Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
19/00202/CON Page 1 of 9
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 19/00202/CON Applicant : Empire Garages Ltd Proposal : Registered Building consent for the demolition elements relating the application 19/00201/B Site Address : Garage And Premises Stanley Road Peel Isle Of Man
Principal Planner: Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 18.07.2019 __
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. In the absence of a detailed, professional appraisal of the historical importance of the sandstone warehouse on the site, is considered that the removal of this building could have an adverse impact on the historical importance of the Conservation Area and the application would therefore be contrary to Environment Policies 30, 35 and 39 of the Strategic Plan and CA/6 of Planning Policy Statement 1/01.
__
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 matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):
The owners of 25, Bridge Street 30, Stanley Road 6, Stanley Mount 18, Castle Street 7, Victoria Terrace 24, Circular Road 31, Stanley Terrace 3, Stanley Road 37, Stanley Terrace 20, Stanley Road
==== PAGE 2 ====
19/00202/CON Page 2 of 9
10, Gib Lane 31, Shore Road 5, Stanley Mount Westholme, Cannan Avenue, Kirk Michael 8, Gib Lane 18, Stanley Mount 13, Rockmount Road 5, Stanley Road 21, Queen's Drive 17, Stanley Road 60, Patrick Street 26, Stanley Road 22, Stanley Road 32, Stanley Road 17, Circular Road 39, Stanley Terrace 6, Stanley Road 40, Stanley Road 24, Bridge Street 5, Circular Road Thie ny Scoill, Derby Road 6, Circular Road 12, Stanley Road Reayrt ny Keylley 14, Stanley Mount 9A, Stanley Road 14, Bridge Street 14, Stanley Road The Old Chapel, Patrick Corner, rents an office in Gib Lane 16, Stanley Road 24, Stanley Road 4, Stanley Road 13, Stanley road 9, Stanley Road 19, Stanley Road Garden Flat, 4, Marine Parade, owner of the Old Stables, Gib Lane 5, Oak Road
as these properties 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 or 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.
Tim Crookall MLC and Peel Residents' Association as 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
Peel Heritage Trust 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. __
Officer’s Report
==== PAGE 3 ====
19/00202/CON Page 3 of 9
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE DIRECTION OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT
THE SITE 1.1 The application site is an area of land which sits at the lower end of Stanley Road just before it reaches Shore Road and Marine Parade, bounded by Stanley Road and Gib Lane, a two way lane which runs westwards from the higher end of Walpole Drive to meet Stanley Road.
1.2 The site contains a two storey warehouse building which has attached at its eastern end, two single storey garages all arranged in an L shape. The site is bounded to Stanley Road by a sandstone wall of varying heights, part of which has a concrete capping and part of which looks like it may at one time in the past, have been the front of a cottage, the apertures of two windows and a central door having been blocked up in brick.
1.3 The two storey building has a sandstone wall to Gib Lane with high level windows in this elevation which sits right alongside the lane. The elevation facing towards Stanley Road is finished in dashed render and has ground floor vehicular sized openings with timber doors and a similar sized window with a row of windows above, all within a brown pea dashed wall. The elevation facing west is also finished in brown pea dash and has a pedestrian door, two windows and a door sized opening fitted with a fixed pane.
1.4 The single storey buildings sit below the level of the sandstone wall. One is built of sandstone, the other in front in brick, both having a monopitch corrugated sheeted roof. The brick structure has a vehicle sized opening within it, the sandstone building a pedestrian door.
1.5 The site was most recently used as parking and workshops associated with the Empire Garage operation which sits on the other side of Gib Lane.
1.6 The property sits opposite a terrace of three storey, plain fronted, rendered houses whose frontages sit flush with the footway. On the other side of the road the terraced housing stops at the Masonic Hall, a much wider two storey building with a dashed finish and with its gable to the road.
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 There are current applications which propose the redevelopment of this site together with the site on the other side of Gib Lane and other land at the higher end of Stanley Road - 10/00199/B, 19/00201/B and 19/00203/B together with the associated applications for Registered Building consent for the elements of demolition - 19/00200/CON and 19/00204/CON. Registered Building consent is required for demolition within a Conservation Area under Section 19(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999. The applications for RB consent are therefore concerned only with the impact of the demolition works on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and not with any aspect of the redevelopment proposals.
