Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
16/01172/B
Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 16/01172/B Applicant : The Foraging Vintners Proposal : Window / door alterations, installation of a flue and eight roof mounted wind turbines and creation of an outside seating area Site Address : The Coal Shed Breakwater Road Port Erin Isle Of Man IM9 6JA
Case Officer : Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO THE HISTORY OF THE SITE
THE SITE 1.1 The site is part of a building which sits on the southern side of Breakwater Road opposite the Raglan Pier and above the fishermen's stores which are level with Breakwater Road: the site sits above this. The site also includes an area in front of the building. The site is part of a longer building, with additional parts of the building to the west and east and with access to the front of the site from the higher part of Breakwater Road as it splits to become one way, to the west. This access turns back on itself towards the application building. To the west of the buildings there is a row of boat parking spaces, the majority of which were occupied by trailers and/or boats at the time of the site visit. The building to the west of the application part of the building had a sign in the window indicating its use as a water activities centre but with little obvious evidence of current use although the user confirms in their objection (see later) that the building is indeed in use.
1.2 The building is a plain but characterful, industrial unit with vertically proportioned windows facing Breakwater Road and a pair of curved wooden doors leading out onto the shared access lane. The building is built of stone with a slate roof.
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Planning approval was granted under PA 16/00527/C for the change of use of the building to manufacture wine along with retail sales and distribution of the product along with a tasting facility. For information, the manufacture process involves handling and maceration of raw products, combining and mixing, bottling, storage, fermenting, labelling, packaging selling, permitting tasting of the product and transporting it for onward distribution.
2.2 The current application proposes changes to the building - the replacement of an existing window with a pedestrian door and the installation of up to 8 wind turbines on the roof which will project 1200mm above the ridge. These have three sets of turbines on each and each emit noise levels up to 40 dB.
2.3 Also proposed is the creation of an outdoor seating area across the access way, fenced in with structural glazed panels on three sides and with bench style tables and seating, accommodating up to around 18 people.
==== PAGE 2 ====
16/01172/B
Page 2 of 5
PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South adopted in 2013 as "Harbour Area" and is within the extent of the proposed Conservation Area prescribed in that document. No progress has been made towards the designation of this Conservation Area to date.
3.2 The unit is clearly not currently used for purposes associated with the harbour and the harbour is an area frequented by those visiting the village and spending leisure time here and indeed Port Erin harbour is referred to as a leisure port in the Area Plan for the South (paragraph 7.2.3) and the current attraction to visitors of the harbour area with specific reference to sailing, fishing and diving (paragraph 6.28.4).
3.3 The Strategic Plan also contains the following advice about harbours:
"11.7 Harbours 11.7.1 Harbours are an established and important part of the Island's environment, and the majority are used for both commercial and recreational purposes."
"Transport Policy 13: Development in or around harbours should neither compromise the ability of the harbour to accommodate other commercial or recreational users in a viable manner, nor be detrimental to the character of those harbours of historic interest."
3.4 Given that the use has been approved, it is also appropriate to consider the general standards of development as set out in General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan and the requirement to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the area as set out in Environment Policy 35, even though the Conservation Area is not yet adopted.
a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief; c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; g) does not affect adversely the character of the locality; h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; i) does not have an adverse effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan; m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."
PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 Planning approval was granted for the installation of a replacement window under PA 08/1585/B and there is a current application for the installation of an advertisement on the main doors (PA 16/01171/D).
REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services note: The proposal is to use an existing warehouse building on Peel Breakwater as a winery/bar with an outside seating area. The buildings in this area are no longer used for industrial uses and there is no highway between the proposed winery and the proposed outdoor seating although there is a lightly used access road that service vehicles can use in one direction only.
There is ample parking within the vicinity on the adjacent highway and there is a footway link from the application site to Shore Road with street lighting.
Highway Services does not oppose this application (07.11.16).
==== PAGE 3 ====
16/01172/B
Page 3 of 5
5.2 Port Erin Commissioners indicate that they support the application subject to the turbines being coloured to match the surrounding cliff face (09.11.16).
5.3 The occupant of 93, Ballamaddrell considers that the signage and seating area would be a welcome development in the area but is concerned that the proposed turbines may adversely affect swallows and users of the harbour area in respect of noise and would also have an adverse visual impact on the area (08.11.16).
