Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
16/00839/B
Page 1 of 11
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 16/00839/B Applicant : Peel Properties Limited Proposal : Creation of a five storey building to provide retail space and six residential apartments Site Address : Showroom East Quay Peel Isle Of Man IM5 1AR
Case Officer : Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken : 18.08.2016 Site Visit : 18.08.2016 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE PROPOSAL AND THE NUMBER OF OBJECTIONS INCLUDING ONE FROM THE LOCAL AUTHORITY
THE SITE 1.1 The site is a piece of land which lies at the junction of St. Peter's Lane and the East Quay together with another piece of land to the rear which is included in the application, and two further pieces of land which abut this on each side (north and south). The main site on the corner accommodates a two storey commercial garage which is an unattractive building with a top heavy first floor overhanding the ground floor frontage. The building is finished in a mix of render and timber cladding.
1.2 The side wall to St. Peter's Lane is partly sandstone leading to Keown's Lane which separates the application site from the workshop owned by the applicant but not included in the application site. This building is 5.8m deep and 16m long with a space between the front of the site and the back of the main site which is 5m deep. The workshop is an unattractive two and three storey building in a poor state of repair. Alongside the main garage building, fronting onto the Quay is a car sales outlet which operates from a portal framed open sided building. To the rear of the workshop is an open play area whose level is higher than that of the workshop.
1.3 To the South of the site, across St. Peter's Lane is a four storey building with additional accommodation in the roof space. This building, The Net Loft apartments, accommodates a car park and café on the ground floor and apartments on the floors above, some of which have a balcony cut out from one of the bedrooms out over St. Peter's Lane. The rooms facing out onto St. Peter's Lane are bedrooms, bathrooms and a kitchen. The building is an obviously modern addition to the Quay with a painted, rendered finish, vertical proportions to the building and its glazing with larger balconies and patio doors on the frontage to East Quay.
1.4 When the New Loft Apartments and Mariner's Wharf apartments were approved, Department of Transport Highways Division required that the development provide one off-street parking space for each one/two bedroom apartment and two off-street parking spaces for each apartment with three bedrooms or more. The submitted plans proposed a total of 30 car parking spaces provided (1 allocated to 7 St. Peter's Lane). The apartments would create a demand for 23 car parking spaces using the Department of Transport Highways Division's requirement. As such there would be 6 "surplus" car parking spaces which are shown on the plans as being allocated to various 2 bedroom apartments.
==== PAGE 2 ====
16/00839/B
Page 2 of 11
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the demolition of the garage and its replacement with a five storey building which accommodates a café/retail floorspace at ground and restaurant at first floor level and apartments above (six in total all two bedroomed). The building will have a lift accessible only to the restaurant and a further lift to the apartments as well as stairs in both cases.
2.2 The building takes a similar architectural approach as the new Net Loft Apartments across St. Peter's Lane and have a similar height. That was approved under 08/00186/B which was a modification of an earlier application and provided 30 parking spaces for 20 apartments formed by the redevelopment of a coal yard and incorporation of a refurbished Viking Longhouse building.
2.3 The scheme also includes the provision of eight parking spaces one of which (number 8) may be a little tight getting into all in the area to the rear: none is provided within the building as is the case with the adjacent apartments where two parking spaces are accessed directly from St. Peter's Lane and the majority from an access directly off East Quay, that side being wider in terms of frontage onto East Quay.
2.4 The southern elevation facing the side of the Net Loft Apartments has no windows which look directly across St. Peter's Lane but two projecting bays in which there are windows which look down the lane towards the quay.
PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies with Peel's Conservation Area and within an area designated as Mixed Use. As such, there is a requirement for development to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Area as set out in Environment Policy 35 of the Strategic Plan and Planning Policy Statement 1/01 - Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man, as well as to adhere to the general standards of development as set out in general Policy 3 of the Strategic Plan as follows:
"Development which is in accordance with the land use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:
b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scaled, form, design and landscaping of building and the space around them; c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape of townscape; g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or 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; l) it is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding; m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of the buildings and the spaces around them."
Parking standards are also set out in the Strategic Plan as follows:
Appendix 7: "New built residential development should be provided with two parking spaces per dwelling, at least one of which should be within the curtilage of the dwelling and behind the front of the dwelling, although the amount and location of parking will vary in respect of development such as terracing, apartment, and sheltered housing. In the case of town centre and previously developed sites, the Department will consider reducing this requirement having regard to: a) the location of the housing relative to public transport, employment and public amenities, b) the size of the dwelling, c) any restriction on the nature of the occupancy (such as sheltered housing) and d) the impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area (paragraph A.7.1). This goes
==== PAGE 3 ====
16/00839/B
Page 3 of 11
on to recommend that one space is provided for a one bedroomed apartment, 2 spaces for two or more bedrooms but that "These standards may be relaxed where development: a) would secure the re-use of a Registered Building or a building of architectural or historic interest; or b) would result in the preservation of a sensitive streetscape, or c) is otherwise of benefit to the character of a Conservation Area d) is within a reasonable distance of an existing or proposed bus route and it can be demonstrated a reduced level of parking will not result in unacceptable on street parking in the locality" (A.7.6).
3.2 Also of relevance is a document produced in 2006 entitled Peel East Quay Design Guide. This produces general and specific guidance for the East Quay area, intended to be supplementary planning guidance to assist development assessments in the town and specifically intended to be a "catalyst for change and improvement in both public and private areas". It has been overtaken by events including more recent planning approvals which do not quite accord with the recommendation (see later). The report refers to the application site in its First Impressions section, regarding "the car showroom also offers possibility for change. St Peter's Lane links back to the church square. There is a grassed public space between Castle Street and Keown's Lane, which could link Castle Street to the Quay." It also refers to the rear lane: "The Water Authority yard at the start of Keown's Lane could relocate. The land has a very run down appearance but with investment could provide a new focus for East Quay. Many of the houses behind are starting to develop south facing gardens.
3.3 It refers to there being a general impression of there not being enough car parking spaces around East Quay and a selection of shops and restaurants would be good for the area. It recommends slowing traffic down in the vicinity of the site to facilitate tourist-related development. It deals with massing and size of buildings, stating the "One of the characteristics of the Peel Quayside is the range of uses, building heights and massing existing alongside one another. In general, the rooflines of the Quayside either run parallel to the Quay or at 90 degrees to it. There forms may be used in new buildings to help integrate them into the "grain" of the Quayside. The East Quay is predominantly 2/3 storeys with exception of the 5 storey Viking Longhouse. It is important that any development respects the scale of the existing buildings. The heights can vary considerably as they already do but should not exceed 2/3 storeys. It would be wrong to have all building one height (as Douglas Promenade) although some tall buildings are necessary to keep the existing scale and respond to the vertical emphasis along the Quay." It does not dismiss the idea of modern design solutions and encourages the use of industrial detailing and loading bay style openings.
3.4 The document discusses parking and recommends that each residential unit should have one parking space and two spaces for units which have 3 or more bedrooms and that car parking should not be visible from the Quay. Commercial developments should also provide enough parking for itself. It describes Keown's Lane as having "the appearance of an ill kept back yard". The report recommends the replacement of the garage and comments that the corner site redevelopment could be higher than that further north and also suggests that whilst the coal yard site was restricted to being lower than the Viking Longhouse (it ended up being taller when built) and suggests that this end of the application site could rise to a similar height although one storey less would be more successful. It also recommends developing backwards bridging over Keown's Lane, thus resulting in a possible reduction in the height of the main building. It strongly recommends taking into account views from the park to Peel Hill and Peel Castle.
PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The site has been the subjection of only one previous application. 94/00544/A sought approval in principle for the replacement of the garage with a four storey building and was refused for reasons that it was not considered that the site was large enough to accommodate the parking generated by a four storey apartment building and that following the designation of the Conservation Area, it was considered that a four storey building here would be out of keeping with the scale of the buildings adjacent and generally along the East Quay and would be skyline
==== PAGE 4 ====
16/00839/B
Page 4 of 11
development when viewed from West Quay. This was prior to the development of Mariner's Wharf and the Net Loft Apartments.
REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Peel Town Commissioners seek a deferral: they do not believe that sufficient information has been provided in respect of car parking in terms of the existing capacity of the car parks mentioned and the fact that one of them is privately owned, with 2 hour restrictions on others. They believe that a Department study on the area recommended that development not be higher than 2/3 storeys although it would be wrong to have all the buildings the same height (10.08.16). They continue on 21.10.16 to express the view that if the building were lower this would reduce the need for car parking to what can be provided on site. They do not believe that the surrounding car parking areas are suitable for accommodating any overspill due to 2 hour restrictions recently introduced and proposed to be introduced in the area and the applicant has not undertaken any survey to demonstrate available parking in these areas. They reiterate these concerns on 26.07.17, adding that the applicant owns land in the vicinity and suggest that they should indicate where this is and whether it could be used in conjunction with this scheme.
5.2 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services initially requested a deferral, noting that the proposals comprise the construction of a building that will have retail premises to the ground and first floor and 6 apartments on the three top floors. There will be 8 car parking spaces provided within land to the rear of the building. They consider that justification for a reduction in the car parking standard of 12 spaces is acceptable. There are several similar developments in the area and there is parking available within walking distance of the site to serve the proposed retail space. They note that proposal includes car parking in a rear lane. Highway Services are currently investigating the status of the land and request that the application is deferred until it can be established which parts of the lane are public highway in order that the status of the proposed car parking can be established. (08.08.16) However, they later resolved not to object to the application, explaining that whilst there is uncertainty over the ownership of the land and extent of the highway but this is a civil matter which may be resolved outwith the planning process and seek only a condition is imposed to require that the parking is required prior to the occupation of the apartments (21.04.17).
5.3 The owner of 6, Lake Lane feels that the site should remain as commercial or industrial not for housing (08.08.16)
5.4 Peel Heritage Trust query whether the apartments will cover Keown's Lane which is a public highway and they also express concern at the number of parking spaces which will be available to those in the scheme as parking is generally in short supply in this area (16.08.16).
5.5 The owners of 27, Castle Street feel that allowing the design and height of the existing building alongside to dominate the Quay is wrong with only a few tall warehouse style building interspersed with smaller buildings, following the older building line, as viewed from the Quay itself and further away from Peel Hill. They query whether there is enough car parking and wonder how all this extra traffic will exist the site as the surrounding streets are all narrow and some one way. They are concerned at the impact of excavation during construction and recall damage done whilst the IRIS scheme was being implemented some years ago. They ask whether the new building will cause overlooking, loss of light and view of adjacent properties and the public garden and whether the right of way along Keown's Lane will be adversely affected (14.08.16).
5.6 They will write in again on 07.10.16 referring again to the building height and referring to other decisions where the redevelopment of what is now the Net Loft was restricted to be on higher than the Viking Longhouse and refers to the Design Guide restrictions on the height of new buildings and car parking. They are still not clear if the right of way will be impeded.
5.7 The owner of 7, St Peter's Lane is opposed to the development on the grounds that the design is too tall and seems to protrude into the lane and considers that no consideration has been given to
==== PAGE 5 ====
16/00839/B
Page 5 of 11
the outlook and amenities of those in the adjacent Net Loft building. She is concerned that there is insufficient car parking which will lead to an effect on the adjacent roads where parking is already a serious problem and is concerned about the narrowness of St. Peter's Lane. She is of the view that the town is already in need of medical facilities, infrastructure, education, sewage and parking and until these issues are resolved, she does not consider that further dwellings should be permitted (24.08.16).
5.8 The same letter of objection dated 19th August, 2016 has been received from the following parties:
1,6,8,9, The Net Loft 1,3,4,5, Viking Longhouse
This letter expresses concern that whilst the regeneration of the town is welcome they consider the current application out of character as the site is still a working garage and is not a brownfield site, the height is double that of the existing building and will have an adverse impact on the light and views of those in the Net Loft, St Peter's Lane and Castle Street amongst others. They believe that in previous discussions with the Department, it was considered that further developments along the quay should be lower and narrower than the Net Loft and be no higher than the existing skyline.
They believe that the protrusions into St. Peter's Lane are unnecessary or that it is certainly unclear as to what they are for and they could be dangerous at first floor level for high sided vehicles. It could be that the development will protrude more into St Peter's Lane than does the existing building and as the lane is already narrow the opportunity should be taken to widen not narrow it.
They consider that the area is already suffering from a lack of car parking and the land alongside is narrow and difficult for vehicles to manoeuvre in and around and they note that the bollard in front of the main entrance to the Boatyard has been knocked down a number of times by vehicle trying to turn in to Keown's Lane and they have concerns about the safety of pedestrians. They are concerned at the potential adverse impact from noise and nuisance from the bar/café and there is information lacking about servicing, pavement café facilities and bin storage. They believe that the first floor restaurant will look directly into the lounges and bedrooms of the Net Loft flats. Finally they consider that copying the façade of the Net Loft is not an appropriate approach and the building should have its own character.
5.9 The owner of 8, Chapel Court in Christian Street has no direct interest in the site but states that he is concerned at the height of the development and the lack of parking which is not in accordance with the area plan (19.08.16).
5.10 The owners of The Boatyard Restaurant has no objection to the development which they considers will improve the area but advise that care should be taken in respect of protrusion into St. Peter's Lane and suggest that any windows facing the Net Loft apartments should be fitted with obscured glazing and the wall facing St. Peter's Lane should be painted white at all times. They are concerned that the building should not be allowed to be as high as The Net Loft development and are concerned about the size of the retail area, particularly in respect of the possibility of one of the areas becoming a disco or club which would adversely affect the surrounding area in respect of noise nuisance. They consider that if planning approval is granted it should be subject to enforceable conditions which would restrict the hours of operation of any alcohol sales and background music and is concerned that the development should not be a replication of the Boatyard development as some new design would better suit the area (20.08.16). They add that they have no objection on the grounds of competition and would welcome the redevelopment of what they describe as an eyesore, but believe that the building should have been a storey lower than the Net Loft, by policy. They consider that the development as proposed would cause major disruption to the occupants of The Net Loft apartments (24.07.17).
==== PAGE 6 ====
16/00839/B
Page 6 of 11
5.11 The letter referred to in 5.8 above is also submitted by the owners of 2, The net Loft but with an additional letter adding supplementary points regarding the impact of any protrusion on their existing balcony and any high sided vehicles using the lane. They wonder what the gallows brackets and bays are for. They do not think that the parking available for the retail use associated with the development is sufficient and they are concerned at the potential impact of the retail/bar/café development and the disturbance to nearby residents and notes that there is no information about extraction of fumes and noise/smell, operating hours, the sale of alcohol, pavement café use, bin storage and service access. They consider the approach to be fragmented and would be better incorporating the workshop at the rear and the design and scale of the development to be inappropriate (21.08.16). They reiterate these concerns on 14.07.17), including reference to a need for the application to mitigate the noise and dust during construction and the noise resulting from the operation of the restaurant.
5.12 Manx National Heritage consider that the site may have archaeological interest and a geophysical survey should be undertaken for engineering and archaeological purposes. They also note that the rear part of the structure in sandstone forms the surviving elements of a warehouse of the kind characteristically found at the Peel Quayside although lower than the nearby Viking Longhouse and is at least 150 years old. These elements should be surveyed to preserve a record of the structure and are disappointed that there are no references in the new building to characteristic local materials (06.10.16).