2.2 Proposed here is the demolition of all of the structures within the site listed in paragraphs 1.1 - 1.4 above including the sandstone boundary wall adjacent to Stanley Road.
PLANNING POLICY Peel Local Plan 1989 3.1 The site lies within an area of Mixed Use, reflecting the variety of uses in the area - industrial retail, residential and tourism. The site is also within the town's Conservation Area which was adopted in 1990.
3.2 The Peel Local Plan identifies that the town has "special characteristics" (paragraph 1.1) and the town plan aims to satisfy these characteristics and to meet its changing needs,
==== PAGE 4 ====
19/00202/CON Page 4 of 9
stimulating and encouraging development where appropriate and to give a clear locational reference to national policies on development, change of use and conservation. The Plan includes reference to the need to closely control changes to existing retail units to ensure that original features which contribute significantly to the character of the old town are not lost (paragraph 2.5) and that no fixed guidelines on the retail zoning should be adopted given the sensitive nature and originality of the old town's fabric and its status as a Conservation Area (paragraph 2.3).
3.3 The plan refers to additional residential accommodation in the town as being a priority (paragraph 5.1).
3.4 The plan encourages "positive schemes of action" to enhance the character of the area (paragraphs 9.2 and 9.15) and identifies the importance of vacant and derelict buildings and what future they have to the town (9.4v), but noting that "demolition of even a single building which in itself may not be of architectural or historic significance and therefore not registered, and its replacement by a new building could prejudice the character or appearance of a Conservation Area" (paragraph 9.5). It continues, "If the development of a site following demolition were to be approved, the prospective developer should be aware that close attention would be paid to the design, location and massing of a replacement building" (paragraph 9.6). It states that, "Any new building will only be encouraged if it conforms to high standards of design and it respects the scale and character of its surroundings" (paragraph 9.17).
Strategic Plan 2016 3.5 As the site lies within a Conservation Area, Environment Policies 30, 35 and 39 are applicable:
Environment Policy 30: There will be a general presumption against demolition of a Registered Building. In considering proposals for demolition or proposed works which would result in substantial demolition of a Registered Building, consideration will be given to:
o the condition of the building; o the cost of repairing and maintaining it in relation to its importance and the value derived from its continued use (based on consistent long-term assumptions); o the adequacy of efforts made to retain the building in use; and o the merits of alternative proposals for the site.
Environment Policy 35: 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.
Environment Policy 39: "The general presumption will in favour of retaining buildings which make a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the Conservation Area."
Planning Policy Statement 1/01 - Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man 3.6 Unlike the Strategic Plan, this document has specific guidance on demolition in Conservation Areas as follows:
POLICY CA/6 DEMOLITION Any building which is located within a conservation area and which is not an exception as provided above, may not be demolished without the consent of the Department. In practice, a planning application for consent to demolish must be lodged with the Department. When considering an application for demolition of a building in a conservation area, the general presumption will be in favour of retaining buildings which make a positive contribution to the
==== PAGE 5 ====
19/00202/CON Page 5 of 9
character or appearance of the conservation area. Similar criteria will be applied as those outlined in RB/6 above, when assessing the application to demolish the building, but in less clear cut cases, for example, where a building could be said to detract from the special character of the area, it will be essential for the Department to be able to consider the merits of any proposed new development when determining whether consent should be given for the demolition of an unregistered building in a conservation area. Account will be taken of the part played in the architectural or historic interest of the area by the building for which demolition is proposed, and in particular of the wider effects of demolition on the building's surroundings and on the conservation area as a whole.
PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 Alterations to the existing buildings have been submitted in the past, none of which is relevant to the consideration of the current proposal.
REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services have no highway interest in this application (19.03.19).
5.2 Peel Town Commissioners object to this application, noting that the existing sandstone walls and buildings add to the historic nature of Peel and this material is not being re-used in the redevelopment, suggesting also that one of the warehouse buildings seems to be in sound condition and could be re-used or refurbished (15.04.19).
