Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
19/00959/B Page 1 of 22
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 19/00959/B Applicant : Homefield Care Limited Proposal : Demolition of existing buildings and erection of 73 bedroom elderly persons care home with associated parking, retaining walls and landscaping (in association with PA 19/00960/CON) Site Address : Homefield 88 Woodbourne Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 3AS
Planning Officer: Mr Nick Salt Photo Taken : 11.09.2019 Site Visit : 11.09.2019 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 31.10.2019 __
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. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved a detailed landscaping plan shall be submitted to the Department and approved in writing. This must include details of how existing and proposed planting will be undertaken taking into account not only proposed new building but also engineering and excavation required for the laying of services within the site.
Reason: To obtain additional detail about the proposed hard and soft landscaping.
C 3. The landscaping plan approved in accordance with condition 2 on this approval will be implemented in the first planting season following the completion of the development. Any trees planted as part of this landscaping plan which, die, are removed, or, in the opinion of the Department, become seriously damaged or diseased within a period of 5 years from their planting, shall be replaced as soon as is reasonably practicable or, at latest, in the next planting season with others of similar size, species and number as originally approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Department.
==== PAGE 2 ====
19/00959/B Page 2 of 22
Reason: To ensure the landscaping is implemented in accordance with the approved details, in the interests of the amenities of the site in accordance with General Policy 2 and Recreation Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
C 4. No retained tree shall be cut down, uprooted, destroyed, pruned, cut or damaged in any manner during the development phase and thereafter within 5 years from the date of occupation of the building for its permitted use, other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars. In the event that retained trees become damaged or otherwise defective during the construction phase due to events outside of the applicant's control the Department shall be notified as soon as reasonably practicable and remedial action agreed and implemented.
Reason: To ensure that trees marked for retention are not removed, in the interests maintaining the amenities of the area and to ensure the visual impact of the development is mitigated in accordance with General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
C 5. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved a detailed Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. Relevant details may include but are not limited to construction methods, construction traffic management, demolition methods, finished levels, the use of existing hard surfaces as ground protection, the removal of existing hard surfaces within Root Protection Areas (RPAs), the formation of new hard surfaces within RPAs, excavations within RPAs, and tree protection barrier fencing. The AMS will also include details of tree protection monitoring and site supervision by a suitably qualified tree specialist which shall make provision for the regular reporting of continued compliance or any departure there from to the Department. All subsequent works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Arboricultural Method Statement.
Reason: To provide additional detail about the protection measures, construction methods and arboricultural supervision to be used during construction, in the interests of the existing trees on the site and its wider amenity in accordance with General Policy 2 and Recreation Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
C 6. The proposed development shall be completed in full adherence to the arboricultural details submitted to and approved in writing by the Department under condition 5 of this approval. No variations to the details of the documents and plans shall be undertaken unless the proposed variations have been agreed in writing by the Department.
Reason: To ensure that the agreed protection measures, construction methods and arboricultural supervision are implemented during the construction phase in the interest of the trees on the site, in accordance with General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
C 7. No development shall commence until a bat survey has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The bat survey shall identify impacts on bat species together with mitigation, where appropriate, including a timetable for its implementation. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To provide adequate safeguards for the bats in accordance with General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016
C 8. Prior to occupation of the development the widened access onto Murrays Road should be surfaced in bound and stable material over its entire width over a distance of at least 5.0m back from the back of footway.
Reason: In order to prevent the migration of loose material onto the highway, in accordance with General Policy 2 (h&i).
==== PAGE 3 ====
19/00959/B Page 3 of 22
C 9. Prior to occupation of the development the redundant access onto Murrays Road should be reinstated to footway with a raised kerb to match the footway on either side of it.
Reason: To ensure pedestrian safety.
C 10. Prior to occupation of the internal car parking, access lanes and turning around spaces shall be constructed as indicated on the approved plans and shall be retained as such for the duration of occupation of the development.
Reason: To minimise on-street car parking that could be detrimental to the operation of the highway in accordance with General Policy 2 (h&i).
C 11. Prior to the commencement of any construction work including site clearance a Construction Management Plan (CMP) shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Department . The approved CMP shall be adhered to for the duration of the construction period.
Reason: To ensure highway safety and to minimise any negative impact upon the highway network in accordance with General Policy 2 (h&i).
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This decision relates to the following plans and drawings, date stamped as received on 30th August 2019:
o 1799 01 P-01 Location Plan o 1799 01 P-02 Existing Site Plan o 1799 01 P-05 Rev C Proposed Front Elevations o 1799 01 P-06 Rev B Proposed Rear Elevations o 1799 01 P-04 Rev B Proposed Floor Plans o LS-01 Site Plan
Additional plans and documents date stamped received on 19th September 2019:
o BS 5837:2012 Tree Protection Plan, Arboricultural Method Statement and Site Monitoring Schedule o TPA-1919 Tree Protection A - Demolition o TPB-4919 Tree Protection B - Construction o PL416/01 Tree Survey Location Plan o PL416/02 Tree Survey Constraints Plan o PL416-01 Outline Planting Plan
Amended/additional plans and documents date stamped received on 17th October 2019:
o 1799 01 P-03 Rev E Proposed Site Plan o 1799 01 P-07 Rev B Site Section and Street Elevations o 11207-001-02 Transport Assessment
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject
==== PAGE 4 ====
19/00959/B Page 4 of 22
matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):
o Elder Healthcare (IOM) Limited, Fuchsia Lane, Governor's Hill, Douglas; and o 33 Ballaquark, Douglas
As it is not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy, as they do not refer to the relevant issues in accordance with paragraph 2C of the Policy and as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy.
It is recommended that the following should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4) as they do not clearly identify the land which is owned or occupied which is considered to be impacted on by the proposed development in accordance with paragraph 2A of the Policy, are not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy and as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy.
o Manx National Heritage o Manx Utilities Authority __
Officer’s Report
THE APPLICATION IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE FOR DETERMINATION AS IT IS AN APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT WHICH WOULD CREATE ADDITIONAL NEW FLOOR SPACE OF 500SQM OR MORE, AND IS NOT WITHIN AN AREA ALLOCATED FOR THAT PURPOSE.
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site is the wider curtilage of the Homefield site at 88 Woodbourne Road, Douglas. This roughly square area of land is approximately 1.06 acres in area and sits at the corner of Woodbourne Road and Murrays Road, with access from both roads onto the site. Paragraph 3.5 of the Woodbourne Road Conservation Area summarises the character of Woodbourne Road more generally:
"This main arterial route into the town is flanked by buildings which show the rich variety of styles adopted by our Victorian forbearers: there is a predominance of Italianate detailing and design seen both in the form of detached villas, as well as terraces with their highly-modelled, repetitive elevations. Decorative stucco, ornate ironwork and contrasting red and yellow Ruabon brickwork, all make important and pleasing contributions to the streetscape as it is progressively presented."