5.4 The operator of 7th Wave sailing school in one of the buildings alongside the application site, explain that their business involves taking boats to and from their building and is concerned that the proposal will prevent access being available 24 hours a day and enough space to be able to turn a tractor and trailer there. They do not agree that a previous observation by the planning officer in an earlier application that their building "has a sign in the window indicating its use as a water activities centre but with little obvious evidence of use" and state that they are busy there every day but keep the doors shut for security when there is nobody there. She is concerned that the proposed seating will cause problems with access and parking on what is a single track road and note that on a sunny summer day, parking spaces in the area are fully occupied. Despite double yellow lines, vehicles still park in prohibited areas and provide a photograph of a van parked outside the application building. The lease contains a requirement to keep the lane clear of obstruction. The coast guard station should also have its access available at all times. She is concerned that if this is approved, it may establish a pathway for others to follow. She questions whether the turbines are acceptable on a Government-owned building? Will they (the turbines) generate any noise? Will this establish a precedent for other wind turbines, particularly those proposed at Ballaman (03.11.16).
5.5 The owners of 20, Fairways Close in Port Erin are concerned about the turbines as regular users of the harbour area. They are concerned that the turbines will adversely affect a building of interest and importance and the flickering of the turbines would be particularly noticeable and intrusive. They are not aware of how the turbines would be fastened to the roof and expect that the Government would not allow such a disfigurement. They are unclear as to the noise impact and also the impact on seabirds and consider that the energy resulting from the turbines is not worth the impact (25.10.16).
ASSESSMENT 6.1 The issues in this case are whether the proposed change of a window to a door and the installation of the turbines will have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the building and the surrounding area, taking into account that General Policy 2 advocates best practice in the reduction of energy consumption. It is also relevant to consider whether the appearance of the outdoor seating area has any adverse visual impact and whether there is any impact from this and the crossing of the lane between the area and the building, on the operation of adjacent businesses.
6.2 The issues which have arisen from the concerns raised locally are whether the turbines will have an acceptable environmental and visual impact and whether the proposed seating area will generate problems for other uses of the building and access.
6.3 The turbines will be visible although generally from a lower vantage point: from immediately in front of the building on the public highway the turbines will probably be visible on the skyline from certain viewpoints although from further away the turbines will be visible with a backdrop of the brown coloured bracken heathland. To try to colour the turbines so that the blend with the backdrop will not be possible from every vantage point. An industrial colour such as silver or grey may work best given the context of the site and avoidance of advertising on it (the examples given have the same of the product on it which is eye-catching). Whilst there may be a noise impact, given the lack of residential accommodation nearby and the proximity of the harbour and highway, it is not considered that this will be of a sufficient magnitude to justify the refusal of the application.
==== PAGE 4 ====
16/01172/B
Page 4 of 5
6.4 The introduction of a seating area for those visiting the facility will increase the number of people able to be at the premises at any one time but there is no indication from the local authority or the highway authority that this will result in an unacceptable number of vehicles in the area. The harbour area is one where the public should be encouraged and where a variety of functions should be available. What is proposed, with the opportunity for sitting out is one such attraction and it is likely that without formal seating, those visiting the premises on a warm summer's day may well wish to go outside to enjoy their sampling of the produce and what is proposed will properly cater for this.
6.5 The access needs to be kept clear regardless of the proposed use of the main building or the area opposite and whilst a greater number of people crossing the access is likely to occur from the proposed outside seating area, there is in place a set of steps which clearly is to facilitate pedestrian movement from the lower highway up to the building, indicating that pedestrian movement along the lane is in existence and acceptable.
6.6 The proposal is considered to be acceptable and is recommended for approval.
PARTY STATUS 7.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested; (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material, in this case Department of Infrastructure Highway Services and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
In addition to those above, article 6(3) of the Order requires the Department to decide which persons (if any) who have made representations with respect to the application, should be treated as having sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application.
In this instance, it is recommended that the following persons have sufficient interest and should be awarded the status of an Interested Person in accordance with Government Circular 0046/13:
The owners of the 7th Wave operation alongside the site.
In this instance, it is recommended that the following persons do not have sufficient interest to be awarded the status of an Interested person in accordance with Government Circular 0046/13:
The owners of 93, Ballamaddrell and 20, Fairways Close who are sufficiently distant from the site not to be directly affected by the proposal.
With effect from 1 June 2015, the Transfer of Planning & Building Control Functions Order 2015 amends the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 to give effect to the meaning of the word 'Department' to be the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture unless otherwise directed by that Order.
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 21.11.2016
==== PAGE 5 ====
16/01172/B
Page 5 of 5
Conditions and Notes for Approval: C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.
Reason: To comply with article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 2. No advertising may be displayed on the turbine.
Reason: In the interests of the visual impact of the turbines.
This approval relates to drawing NB/FV/1602 and the illustration and details of the D75 DOMUS turbine all received on 14th October, 2016.
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.
Decision Made : Permitted
Committee Meeting Date: 28.11.2016
Signed : S CORLETT Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See below
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal