Plans to turn a structurally compromised Front Street building into a private parking lot have been shot down by the Development Applications Board.

The proposal suggested retaining the façade of 117 Front Street and creating 31 new parking spaces behind it, which would be accessed from Reid Street.

While the developers said there was a need for additional parking spaces in the city, a report by a technical officer said the proposed change could worsen traffic in the area.

A technical officer wrote: “While the proposal aims to address parking shortages, it would likely increase traffic congestion due to the creation of 31 new car park spaces.

“Additionally, the applicant has not demonstrated any robust and identified need for the parking lot or shown that site access would not negatively impact traffic flow or pedestrian safety.”

The report writer also argued that the proposal “represents unsustainable development” and contradicted public policy objectives.

“Demolishing the existing structure instead of reusing it to limit unnecessary waste and reduce the carbon footprint does not align with the Government's commitment to encourage sustainable development best practices,” the technical officer wrote.

“The Department of Planning maintains its concerns regarding the lack of evidence demonstrating identified need for new parking spaces, conflicting with planning policies aimed at promoting sustainable transportation.

“The requested evidence was never received. The proposal is not supported under planning policy and warrants the board’s refusal of this application.”

The proposal was subsequently refused by the DAB earlier this month.

The board also turned down a proposal to convert Triton House, a former Bermuda Land Development Company headquarters in Southside, into staff residences.

The proposed design would have turned the building’s ten offices into eight single bedrooms, each of which could house up to two people, along with two shared dining rooms.

A technical officer wrote that the proposed facilities met the base standards for group housing, but said the proposed change of use from commercial to residential did not comply with planning policies.

“Residential uses are permitted within mixed use zones at the board’s discretion provided that commercial uses are included on the ground floor, unless there is no reasonable form of commercial development that can be provided,” the officer wrote.

“In this case, given that the existing use is commercial the application does not comply with policy and therefore cannot be supported.

“Additionally, the proposal would not support the community centre as it does not maintain nor encourage the development of retail, restaurant or service uses on the ground floor contrary to policy.”