1.2 The main Homefield building on the site follows this style, with Italianate design featuring large chimney stacks, ornate window arches and external features throughout the rendered 2.5 storey building. Whilst these features are retained, along with the slate roof, there have been minor additions and alterations including a single storey annex to the main building over the years and it is need of refurbishment. Whilst in terms of size and presence, the building is equal with many of the mansion houses along Woodbourne Road, its poor upkeep and the nature of the rest of the Homefield site detracts from it significantly.
==== PAGE 5 ====
19/00959/B Page 5 of 22
1.3 There are 6 other buildings on the site all of which are currently vacant. There is a large garage building to which is attached a small store building, a single storey doctors surgery covering roughly the same area as the main building, another store building to the south west boundary, a large timber prefabricated building, as well as single storey offices directly adjacent to the main building in the northern corner of the site. None of these additional buildings are of notable architectural significance of value, with more modern functional designs and in some cases poor condition.
1.4 The site is bounded by a high stone wall on all sides, within which the topography varies. There is a drop of approximately 6 metres in ground height from the north west to the south east of the site, including a steeply banked area in the middle of the site between Homefield and the former doctors surgery. There are mature trees at the boundaries, as well as some smaller trees and planting within the middle of the application site. The central parking area is concreted, with hard surfacing between the upper level accessing Homefield and the lower level to the car park at the former surgery.
1.5 The site is flanked to the south west by Africa House and its associated gardens, the main building being 8 metres from the application site boundary. At the Woodbourne Road side there are a number of large detached villas similar in size to Homefield at the opposite side of the street. Opposite the site on Murrays Road there is a residential area and a health centre, and to the south east a new nursing home site (Salisbury Street Care Home constructed in 2016).
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 This application seeks full planning approval for the erection of a 73 bedroom, 3130 sq m (measured internally) elderly persons care home over a three storey 'L' shaped building with a partial basement level. The building would sit, at its closest points, 4 metres from both Murrays Road to the northeast and Africa House to the southwest.
2.2 In order to facilitate the proposed development, the existing buildings on the site are proposed for demolition. As the site is within a conservation area, this demolition work requires Registered Building Consent which is the subject of 19/00960/CON. The demolition on the site will therefore be assessed separately in that application.
2.3 Access to the site would remain via the existing access from Woodbourne Road into to the northeast side of the site and Car Park 1 containing 15 parking spaces (including 4 disabled spaces), a row of 4 to the right of the entrance and 11 to the left of the entrance, with approximately 4.7m of grass between the boundary and the parking spaces. Each parking space proposed measures 2.5x5m. Car Park 2 would be accessed via a new entrance at the eastern corner of the site from Murrays Road, with an additional 9 spaces of the same size. There would therefore be a total of 24 parking spaces. A 35 sqm cycle parking area is shown adjacent to Car Park 2, with a secure store beside it and a bin store located 3.5 metres from the Murrays Road entrance, between it and car parking.
2.4 With both 'wings' of the L shaped building facing Woodbourne Road and Murrays Road respectively, the area to the rear would be landscaped into a paved patio area and stepped landscaped garden with seating and planting. The areas outside of this, and the car parks, would retain grass and trees - particularly to the southern corner.
2.5 The basement level of the building would be primarily accessed from the Murrays Road side, due to the topography of the site. The basement would contain a boiler room, kitchen, laundry and other ancillary operations for staff. Each of the main three floors would accommodate 23-25 bedrooms with a 2m corridor the entire length of these floors. Each bedroom would have a minimum of 15 sq m of useable space, with its one wet room ensuite. There is a lounge with balcony or terrace proposed on all three floors.
==== PAGE 6 ====
19/00959/B Page 6 of 22
2.6 The design of the building proposed could be summarised as a modern take on the Italianate Victorian design prevalent in the Woodbourne Road area. The roof would be pitched and finished in slate, and main sections of the building finished in render. From Woodbourne Road, the building would have the appearance of three separate traditionally styled buildings with two modern glazing links between. Windows on the main sections would have decorative moulding around the windows and decorative eaves and ridge features. From Murrays Road, the design is similar in parts but takes on modern square dormers and more modern fenestration, along with the use of Staffordshire Blue Brick all providing a more contemporary appearance from this side.
2.7 According to the tree survey and plan provided, 3 category U trees would be removed from the site, with other category B and C trees of various species pruned back or having ivy removed. Construction Exclusion Zones and Arboricultural Monitoring Areas would be put in place for trees marked for retention.
2.8 A planting and landscaping plan has been provided showing the species and locations of plants and shrubs to be planted on the site as part of the development. Much of this planting is shown around the road boundaries of the site and the proposed garden area. Maintenance procedures are noted on the plan, to be carried out for a minimum of three years until the planting is established.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 There are a number of past planning approvals on the Homefield site for the main building and the surrounding buildings including the doctors' surgery/clinic. These are all dated from the late 1980s through to the late 1990s and paint a picture of the previous use of the site as offices and a clinic but are not of specific relevance to this application.
3.2 The most recent application on the site related to one of the outbuildings (11/01418/B), and was for the conversion of a workshop/office to office accommodation with a public counter and was approved.
4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 The site is within an area zoned as Predominantly Residential use as per the Douglas Local Plan 1998 (Map 3 - North). The site is also within Woodbourne Road Conservation Area.
4.2 Under the recently produced Draft Eastern Area Plan the site is also designated as "Predominantly Residential".
4.3 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains a number of policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application:
4.4 Strategic Policy 1 states: "Development should make the best use of resources by: (a) optimising the use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and under-used land and buildings, and re-using scarce indigenous building materials; (b) ensuring efficient use of sites, taking into account the needs for access, landscaping, open space and amenity standards; and (c) being located so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services."
4.5 General Policy 2 states: "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: (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief; (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape;
==== PAGE 7 ====
19/00959/B Page 7 of 22
(d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea; (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (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 unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; (j) can be provided with all necessary services; (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan; (l) 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 buildings and the spaces around them; and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."
4.6 Environment Policy 35 is relevant given the location within a Conservation Area, it states: "Within Conservation Areas, the Department will permit only development which would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Area, and will ensure that the special features contributing to the character and quality are protected against inappropriate development."
4.7 Transport Policy 4 states: "The new and existing highways which serve any new development must be designed so as to be capable of accommodating the vehicle and pedestrian journeys generated by that development in a safe and appropriate manner, and in accordance with the environmental objectives of this plan."
4.8 Transport Policy 6 states: "In the design of new development and transport facilities the needs of pedestrians will be given similar weight to the needs of other road users."
4.9 Transport Policy 7 states: "The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards."
Current car parking standards are set out at appendix 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007.
4.9.1 For 'Nursing, Rest and care homes' the requirement is 1 space per 3 residents in addition to space for staff and deliveries. The Appendix (A.7.6) notes that these standards may be relaxed where development 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."
4.10 Recreation Policy 3 states: "Where appropriate, new development should include the provision of landscaped amenity areas as an integral part of the design. New residential development of ten or more dwellings must make provision for recreational and amenity space in accordance with the standards specified in Appendix 6 to the Plan."
4.11 "Environment Policy 42 states: New development in existing settlements must be designed to take account of the particular character and identity, in terms of buildings and landscape features of the immediate locality. Inappropriate backland development, and the removal of open or green spaces which contribute to the visual amenity and sense of place of a particular area will not be permitted. Those open or green spaces which are to be preserved will be identified in Area Plans."
==== PAGE 8 ====
19/00959/B Page 8 of 22
4.12 Community Policy 6 states: "New community health care facilities and extensions to existing facilities will be permitted provided that they: a) would not result in an over concentration of such uses in a particular area; b) would not have an unacceptable effect on the residential or prevailing character or amenity of the area; c) would be easily accessible; and d) would not have an unacceptable impact on the local highway network."
4.13 Planning Circular 1/91 - Provision for Disabled People is also relevant given the nature of the proposal. This circular sets out standards for access including ramp gradients, corridor width requirements and external space etc.
4.14 The Department's recently published Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) mainly relates to domestic development but is relevant to this application and is referenced in this report. Whilst it is not adopted planning policy it is politically approved and capable of being a material planning consideration.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 DoI Highways provided an initial objection on 12.09.19 raising a number of issues around parking, access, and the lack of a Transport Assessment included with the application. Following submission of a Transport Assessment and revised drawings by the applicant, Highways no longer oppose the application subject to conditions:
"An initial highway response was provided on 12th September 2019 which stated the need for a Transport Assessment (TA) to support the application. Other issues related to vehicular access onto Woodbourne Road and Murrays Road, on-site car parking (in terms of dimensions and numbers), fire tender access, refuse collection and cycle parking.
A TA has now been provided that has largely and satisfactorily addresses the outstanding highway issues. The recent changes to the application, along with the new information are detailed below. There remains to be 24 on-site car parking spaces but the number of spaces with a vertical obstruction to one side has reduced from 6 to 5. Whilst these spaces would effectively have a substandard width, they could be occupied by smaller cars and hence would have some merit. The cycle parking has now been amended as suggested with cycle stands spaced at 1.0m centres along with the parking area now being covered.
The bin store has been located close to the Murrays Road entrance whereby a refuse collection vehicle would not be required to enter the site.
Fire tender access can be obtained to the development by the adjacent streets or within Car Park 1; the applicant has stated that they will undertake a consultation with The Isle of Man Fire and Rescue Service at detailed design stage.
The pedestrian visibility in relation to the access onto Murrays Road has now been addressed. The type of surfacing for this widened access has not been confirmed but this can be addressed by means of a planning condition. The widened access on Murrays Road would require the widening of the dropped kerb access crossing of the footway. This work would need to be undertaken by the Highway Authority whereby the developer would need to enter into a Section 109A Agreement with the Highway authority (Department of Infrastructure). The Murrays Road access that is no longer required would need to be stopped up and reinstated to footway with a full height kerb. This could be undertaken as part of the Section 109A Agreement works.
The number of staff on site between 9am and 5pm would be a maximum of 22 which would then reduce to a maximum of 19 between 5pm and 7pm. The proportion of staff arriving by
==== PAGE 9 ====
19/00959/B Page 9 of 22
car would be 53% in the morning peak hour and 83% in the evening peak hour; this would result in a maximum of between 12 and 16 of the 24 spaces being occupied by staff.
The TA provides comparable information in relation to on-site car parking demand for a 68 bed care home on nearby Salisbury Street in Douglas which has 26 car parking spaces. This survey information indicated that the maximum demand for on-site car parking was 21 spaces and when factored to 73 beds this demand would be for 23 spaces, leaving 1 space available in the case of the currently proposed development. The TA also undertook an assessment of the car parking demand for the former use of the site using the same proportions of car use, whereby it was determined that the former use would have had a greater demand for car parking. It has therefore been concluded that the proposed 24 car parking spaces would be adequate for the majority of the time.
Due to the scale of the development the developer would need to provide a Construction Management Plan (CMP) prior to the start of any construction which should state the following information (note that this is not necessarily an exhaustive list and further information may be required upon submission of the CMP):
o Routes to be taken by delivery vehicles and vehicles removing material; o Times and frequency of deliveries and removal of material; o Size of delivery vehicles and vehicles removing material; o Site operating times; o Numbers of staff to be employed on the site; o Provision of car parking for staff; o Facilities within the site for offloading of construction materials or collection of material; o On-site storage facilities for construction materials or materials to be removed from the site; o Wheel washing facilities; and o Details of site perimeter hoarding and other security measures.
Suggested Planning Conditions
Prior to occupation of the development the widened access onto Murrays Road should be surfaced in bound and stable material over its entire width over a distance of at least 5.0m back from the back of footway. Reason: in order to prevent the migration of loose material onto the highway.
Prior to occupation of the development the redundant access onto Murrays Road should be reinstated to footway with a raised kerb to match the footway on either side of it. Reason: to ensure pedestrian safety.
Prior to occupation of the internal car parking, access lanes and turning around spaces shall be constructed as indicated on the approved plans and shall remain as approved for the duration of occupation of the development. Reason: to minimise on-street car parking that could be detrimental to the operation of the highway.
Prior to the commencement of any construction work including site clearance a Construction Management Plan (CMP) shall be provided for approval and approved. The approved CMP shall be adhered to for the duration of the construction period. Reason: to ensure highway safety and to minimise any negative impact upon the highway network.
Informative: The developer would need to enter into a Section 109A Agreement."
==== PAGE 10 ====
19/00959/B Page 10 of 22
5.2 The DEFA Ecosystem Policy Team noted on 23.09.19 that some information was missing from the online application and an assessment could not be made at that time. This was found to be a scanning error and was rectified.
5.2.1 Following on from this, consultation was received on 07.10.19 from the Ecosystem Policy Team, requesting that a bat suitability survey be undertaken of the buildings and trees within the development site by a licensed bat ecologist. They also request that; "If found to be suitable, a bat survey should be undertaken by a licensed bat ecologist and a report detailing the findings and any mitigation requirements should be submitted to the Planning Directorate prior to determination of this application."
5.3 DEFA Forestry made the following comments on 26.09.19:
"I have reviewed the tree related information which has been submitted in support of application 19/00959/B and would like to make the following comments and recommendations on behalf of the Agriculture and Lands Directorate.
The related application, 19/00960/CON, for demolition of the existing buildings on the site, does not contain any information about tree protection measures. I note that the Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) submitted under application 19/00959/B covers protection during demolition, but a copy of this document and drawing TPA-4919 needs to be formally submitted under application 19/00960/CON as well. I recommend that you get this information before determining the outcome of the application. I would welcome the opportunity to comment on appropriate conditions relating to tree protection once this information has been submitted.
I think that many of the category ratings in the original survey, completed October 2016, were overstated. I visited the site in May when I was asked if any of the existing trees were worthy of entry on to the tree register and I only found 3 possible candidates: T04 (Oak), T06 (Elm), and T33 (Elm). In my opinion there are very few good quality trees with significant amenity value on the site; a lot of small trees in the centre of the site are not visible to the general public. In contrast, the larger trees on the North-East and North-West boundaries of the site are very visible and therefore have some amenity value. The mature horse chestnut (T37) on the North-East boundary, adjacent to Murray's Road, is unsuitable for long term retention due to poor past management. T33 (Elm) is a large mature tree in the centre of the site but unfortunately this is on a slope between 2 different levels. Accordingly, it would be very difficult to incorporate this tree in to a design which also maximises the use of the site. T04, T06 and a small number of other trees along the North-West boundary adjacent to Woodbourne Road are being retained, which is positive. I do not object to the tree removal proposed as part of this application. The Tree Protection Plans show how the retained trees could be protected during demolition and construction. The AMS outlines the types of protective measures that will be necessary within the 'Arboricultural Monitoring Areas' (hatched green on drawing TPA-4919). For example, general procedures for the use of existing hard surfaces as ground protection, the removal of existing hard surfaces within Root Protection Areas (RPAs), the formation of new hard surfaces within RPAs, and other excavations within RPAs are provided. However, many of the statements are generic and I don't believe there is enough detail to be considered a full AMS, which could really only be produced in collaboration with the primary construction contractor. In terms of the amount of tree canopy cover, the proposed planting does not (and will not) fully mitigate the proposed tree removal. However, from a visual amenity point of view, I believe that the proposed planting could have a positive impact on the overall appearance of the area and the street scene. The species selected suit the character and constraints of the site and will soften the visual appearance of the new building. At a meeting with the developer prior to the submission of this application we discussed the importance of replacement tree planting along the Murray's Road boundary. A concern I raised about the viability of planting here was the limited soil volume. In response the agent said they could put in a retaining wall,
==== PAGE 11 ====
19/00959/B Page 11 of 22
rather than grade the bank down, which would increase the overall soil volume. It is not clear from the plans submitted that this suggestion has been adopted. I am also concerned that a new foul and surface water drain is to be routed through this area and this may present a conflict between the drainage and the proposed landscaping. It is also not clear how the area under the existing building in the southern corner of the site will be treated, as this is not covered in the outline landscaping plan. Because of the importance of the landscaping here and the issues which remain outstanding I recommend that this is addressed through conditions."
5.4 Douglas Borough Council requested on 12.09.19 that the application be deferred until after the next Environment Services Committee of the Council. Following verbal discussions with the Council, who would prefer that the matter is deferred until after a meeting later this month, they sought confirmation that it is important that Highway Services' concerns are satisfied.
5.5 Manx National Heritage commented (received 25.09.19), highlighting the potential for the presence of bats at the site. They therefore recommend that an assessment of the site for its potential use by bats is undertaken by a suitably licensed and experienced ecologist. A suitably qualified and experienced ecologist should assess the potential of the buildings and trees to support bats and advise on any further survey requirements, as well as providing practical advice on avoidance measures, and where required, mitigation in consultation with DEFA.
5.6 Manx Utilities (Technical Drainage Officer) requested a deferral of determination of the application in order to review the planning application (22.10.19).
5.7 Elder Healthcare, Governors Hill, Douglas, have commented on the application. They wish to assure the Planning Committee that existing care homes on the Island are not 'past their sell by date' as suggested in the application, and note the investments into Elder Grange and Springfield Grange (18.09.19).
5.8 Comments have been received from 33 Ballaquark, Douglas (20.09.19) which question where construction workers and plumbers, joiners etc. would be able to put their vans.
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1.0 The key planning considerations in the assessment of this application are as follows:-
Principle of developing the site as a care home; 2) The potential visual impact on the street scene and impact on the wider Conservation Area; 3) Highways issues in relation to access and parking provision; 4) The amenity of future residents, staff and visitors; 5) The potential impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties; 6) Impacts upon existing trees; 7) Planting and landscaping; 8) Ecology; and 9) Other Matters.
6.2 THE PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPING THE SITE AS A CARE HOME 6.2.1 The development of the site for an elderly persons care home accords with the 'Predominantly Residential' land use designation set out by the Douglas Local Plan Order 1998, in that it is a residential use, for the housing of 73 residential bedrooms. In its broadest sense therefore, the principle of the development proposal is acceptable in land use terms.
6.2.2 In addition, the Draft Eastern Area Plan has been produced since the previously application was considered. The draft plan which currently has very little material planning
==== PAGE 12 ====
19/00959/B Page 12 of 22
weight; albeit still some, designates this site and the adjoining land to the south of the application site (within applicants ownership) as "Predominanty Residential" which again the proposed use of the site now would fall within.
6.2.3 In terms of Community Policy 6 new community health care facilities cannot result in a over concentration of such uses in a particular area. This site would sit directly adjacent to the Salisbury Street Care Home. Therefore there would in effect be two directly adjacent care home facilities. However, part of the site was previously occupied by a now vacant doctors' surgery and clinic. The proposed building, albeit larger, would replace the previously existing community health care facility. It is not considered that the erection of the proposed facility would result in an unacceptable overuse of the area for health care related sites. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposal would comply with this aspect of CP6.
6.2.4 Overall, while the principle of the land use is considered acceptable, it still remains necessary to assess the proposed development against other relevant planning policies and the physical constraints of the application site.
6.3 THE POTENTIAL VISUAL IMPACT ON THE STREET SCENE AND IMPACT ON THE WIDER CONSERVATION AREA 6.3.1 The assessment of potential impacts on the character and appearance of the street scene and the wider Woodbourne Road area is of particular importance given the scale of the proposal in a prominent location in a Conservation Area. In assessing such impacts, the context of the design and appearance of surrounding properties is of considerable importance. The visual impacts of the loss of the existing buildings are specifically assessed in the report for 19/00960/CON, this report deals only with the proposed building and site in that regard.
6.3.2 The Department's Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) is an important material consideration in relation to visual concerns. Whilst more specifically related to new build dwellings, the advice is also applicable to a new residential care home such as this - particularly given the residential land use designation. It states for example:
"Development should be informed by the best qualities of our existing residential areas. However, this does not mean that all new residential developments should seek to replicate the appearance of older ones, and good quality contemporary design is encouraged. Nevertheless, it is important that the design of new residential developments, including their scale (including height), form, layout/orientation, and detailed design (including the materials used) is informed by and respects both the nature of the development site and the character of the neighbouring buildings and surrounding area." (RDG 2.2.2)
6.3.3 The Woodbourne Road area is as previously mentioned, a Conservation Area. As with the wider Upper Douglas, the townscape is characterised by a number of fine, and often elegant, civic spaces in the form of squares and gardens. In addition, this main arterial route into Douglas town centre is characterised in part by buildings displaying ornate Victorian styles
6.3.4 Further north from the site on Woodbourne Road, and on the surrounding side streets including Murrays Road, there are traditional Victorian terraces - some finished in traditional formal render and others featuring red and yellow Ruabon brickwork. Decorative featuring, particularly around windows is prevalent. On the east side of Woodbourne Road close to the site, there are some more modern buildings featuring either mid to late 20th Century styling, with one contemporary glazed building. There are however, some standalone Victorian Villas. On the western side, opposite the site, there are a number of well-spaced out large Victorian Villas in private grounds, many featuring Italianate designs and with a mix of rendered and
==== PAGE 13 ====
19/00959/B Page 13 of 22
brick finishes. They are generally high-ceilinged two storey properties with pitched roof dormers above.
6.3.5 As previously noted, Homefield follows this design pattern being a large villa with Italianate design features. It is notable for the acreage surrounding it and the high stone wall bounding it at the corner to both Murrays Road and Woodbourne Road. It is important therefore given the site and street contexts, that any proposed development on the site respects the Victorian nature of the area and provides a visible link with the existing.
6.3.6 The siting of the proposed care home building is also important. The proposed building is set back from the boundary wall by a minimum of 3.7 metres at Murrays Road - somewhat similar to the general building line further down this road, and approximately 16 metres at Woodbourne Road. This is considered to leave an appropriate amount of space between the building and the road, following the pattern of the surrounding Villas and the existing Homefield building. In terms of siting, the proposed building is appropriate for the site and the street scene - situated in the middle of the site with space for vegetation and access surrounding.
6.3.7 The building proposed, at three full storeys, with a partial lower ground floor at the Murrays Road end, is taller than those in the surrounding area. However, the height difference is not so significant insomuch as to appear dominating in the street scape or overbearing in appearance when read in the context of the surrounding area. On the Murrays Road end facing the road, the use of dormers on the second floor, and a drop in roof height, would reduce the height in accordance with the natural topography of the site. Whilst, at both ends of the 'L' shape building, length (at 50.8 metres and 35.7 metres respectively) the length would be over and above that seen in the surrounding villas, it would not be unusual in the context of the terraces in the area and is therefore not out of keeping with the street scene in relation to scale and massing when viewed from the road. The building is also of a similar width as the surrounding properties and the existing Homefield building, thus it would not appear overly 'blocky' rather following the corner of the two roads.
6.3.8 The Residential Design Guide also contains best practice guidance around design and materials: "Consideration should be given to the relationship between the new building/extension and surrounding properties/the original part of the building, for example matching the brick/stone/render and colour/type, the mortar joints and continuing string-courses or continuation of plinths, string courses, decorative brickwork, bargeboards and fascias. For extensions, the position of joinery details should reflect those of the original building, this is especially relevant to more period/traditional dwellings. Consideration should also be given to the most appropriate pattern, texture and type of roof tiles/slates. However, it is recognised that in some circumstances, a distinctive break in style/finishing/details may be appropriate and there have been good examples of the use of more contemporary high quality design and finishes to traditional buildings." (RDG 5.3)
6.3.9 The design of the proposed building is a mix of features found in the surrounding area, and contemporary styling and finishes. The proposal features a gradual shift from the front of the building facing Woodbourne Road to the rear, in terms of the use of traditional - contemporary design. The north west elevation facing Woodbourne Road would appear in many respects as three separate villas, each three storeys in height with a hipped roof and bays. The two storey bays in particular would have the appearance of those traditional Victorian style ones prevalent in the Woodbourne Road area. Between each of the three sections would be a three storey glazed link - one of which would provide the main entrance area and porch from that side of the building. This elevation would also feature decorative design such as mouldings on each floor and above the windows, concrete parapet and artificial slate roof with overhangs typical of the Italianate style of the area. The north west elevation
==== PAGE 14 ====
19/00959/B Page 14 of 22
would be finished in formal render with aluminium casement windows with the appearance of sliding sash.
6.3.10 It is considered that the appearance of this elevation would effectively tie in a large new building with the Woodbourne Road street scene in utilising the quality design features in the area as a basis whilst providing the glazed links as an acceptable contemporary addition. The building would, from the perspective of Woodbourne Road, fit with its surroundings and preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area in respect of scale, massing and design.
6.3.11 The Murrays Road (north east elevation) would present a gradual shift from the traditional styling of Woodbourne Road towards the contemporary, similar to Salisbury Street care home adjacent. Whilst the section closest to Woodbourne Road would appear similar to the north west elevation discussed above, the majority of this elevation would be of a more contemporary design. The lower slate roof would have a flat top, with second floor flat roofed dormers, modern styled windows and a curtain wall feature between the 'new' and 'old' style part of the building. The finish on the Murrays Road section would also be contemporary but with links to the past particularly through the use of Staffordshire blue brick on part of the elevation, and coloured render elsewhere. This contemporary approach along the secondary road section would be visible and not as in keeping with the traditional design of the area as the Woodbourne Road elevation. However, as noted in the Residential Design Guidance - good quality contemporary design is encouraged, particularly where such design links effectively with traditionally designed elements of the building in a natural progression.
6.3.12 The rear elevations of the building would follow the contemporary approach of the north east elevation through the use of a mix of curtain wall glazing, traditional render and the dormers windows. There would also be a balcony on both the first and second floors of the south east elevation. Whilst these elevations would be less publically visible than those discussed above, it is important that they read well in the context of the wider building and surrounding area. It is considered that a good mix of contemporary and traditional design would continue, and whilst of lesser aesthetic interest than the main road-facing elevations, they would not be considered harmful to the wider site or conservation area in terms of character and appearance.
6.3.13 The landscaping and boundary treatment on the site is key in retaining some of the low density appearance of the site, it is therefore important that it is effective and attractive. Trees will be discussed later in this report, however their retention along the boundaries (with the exception of Murrays Road) would provide a natural visual break between what would be a large building on a prominent corner, and the road. The use of green space and features in key to preserving the character of the Conservation Area, and the retention of such features would help to achieve this.
6.3.14 The existing Manx stone wall is also a key unique feature of the site - particularly due to its corner location. The proposal seeks to largely retain it with the exception of modifications for access arrangements. This again would retain a break with the street and the essential character of the site.
6.3.15 Overall, the proposed care home building and wider site proposal is considered to be broadly acceptable in terms of its impact on the character and appearance of both the site and the street scene. In this respect, it is in accordance with General Policy 2, Environment Policy 35 and Environment Policy 42.
6.4 HIGHWAY ISSUES IN RELATION TO ACCESS AND PARKING PROVISION 6.4.1 Woodbourne Road is a main arterial route through the middle of Douglas and any alterations to the position or quantity of vehicles entering onto it is significant from a highway safety perspective. With regard to the proposed care home, those accessing the site are more
==== PAGE 15 ====
19/00959/B Page 15 of 22
likely to be staff and visitors than residents given the nature of the proposal - although there are likely to be peak periods of use during and staff shift changes.
6.4.2 The current situation regarding access and parking on the site has been alluded to in the early part of this report (section 1). The main access, via Woodbourne Road, would remain, with a widened access to the end of the Murrays Road section at the boundary with the Salisbury Care Home site. There would be no through road or connection for vehicles between the two access points, which would both serve their own car park.
6.4.3 The main access onto Woodbourne Road would be retained, and 2.4m x 45m visibility splays have been shown in each direction. The access at Murrays Road would be widened to accommodate adequate 2.4m x 45m visibility to the northwest - as the street operates on a one-way system, visibility to the southeast is not a primary concern, however it is considered that there would be adequate views of the pedestrian footpath to as to ensure the safety of pedestrians walking up the street. In terms of access to and egress from the site, no additional concerns have been raised from Highway Services and it is considered that these aspects would be in accordance with General Policy 2 (h&i).
6.4.4 Car parking is provided on the site, split between two car parks - Car Park 1 accessed from Woodbourne Road, and Car Park 2 accessed from Murrays Road. Generally, new development must accord with the parking standards set out in Appendix 7 of the Strategic Plan. For 'Nursing, rest, and care homes' this standard is 1 space per 3 residents in addition to spaces for staff and deliveries. A.7.6 states however 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."
In this case, sections (c) and (d) above are relevant. Given the existing nature of the site, and its Conservation Area location as discussed earlier in this report, there is a need to retain landscaping and natural features on the site - the reduction of this to facilitate car parking will have some negative impact. Furthermore, the length of the proposed building places restrictions on where car parking can be situated - requiring it to be split between the two car parks. A balance is needed therefore between the wider impact of car parking and its obvious benefits. It is also noted that the site is located close to existing bus routes servicing Onchan and Douglas town centre and further afield, and is wells served by pedestrian links to the surrounding residential area.
6.4.5 The number of staff on site between 9am and 5pm would be a maximum of 22 which would then reduce to a maximum of 19 between 5pm and 7pm. The proportion of staff arriving by car would be 53% in the morning peak hour and 83% in the evening peak hour; this would result in a maximum of between 12 and 16 of the 24 spaces being occupied by staff. The Transport Assessment provides comparable information in relation to on-site car parking demand for a 68 bed care home on nearby Salisbury Street in Douglas which has 26 car parking spaces. This survey information indicated that the maximum demand for on-site car parking was 21 spaces and when factored to 73 beds this demand would be for 23 spaces, leaving 1 space available in the case of the currently proposed development. The case officer undertook a site visit on two occasions to the car park of Salisbury Street and noted that, in the mid-afternoon and mid-morning weekdays, the car park there was not at capacity. The TA also undertook an assessment of the car parking demand for the former use of the site using the same proportions of car use, whereby it was determined that the former use would have
==== PAGE 16 ====
19/00959/B Page 16 of 22
had a greater demand for car parking. The conclusions of DoI Highways that the proposed 24 car parking spaces would be adequate for the majority of the time, are agreed. It is therefore considered that between the two car parks on site, there would be adequate on-site parking for the nature of the site, despite it not meeting the parking standards set out in the Strategic Plan.
6.4.6 Parking for disabled users has also been shown on the proposed site plan - with 4 accessible spaces in Car park 1 opposite the main entrance of the building. This is considered helpful and necessary both for members of staff and visitors requiring such spaces, and for wheelchair accessible taxis which may transport residents in need of such a service. Planning Circular 1/91 sets out that parking spaces reserved for cars driven by disabled drivers or carrying disabled passengers should be provided close to an accessible entrance - which has been shown on the site plan in question. It also requires that such spaces be 3.6m wide, giving adequate space for transfer from car to wheelchair. When the access areas are included with the spaces themselves, they provide just over 3 metres of width - which does not meet this requirement. It is therefore considered that accessible parking, whilst provided, would not meet the requirements on Planning Circular 1/91. Despite this, the provision of standard parking spaces and some accessible parking spaces close to the main entrance is clear. The benefits of having 0.5m wider accessible spaces would not outweigh the loss of one standard space to facilitate this.
6.4.7 Overall, the parking and access situation on the site is considered acceptable on balance. It is considered that between the spaces provided on site, and the likely demand when compared to the adjacent nursing home, parking on the site would be adequate albeit not excellent. The accesses on both sides would be safe from a highways perspective.
6.5 THE AMENITY OF FUTURE RESIDENTS, STAFF AND VISITORS 6.5.1 Due to the level of expected residents and visitors/staff in the proposed care home at any one time, it is important that adequate and proportionate on site amenity is provided. This can take the form of adequate access and permeability around the site as well as features such as gardens and planting in open space. In this case, the floor space of each residential room or unit is a consideration. General Policy 2 (h&m) and Recreational Policy 3 are the main policy considerations in this respect.
6.5.2 Staying on the matter of parking as discussed above, it is becoming increasingly important that an adequate cycle parking area and stands are available. In this case, after consultation from Highways and Douglas Borough Council, the applicant submitted revised plans extending the cycle parking provision from 20 sq m to approximately 35 sq m, with the area to be covered. Cycle stands would be spaced at 1m. It is considered that this would provide secure and spacious cycle parking for use by staff and visitors and be in accordance with the long term Active Travel Strategy and paragraph 11.5.3 of the Strategic Plan which states:
"The long term target is to reduce the level of car parking required for town centre developments and seek to develop more sustainable staff and visitor transport plans including improved public transport, staff buses, shared and pooled cars, cycling and walking."
6.5.3 The application Transport Assessment sets out the position of the proposal site within Douglas as ideal for both cycling and pedestrian access, noting the likely 800m walking radius and 5km cycling radius. Bus services in the area are regular - with the closest bus stops on Woodbourne Road and Somerset Road on the Douglas-Onchan bus around 400m away - well within what may be considered reasonable walking distance for an able bodied person. The central and well-connected location of the site is considered as good as any on the town centre periphery in terms of encouraging alternative modes of transport to the car - therefore reducing environmental impact and improving the amenity of staff, visitors and residents.
==== PAGE 17 ====
19/00959/B Page 17 of 22
6.5.4 Furthermore, bin storage provision has been shown adjacent to the lower parking area and next to the Murrays Road access - meaning that refuse collection vehicles would not be required to enter the site. The application design and access statement notes that refuse collection would be from Murrays Road and at times agreed with Douglas Borough Council. The bin storage area shown is considered appropriately secure in a sheltered position. It should also be noted applicant has also provided a waste strategy for the site demolition and construction which would include reuse/recycle approaches to waste generated from the existing buildings where possible, and infilling on site using demolition material to reduce waste removed from the site. This is considered acceptable and in line with aforementioned policies.
6.5.5 The applicant has provided a Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) Strategy which includes the provision of level access into the building, push-pad operated doors, a DDA compliant lift to all floors, corridor design suitable to the moving of wheelchairs (1.85m wide), compliant accessible toilets with emergency assistance alarms, suitably designed stairs and clear signage as well as visual contrast between colours on finishes on floors, walls, doors and ironmongery. It is considered that the provisions for disabled and/or elderly users within and around the care home would meet the requirements of the policies in 6.5.1 and Planning Circular 1/91 in providing a safe and accessible useable space for residents in particular as well as adequate facilities for staff including changing rooms and staff room.
6.5.6 The Isle of Man Government Adult Care Homes Standards 2017 includes the requirement for bedrooms to be a minimum of 12.5 sq m in new registration premises, and en- suites to be 3.5m2 or more. Throughout the proposed care home, a minimum of 16.4 sq m bedroom floor space and 4.1 sq m en-suite floor space would be provided which would meet these Standards. Due to this, it is considered that the floor spaces proposed would accord with Planning Circular 1/91 as well as General Policy 2(h&m).
6.5.7 An area of landscape garden and terrace is proposed to the rear of the site, accessed from rear doors, with balconies overlooking the area on the upper floors. This area would be set down from the adjacent terrace, car park and grassed open space with both stepped access and ramped access and areas of seating on a paved walkway between planting. It is considered that such space would be of a useable and appropriate design for care home residents and as there would be no direct ramped access to the car park, would not pose an unacceptable safety risk to more vulnerable residents. In this respect, the landscaping around the site - including the areas of grass towards the rear and the retention of trees on the site (discussed in detail later in the report) would accord with aforementioned policy.
6.5.8 Following on from this, the permeability and connectivity of such a site is of considerable importance considering the large size of the site and its location within a built-up area, as well as the nature of the proposed use. The ease of pedestrian access to the site has been noted, and the ease of pedestrian movement around the site is also of importance in terms of amenity. As well as accessed to the front and rear of the building, there are paths surrounding it, suitable for pedestrians. With two accesses to the wider site, connecting a footpath on Woodbourne Road with one Murrays Road, it would be possible to walk through one end of the site and out of the other. It is considered that there is good permeability and connectivity for pedestrians including wheelchair users through the use of ramps to access a secure patio area and sunken garden.
6.5.9 Overall, it is considered that there would be adequate amenity provided for users of the site which would accord with General Policy (h&m), Recreation Policy 3, Community Policy 6 and Planning Circular 1/91 in this respect.
6.6 THE AMENITY OF NEIGHBOURING PROPERTIES 6.6.1 In addition to the amenity of the users of the site, any impact on the residential amenities of existing neighbours in this residential area should be carefully considered. This
==== PAGE 18 ====
19/00959/B Page 18 of 22
aspect forms part of General Policy 2 in criterion g. The key test therefore is whether the amenity of neighbouring residents would be adversely affected.
6.6.2 The first question is whether the use of the site as a nursing home, and the associated activity with that use, would have a greater impact than the previous use as an office space. Given the increase footprint of the new building compared to the useable buildings which exist on the site, and the residency of 70 clients in addition to staff and visitors, it is likely that there will be increased footfall and occupancy on the site - probably more so than has ever been experienced previously on this site for any extended period. However, the use of the site as a care home is somewhat unique in that the likely clientele and the use itself are unlikely to result in loud noise generation or late night activity. The most significant level of activity is likely to be from cars during staff shift changes and visiting times. Overall, this traffic noise impact is again unlikely to occur outside of daytime hours in any significant number as this would affect the amenity of paying residents. Therefore, the level of activity on the site is unlikely to be increased in such a manner as would result in an unacceptable nuisance in this residential area.
6.6.3 There are a number of physical impacts which can result between neighbouring properties. The DEFA Residential Design Guide (July 2019) sets out how these are assessed and some best practice for development in residential areas. One of these potential impacts in overbearing impact on neighbouring properties which would result in a loss of outlook. Section 7.4.1 of the design guide states:
"Any development should ensure that existing residents can enjoy appropriate levels of comfort and enjoyment of their properties without their outlooks being impacted by an overbearing building/structure. The positioning, design and scale of an extension/new build dwellings should not be dominant or have an adverse impact on the primary windows of a primary habitable room or on the private garden that may be present in a neighbouring property."
6.6.4 The site positioning does assist the proposed building in this regard. Roads and footpaths separate the care home from villas to the northwest by a distance of around 40 metres. The property to the north is around 16 metres away and would have outlook relatively unchanged from the existing with the Homefield building. The Health centre and Care Home to the northeast and southeast are both at significantly different ground levels to the site - sitting below it. However, they are also sufficiently far away from the proposed building to as to limit any loss of outlook. The closest point of the respective nursing homes would be gable walls at 15 metre separating distance. Whilst there may be some loss of outlook to the northwest from this part Salisbury Street nursing home, it is not considered to be notably different and would relate to a small section of both buildings. Africa House to the southwest is also considered at a sufficient distance, and screened by existing vegetation so as to limit any potential loss of outlook or unacceptable dominance.
6.6.5 In a similar vein, overshadowing and loss of light is a consideration and there are methods to test whether this will be a significant issue as set out in section 7.3 of the Residential Design Guide:
"A development should not result in significant levels of loss of day light or overshadowing, especially to primary habitable rooms, or to private gardens. Applicants are advised to look carefully at the path of the sun throughout the day, and consider where shadows fall, using this information to help in considering the design, position and height of the extension. The impact of overshadowing will increase if the new property/extension is to the South of a neighbouring property (as the sun's orientation is East to West). When the windows affected serve habitable rooms then it will be necessary to assess the impact upon light reaching these rooms.
A simple check can be undertaken in relation to this issue.
==== PAGE 19 ====
19/00959/B Page 19 of 22
o A side view is drawn which includes the proposal site and the main face of the neighbouring property. o A point is identified which is 2 metres above ground level on the closest wall with a relevant window of the neighbouring building. o A line is drawn from this point at a 25 degree angle towards the application site. o If no part of the proposal is above this line, there will still be the potential for good daylight to the interior.
Where a change in level separates two adjoining dwellings, a proposal for a dwelling on a higher site or an extension to the higher dwelling, will normally have a far greater effect on its lower neighbour than in the reverse."
6.6.6 The assessment of overbearing in 6.6.3 of this report applies also, for the most part, to overshadowing. Such are the distances between the site proposal and surrounding buildings. The northern part of the adjacent Salisbury Street nursing home, the closet part to the proposed dwelling, is likely to experience some degree of overshadowing on the northwest 13m long elevation during the evening onto the single first floor window. The ground floor window currently experienced shadowing to a degree from the stone boundary wall between the two sites. That said, light would be able to reach the first floor window on this elevation from either side of the Homefield Care Home due to the 15 metre separating distance.
6.6.7 Overlooking and loss of privacy is another consideration in residential areas. Concern. It refers to the distance between elevations that contain windows serving habitable rooms that face each other - if this distance is over 20 metres, overlooking is unlikely to be a concern. This distance can be relaxed where the design or orientation is such that privacy and amenity of a neighbouring property is not compromised. In dense urban areas where there is already a level of mutual overlooking a lesser standard may be acceptable. The required distance may need to be greater if there is a change in topography, which would result in an adverse effect on the privacy and amenity of a neighbouring property.