5.13 The owner of 8, The Net Loft submits a supplementary submission, suggesting that the Net Loft and Viking Longhouse already form the high point on the Quay and further development should taper off and down either side. Whilst the applicant may seek to remove the bay windows alongside St. Peter's Lane, they know not with what and comment that to have included windows here in the first instance indicates that they are needed or at least desirable (11.10.16).
5.14 The owners of 2, Kelly's Court in St. Peter's Lane are concerned about the height of the building which will make St. Peter's Lane feel very enclosed and they feel that the rear of the building is not attractive or in keeping with the surrounding buildings (14.07.17).
5.15 The owner of 3, The Net Loft welcomes the redevelopment of a very run down site but considers that any development has to be sympathetic to its neighbours and that what is proposed is too high and will affect light coming into the Net Loft apartment bedroom windows. She would recommend that the building is stepped down towards the rear. She considers that the car parks referred to are almost always full and the retail outlets in the town will struggle to survive if there is no parking to support it (24.07.17).
5.16 The owners of 6, The Net Loft submit further comments on 18.07.17, reiterating their earlier objection in the strongest terms, suggesting that viability is not a material planning consideration and reiterating that so tall a building will have an adverse impact on the already narrow lane and the living conditions of those in the Net Loft apartments. Comparisons with Douglas are inappropriate and any development here needs to grade down from the existing tall buildings to be sympathetic to the streetscene of East Quay. The information provided by the applicant on car parking demonstrates a lack of understanding about the amount of spaces which are available and the existing traffic and parking problems which exist in the town.
5.17 The owner of 4, The Net Loft objects most strongly to the development on the basis that new development should decrease in height along the Quay and believes that the development proposed would be higher than the adjacent construction. He considers that the parking issue has not been adequately researched nor does it reflect existing parking issues in the area (14.07.17).
ASSESSMENT 6.1 The issues in this case are whether a building this tall is acceptable, whether the architectural treatment is appropriate particularly taking into consideration that the site lies within a Conservation Area, whether the development would have any adverse impact on the living conditions of those in
==== PAGE 7 ====
16/00839/B
Page 7 of 11
adjacent property or any public amenity and finally, whether the provisions for parking and access are acceptable in highway safety terms.
Visual impact on the area in general 6.2 The East Quay Study is an interesting document which has some weight in illustrating Department thinking at that time and if possible, the scheme should accord with these principles. Whilst the document refers to buildings generally being 2/3 storeys high, it also suggests that more taller buildings along the Quay will emphasise the characteristic verticality of the buildings in the area and that in the vicinity of the site, buildings could be as tall as that which resulted from the redevelopment of the coal yard, albeit adding that a building a storey lower would be more successfully integrated into the streetscene. As such, it would appear that a building as tall as this could be acceptable and the Study does not completely rule out such a concept.
6.3 The Study also draws out the importance of public views from the recreation area immediately to the rear of the outbuilding behind Keown's Lane. When visiting the site, it is clear that the outlook from it is dominated by the existing garage and outbuildings such that a view of Peel Hill is not possible. The erection of a taller building will remove slightly more of this view - a small fraction of what is already blocked, such that it is not considered that this is sufficient to object to the application.
6.4 The proposal does not encroach upon any part of Keown's Lane which will be retained for access to the associated parking spaces.
Impact on the living conditions of those in adjacent property 6.5 The proposed building will be very close to the side of the building which replaced the coal yard, which accommodates apartments at the upper level. As such, there will be an impact on the living conditions - certainly the outlook from those in these units by virtue of the proximity of a much taller building within 5.5m of its side wall. Even if the building were reduced by a storey, this would still affect the outlook and light to those in the lower few storeys of the Net Loft and if this relationship is considered acceptable, it is difficult to argue that this same impact is not acceptable to the units higher up the building. This façade of the Net Loft contains windows which are the sole windows in bedrooms, bathrooms and a kitchen and there is also a lounge window at the front which is one of the two windows serving this room, the other window looking out onto the Quay and being much larger. Within the adjacent development there are units which are close to each other but not as close as what is proposed here, although there are to be no windows on the St. Peter's Lane elevation looking towards the Net Loft apartments.