5.3 Manx National Heritage submit an objection to all six of the applications on the basis that there the proposals would result in the loss of fabric of historical importance for the town due to their former association as a warehouse and a net loft for Peel's fishing industry and are rare examples of this type of building. They consider that the historical assessment of the site includes a number of errors and wrongly dismisses these as of no historical significance. They recommend that permission is not granted for the demolition of these buildings unless and until a detailed, professional assessment of significance of these historic structures has been undertaken and which demonstrates that they are not of sufficient interest and value to justify their removal. A sensitive renovation and conversion scheme which re-uses the historic buildings would be preferable (05.04.19).
5.4 Private representations 5.4.1 There have been a number of representations on all six of the current applications for the Empire Garage premises, many of which have applied the same comments and submitted the same letter or e-mail to all six proposals. It is clear that some of the submissions relate to one of the applications not all, but all have been included for completeness but only the comments relating to the loss of the existing buildings have been noted here as this reflects what the application actually proposes.
5.4.2 Concern is expressed at the loss of the sandstone walls on Gib Lane and some submissions suggest that the sandstone building behind the car wash is at least 120 years old and is part of the fishing heritage of Peel, formerly known as The Bark House and was where fishermen spent a lot of time barking and drying their nets until the introduction of synthetic fibres in the 1950s. They suggest that the pit in which they immersed their nets was still visible until Farghers took over the warehouse. Whilst some redevelopment could occur, efforts could be made to retain the sandstone buildings on site. There is a concern that the plans neither preserve nor enhance the Area.
25, Bridge Street (21.03.19) 30, Stanley Road (22.03.19) 6, Stanley Mount (undated but received on 26.03.19) 18, Castle Street (31.03.19) 7, Victoria Terrace (27.03.19)
==== PAGE 6 ====
19/00202/CON Page 6 of 9
24, Circular Road (25.03.19) 31, Stanley Terrace (undated but received ??) 3, Stanley Road (27.03.19) 37, Stanley Terrace (30.03.19 and 05.04.19) 20, Stanley Road (28.03.19) 10, Gib Lane (29.03l.19) 31, Shore Road (30.03.19) 5, Stanley Mount (28.03.19 and 29.03.19) Westholme, Cannan Avenue, Kirk Michael (29.03.19) 8, Gib Lane (30.03.19) 18, Stanley Mount (undated but received on 02.04.19) 13, Rockmount Road (29.03.19) 5, Stanley Road (31.03.19) 21, Queen's Drive (29.03.19) 17, Stanley Road (02.04.19) 60, Patrick Street (01.04.19) 26, Stanley Road (02.04.19) 22, Stanley Road (02.04.19) 32, Stanley Road (28.03.19) 17, Circular Road (31.03.19) 39, Stanley Terrace (03.04.19) 6, Stanley Road (03.04.19 and undated but received on 04.04.19) 40, Stanley Road (02.04.19) 24, Bridge Street (02.04.19) 5, Circular Road (undated but received on 03.04.19) Thie ny Scoill, Derby Road (03.04.19) 6, Circular Road (06.04.19) 12, Stanley Road (05.04.19) Reayrt ny Keylley (05.04.19) 14, Stanley Mount (05.04.19) 9A, Stanley Road (05.04.19) 14, Bridge Street (06.04.19) 14, Stanley Road (05.04.19) The Old Chapel, Patrick Corner, rents an office in Gib Lane (05.04.19) 16, Stanley Road (03.04.19) 24, Stanley Road (04.04.19) 4, Stanley Road (03.04.19) 13, Stanley road (02.04.19) 9, Stanley Road (04.04.19) 19, Stanley Road (05.04.19) Garden Flat, 4, Marine Parade, owner of the Old Stables, Gib Lane (03.04.19) 6, Oak Road (28.07.19)
5.4.3 Peel Residents' Association, established following the submission of the six applications (05.04.19) submit the same parking study as was submitted by the resident of 37, Stanley Terrace and reiterate the concerns of others regarding the height, design and impact of the development on traffic and car parking. They suggest that the members all share boundaries with the site and should be given Interested Person Status although each member has written in separately. No addresses have been provided, only names.