6.6.8 The distances between respective primary habitable windows in the proposed building and surrounding properties is around 20 metres or exceeding 20 metres from all directions with the exception of the rear elevation facing Salisbury Street Nursing Home. The main part of the rear elevation features balconies and a terraced area which sits significantly higher in terms of topography than the adjacent property. However, the balconies would be over 40 metres from the rear elevation of Salisbury Street, and the ground floor terrace would not have clear views due to the presence of trees and the boundary wall. Some overlooking may be possible from the entrance side of Car Park 2, however this is unlikely to be prolonged or unacceptable in practice due to the nature of a car park having temporary pedestrian usage. The closest parts of the respective buildings as noted previously, at 15m, would also not experience unacceptable mutual overlooking as the windows on that elevation on the proposed building would be exclusively for the provision of light into stairwells, not any primary habitable room.
6.6.9 Taking the above into account, there may be some impact on a section of Salisbury Street Nursing Home in terms of overshadowing onto a single first floor window. However, when the scheme as a whole is taken into account within the context of the surrounding properties, it is expected that impact on neighbouring amenities will be low and insufficient so as to warrant a reason for refusal on that basis. It is considered that the proposal accord with General Policy 2 (g) in this respect.
6.7 IMPACTS ON EXISTING TREES 6.7.1 Large trees close to site and roadside boundaries are one of the defining characteristics of this part of Woodbourne Road Conservation Area and there are a fairly significant number of trees throughout the application site at present. The largest and most mature trees are on the northwest, southwest and the southeast boundaries. There is a cluster of trees on the northeast boundary of small-medium size. In addition, there are trees throughout the middle
==== PAGE 20 ====
19/00959/B Page 20 of 22
of the site including a strip directly in the centre. The DEFA Forestry Arboricultural Officer notes, in concurrence with the Tree Survey report submitted with the application, that there are few good very good quality trees with significant amenity value on the site. The ones in the centre of the site are not regarded to be of any specific value and are not highly visible to the public.
6.7.2 A number of the trees are marked for felling and removal as part of the application. The trees in the middle of the site would be removed to facilitate the new building, as would the cluster to the northeastern boundary and another small cluster on the northern part of the southeast boundary. One large tree would also be removed which sits at the Woodbourne Road entrance, although two of the trees on this part of the site - a large oak and an Elm which are noted by the Arboricultural Officer as being worthy of entry on to the tree register - would be retained, along with the majority of the trees around the edges of the site.
6.7.3 Whilst there would be a loss of a number of the trees on the site, the majority of those at the boundaries - including the prominent Woodbourne Road boundary, would be retained. The essential character of the area and the site as being populated by large buildings in grounds with mature trees would therefore be retained. The Arboricultural Officer does not object to the loss of the trees marked for removal but does note a preference for replanting of trees on the Murrays Road boundary.
6.7.4 Of the trees marked for retention, Tree Protection Plan details have been submitted showing Construction Exclusion Zones and methodology for root protection. The expertise of the DEFA Arboricultural Officer has been consulted in this respect and no objections have been raised with regard to the protection of retained trees on the site. In respect of the existing trees on the site, and the impact of tree related works on the Conservation Area, the proposal is considered acceptable.
6.7.5 The DEFA Arboricultural Officer has recommended a number of conditions on any approval in relation to the trees and future planting, these are considered appropriate.
6.8 PLANTING AND LANDSCAPING 6.8.1 Further to the proposed removal and retention of the existing trees on the site, additional tree planting and planted amenity areas are proposed on the site, particularly to the boundaries with Woodbourne Road and Murrays Road and in the proposed sunken garden area. This planting has been detailed to some degree in an outline planting plan (PL416-01) showing the species and location of trees to be planted at the Murrays Road boundary, and shrubs and planting around the landscaped garden.
6.8.2 As noted earlier in the report, the garden would provide a natural break in the site and an amenity space for users of the property to enjoy - appropriate planting as shown would contribute to the achievement of this and therefore the compliance of the application with Recreational policy 3. The planting shown around the northern boundaries is of particular importance in ensuring a natural break is retained and enhance between the large building proposed and the street. The landscaping and planting proposed would incorporate many of the existing trees and is considered acceptable in accordance with General Policy 2 (f).
6.9 ECOLOGY 6.9.1 Much of the representation received in regard to ecological concerns relate to the demolition of the existing buildings on the site, and therefore in some degree to the Registered Building Consent application (19/00960/CON). However, those matters are assessed as part of this application as the RB applications primary consideration is the impact on the conservation area from the loss of the buildings, whereas the planning application deals with a broader range of planning concerns. The two applications are linked in any case and should be considered concurrently as approval of both is required for any works to take place.
==== PAGE 21 ====
19/00959/B Page 21 of 22
6.9.2 Both Manx National Heritage and DEFA Ecosystem Policy team raise concerns about the impact of the development on bats, which are protected under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife Act 1990. It is noted that several species of bat have been found in the area, and that the existing buildings on the site may be capable of being suitable for roosting bats. It is therefore recommended that a condition be attached to any approval requiring a bat survey to be carried out by a suitably qualified ecologist prior to the commencement of any works, and that any mitigation or avoidance measures be followed thereafter. If carried out in accordance with these requirements and recommendations, it is considered that there would be no unacceptable ecological impact, and that the proposal would accord with General Policy 2 (d).
6.10 OTHER MATTERS 6.10.1 In relation to the accessibility of the site for fire tender access, DoI Highways have noted that this could be obtained to the development by the adjacent streets or within Car Park
6.10.2 In terms of drainage, the level of hard surfacing on the site would not be significantly greater or different from what it is at present. The presence of landscaping and planting around the boundaries of the site is considered likely to be sufficient in preventing any unacceptable runoff from the site onto the roads or adjacent sites. In relation to the sewage system, the case officer has spoken to Manx Utilities (31.10.19) regarding whether or not the system for the site is public or private. Full comments from Manx Utilities are expected prior to the Planning Committee consideration of this application however, in the event that further comments have not been received, it is not considered that the absenced of confirmation from MU that the scheme is acceptable, is not a reason why the application should not be approved given the comments above and that there would not be any significant or adverse change in the impact on drainage of the site.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 To summarise, the proposed development is considered acceptable on balance in regard to the Isle of Man Strategic Plan and Douglas Local Plan 1998. Whilst there would be a loss of a Victorian-era large villa, the site would be well placed to accommodate a care home which is sympathetic to the existing site and wider area.
7.2 On the basis of the assessment above, it is recommended that the planning application be approved subject to conditions.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 (Article 6(4), 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 (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
8.2 The decision maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and o whether there are other persons to those listed in Article 6(4) who should be given Interested Person Status.
8.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given Interested Person Status.
==== PAGE 22 ====
19/00959/B Page 22 of 22
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: 11.11.2019
Signed : C BALMER 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