourism destination.
The layout of the bedrooms within the property does not accord with the Council's
Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 10 (SPG10), which provides detailed advice on
the conversion of holiday accommodation to permanent residential use, and to the
locational criteria for allowing such changes. The advice in SPG10 is that proposals for
the change of use or development of holiday accommodation for permanent residential
use will not be permitted in areas where holiday accommodation remains the dominant
use. The accommodation at 64 Palatine Road is additionally contrary to Policy HN5 of
the Local Plan, which requires any new residential accommodation to be self contained
and comply with the Council's floorspace and amenity standards.
Breach Alleged
Without planning permission, the material change of use of the property from a hotel
providing short stay holiday accommodation, to a house in multiple occupation.
Steps to be Taken
Cease using the property as a house in multiple occupation.
Reasons for Expediency
The nature and extent of the use of this property is out of keeping with the existing
character of this Resort Neighbourhood. The retention of the use in this location would
undermine that holiday character and be contrary to Policies RR8, RR9 and BH3 of the
adopted Local Plan. Furthermore, the layout of the units within the property does not
accord with the Council's Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 10 (SPG 10). The
accommodation fails to provide fully self-contained accommodation and that also meets
the Council's floorspace and amenity standards, contrary to Policy HN5 of the adopted
Local Plan.
Human Rights Act
Under Article Eight and Article One of the First Protocol to the Convention on Human
Rights, a person is entitled to the right to respect for private and family life, and the
peaceful enjoyment of their property. However, these rights are qualified in that they
must be set against the general interest and the protection of the rights and freedoms of
others.
The retention of the use would undermine and be detrimental to the character and fabric
of the holiday area and to the amenities of both visitors and adjacent residents, and is
therefore considered to outweigh the owner's use of the property and the occupier's
rights under Article Eight.
Recommendation
The Committee will be requested to authorise the Head of Development Control to issue
an appropriate enforcement notice to require the above steps to be taken; period of
compliance to be three months.