Policy for “Public service garages” to be applied less rigidly

A

2009 planning application entitled “Change of use from garage to a public use garage including sign” was turned down by the Environment and Planning Commission after it held that the garage in question is located in a designated Residential Priority Area (in other words, a villa area).

For this reason, the commission underlined that the proposed change of use would generate a deleterious impact on the residential amenity of the area by virtue of noise, disturbance, additional traffic generation and lower air quality. The commission further highlighted that the proposal constitutes bad neighbour development, thus conflicting with Structure Plan policy BEN 1, which basically seeks to protect the amenity of existing uses.

As a reaction, applicant appealed the decision before the Environment and Planning Tribunal, insisting inter alia that “the proposed change of use will only be used as storage of unused car hire vehicles and therefore does not increase virtue of noise disturbance and additional traffic impact.’’

On its part, the authority reiterated that planning regulations invoke a general presumption against public service garages in all types of designated residential areas, including not least residential Priority Areas. In support of his argument, the case officer made specific reference to policy 6.15 of the Policy and Design Guidance 2007, which provides that garages for the parking of public service vehicles may only be permitted on condition that the area surrounding the site is predominantly and  legally developed for this type of use. In addition, the officer remarked that the garage in question can accommodate a significant number of vehicles, so much so that the proposal would have equally been refused had it not been located in a residential priority area.

In its assessment, the tribunal acknowledged that public service garages are primarily considered in residential areas (typically characterised by terraced houses) and technically excluded from being located in residential priority areas (typically, villa areas). Notwithstanding, the tribunal conceded that in the given circumstances, the policy regulating public service garages need not be applied in a rigid manner since the garage in question lies opposite an area comprising terrace house development, where such use may be freely permitted.

Against this background, the tribunal ordered MEPA to issue the permit on the express condition that “the garage shall be used as a public service garage for the parking of cars for hire.”