6.6 Anything other than a single storey building or flat roofed two storey structure similar to the existing, built on this site will have an adverse impact on the natural light to some of the Net Loft Apartments, the lower apartments being the most readily affected. Sunlight will not be affected as the side of The Net Loft building which faces the application site, faces due north. However, the nature of Peel, with narrow streets and a very mixed array of building heights lead to relationships between buildings which in other more modern situations would be considered unacceptable. For example, the former Corlett's warehouse is now apartments on the western end of Lake Lane and the cottages to the north and the general narrowness of the city's streets and lanes which lead to dwellings being far closer to each other than would now generally be encouraged. The fact that the Net Loft Apartments have balconies off the bedrooms reaching out across a public highway, affording little privacy to the users of these balconies, is on the same lines of the character of the area. Similarly outlook is much more limited within the historic, older part of Peel due to its narrow street layout and variety of building heights. It is generally encouraged to protect the principal outlook from the main living rooms of a dwelling or apartment rather than ancillary living space such as bedrooms, kitchens and bathrooms (see the inspector's report for 16/00529/B, paragraph 16) as well as considering whether the windows affected are the only windows serving principal rooms and clearly The Net Loft Apartments has been designed with its greatest areas of glazing to take advantage of the harbour view and light from there.
==== PAGE 8 ====
16/00839/B
Page 8 of 11
6.7 As such, whilst there will clearly be a direct impact on the outlook from the windows in the northern elevation of The Net Loft Apartments, it is not considered for the reasons set out above, that this is sufficient to warrant refusal of the application.
Impact on highway safety and parking 6.8 The Strategic Plan requires there to be twelve parking spaces to serve the apartments and further space to accommodate service vehicles. This may be relaxed where it can be demonstrated that a lower provision of parking would not result in unacceptable on street car parking. The proposal involves one space per apartment with two spaces for the commercial element of the scheme (for staff). The applicant has provided a parking survey which identifies the following parking provision although no information is available from them to indicate the capacity of these car parks:
Fenella Beach 43 spaces which are less than 300mm (this should read 300m) and 2-3 minute walk. IRIS pumping station, the promenade - approximately 25 spaces of which 14 are publicly available, less than 10m from the site. Town Centre parking - approximately 60 spaces with a further 42 under disc zone controls (0811hrs to 1800 hrs) with additional spaces in the Market Place - all 150m from the site Creg Malin, promenade - 27 spaces, 500m from the site (5-6 minute walk) Marine Parade, promenade approximately 40 spaces, a 6-7 minute walk Derby Road - 41 spaces 500mm (again should be m) from the application site Transport Museum, Mill Road - approximately 30 spaces St. German's Place, Patrick St/Glenfaba Road - 14 spaces, 500m from the site House of Manannan has been excluded as it is intended for visitors to the museum but is available for use to others and in addition, spaces are available on East Quay, West Quay and the promenade.
6.9 However, as Peel Town Commissioners point out, the study notes the number of spaces, not their availability and this was an issue in another application, 16/00729/B for 40, Douglas Street in Peel (see Paragraphs 28-31 although it is clear that the inspector considers it possible within that site to accommodate the requisite parking). They also suggest that the House of Manannan and Transport Museum are privately owned sites and should not be included and the Commissioners have recently introduced a 2 hour parking restriction in the Market Place car park to ensure that sufficient capacity exists to serve the town, particularly on Saturdays and are considering a similar scheme on East Quay where insufficient turnover of on street parking occurs and illegal parking frequently occurs on the prohibited areas adjoining the Quayside.
6.10 This view contrasts with that of the Department of Infrastructure who are content with the proposal from a parking perspective.
6.11 Peel is a town which historically has had no on-site parking for the majority of houses, churches, public houses, restaurants and shops. Over time public and private car parks have been introduced, some to the detriment of the character of the town centre but also, cars have now appeared along most of its streets, East and West Quay and the promenade with a similar impact on the character of the area. It is clearly a difficult balancing act to accommodate the vehicles which visit and stay in the town in a way which accommodated both visitors and residents whilst maintaining the character of the area and at the same time make new, badly needed development worth undertaking. There is an argument that people who own their own vehicle may choose not to buy a property which does not have its own on-site parking and where the on-street and public parking in the area is subject to restrictions which make longer term parking unlawful and this is a matter for the prospective purchaser and those responsible for the various car parking areas. Insufficient parking provision can, however result in tensions between local residents and parking spaces not being available for customers and local business being adversely affected as a result.
==== PAGE 9 ====
16/00839/B
Page 9 of 11
6.12 On balance, due to the lack of objection from the highway authority, it is considered that the parking provision in this case is not so inadequate as for the development to be refused for this reason.
Conclusion 6.13 The site is clearly in need of re-development with the current building on the front part of the site being unsightly and inappropriate for such a prominent part of the Conservation Area and the principle of the redevelopment of this building is very welcome, retaining investment in the town centre rather than seeing all of the new building focused at the outskirts in new residential estates. The provision of additional housing here in the heart of the town will also bring a greater likelihood of the occupants shopping in town and using its range of services and amenities, perhaps than those who live further towards the outer edges of the town. East Quay has clearly been the subject of re-development in relatively recent years with new, tall and more modern buildings being introduced, following the lead of the Viking Longhouse which has always been much taller than most of the buildings along here, except for the former Corlett's warehouse at the southern end of the Quay. The Quay is clearly a mix of tall and shorter buildings and the design guide seems to allow for some continuation of this. Having such a tall building with such an amount of accommodation has led to an impact on the adjacent apartments and on car parking which would not have been so considerable had the proposed building been less tall with less accommodation and it could be successfully argued that this should have been the approach in this case. However, as the design guide appears to allow a taller building in this case and as the Strategic Plan contains some flexibility in the application of the parking standards and particularly noting the lack of objection from the Highway Services Division in this case, it is considered, on balance that what is proposed is acceptable. The application 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 the highway authority and Manx National Heritage 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 require 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 owner of The Boatyard restaurant (address as Greendale, The Downs, Braddan) and the Net Loft restaurant 7 St. Peter's Lane 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 9, The Net Loft Apartments 2, Kelly's Court, St. Peter's Lane which are immediately opposite or close to 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 the Government Circular 0046/13:
The owner of 6, Lake Lane The owners of 1, 3, 4 and 5 Viking Longhouse
==== PAGE 10 ====
16/00839/B Page 10 of 11
27 Castle Street 8 Chapel Court, Christian Street Which are not close enough to the site to experience a direct impact from the proposal and
Peel Heritage Trust who are not 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: 31.07.2017
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. None of the flats nor any of the restaurant space hereby approved may be occupied or operational until such times as the parking facilities shown in drawing 15/2474/08 have been provided and are available for users of the proposed development. Thereafter the spaces must remain available to users of the development hereby approved.
Reason: To ensure that there is sufficient parking available to users of the development.
C 3. Prior to the commencement of any works on site, a geophysical survey must be undertaken for engineering and archaeological purposes to establish whether there are any archaeological features of interest within the site and this must be approved by the Department. If any are found then a method statement for dealing with them must be submitted to and approved by the Department and the development implemented in accordance with these approved details. Also, the rear part of the structure in sandstone forms the surviving elements of a warehouse of the kind characteristically found at the Peel Quayside although lower than the nearby Viking Longhouse and is at least 150 years old. These elements must be surveyed to preserve a record of the structure and the survey findings provided to the Department prior to the occupation of the new development.
Reason: To record any features of archaeological interest on the site.
This approval relates to the following drawings:
15/02474/02, 15/2474/07B and 15/2474/08 all received on 20th July, 2016 15/2474/50 received on 16th September, 2016 and 15/2474/05B and 15/2474/06B received on 7th June, 2017.
==== PAGE 11 ====
16/00839/B Page 11 of 11
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: 07.08.2017
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