5.4.4 Peel Heritage Trust (28.03.19) make no comment on the demolition of the existing buildings.
5.4.5 Tim Crookall MLC reiterates a number of the above views, commenting on the lack of the re-use of existing sandstone, the parking, highways and traffic issues, loss of light to existing residents. He also notes that in his time as representative of the people of Peel, he has very,
==== PAGE 7 ====
19/00202/CON Page 7 of 9
very rarely seen such local opposition to a development scheme and whilst he believes that there is generally no opposition to the redevelopment of the sites, what is proposed is not acceptable (13.04.19).
ASSESSMENT 6.1 The issue in this case is whether the demolition of the buildings on site would have an adverse impact on the character or appearance of the Conservation Area. Whilst there are concurrent proposals for redevelopment of this and the adjacent site, this is not relevant to the consideration of this application, although it is relevant to consider whether it is acceptable for these buildings to be demolished without the assurance of immediate redevelopment and if so, whether any conditions need to be attached to control the appearance of the site in the mean time.
6.2 It is clear from the policies that where existing buildings do not contribute positively to the character or appearance of the Conservation Area, it may be acceptable for those buildings to be demolished. The existing car showroom on Site A is a modern building which contributes little to the otherwise historic and attractive seaside setting of the immediate vicinity. Whilst the building alongside on Site A is more interesting, possessing elements of sandstone walling, this building has been significantly changed and contributes little as it stands, to the Conservation Area. The buildings on Site B have been similarly altered but as is clear from Gib Lane, their composition of Peel sandstone, even if this has been compromised by patching and additional fabric being added on top, adds to the character of the town, particularly given the historic use associated with the fishing industry.
6.3 However, Manx National Heritage suggest that the application has been too quick to dismiss the historical importance of the existing sandstone building on the site and in the absence of a detailed historical appraisal, it is not accepted that RB consent should be granted for the removal of this building.
6.4 If the buildings were demolished and the site levelled and finished with a consistent material, it is considered that this, if the adjacent building proposed for demolition under 19/00202/CON were also removed, would open up a public view of the sea and provide more light and open outlook for numbers 9-19 (odd only), Stanley Road. If the existing buildings on Site b were demolished, notwithstanding the concerns expressed in 6.3 above, some of what remains of the buildings on Site A are interesting, if not in particularly good repair and the public view of this would not be objectionable. Whilst the showroom is not particularly attractive, its rear elevation is little different from its others which are already visible from Stanley Road and Marine Parade. It is also relevant that should open sites become unsightly, the local authority has powers under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1984 (Section 14) to take action to remediate the situation.
CONCLUSION 7.1 In the absence of a detailed, professional appraisal of the historical importance of the sandstone warehouse on the site, is considered that the removal of this building could have an adverse impact on the historical importance of the Conservation Area and the application is not supported.
CONCLUSION 7.1 In the absence of a detailed, professional appraisal of the historical importance of the sandstone warehouse on the site, is considered that the removal of this building could have an adverse impact on the historical importance of the Conservation Area and the application is not supported. The single issue in this case is whether the demolition of the buildings, including the boundary sandstone wall, would have an adverse impact on the character or appearance of the Conservation Area. Whilst there may be concerns about what will replace the buildings, this is
==== PAGE 8 ====
19/00202/CON Page 8 of 9
not an issue for the current application which relates solely to the demolition of the existing structures.
INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Registered Buildings) Regulations 2013, the following 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; (c) Manx National Heritage; and (d) 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.
__
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 : ...Refused... Committee Meeting Date:...12.08.2019
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.
==== PAGE 9 ====
19/00202/CON Page 9 of 9
PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 12.08.2019
Application No. :
19/00202/CON Applicant : Empire Garages Ltd Proposal : Registered Building consent for the demolition elements relating the application 19/00201/B Site Address : Garage And Premises Stanley Road Peel Isle Of Man
Principal Planner : Miss S E Corlett Presenting Officer As above
Addendum to the Officer’s Report
Miss Corlett clarifed the position of her recommendation as to interested person status and recommended that the reference to "could" in the reason for refusal, should be replaced by "would".
Reason for Refusal
R 1. In the absence of a detailed, professional appraisal of the historical importance of the sandstone warehouse on the site, is considered that the removal of this building would have an adverse impact on the historical importance of the Conservation Area and the application would therefore be contrary to Environment Policies 30, 35 and 39 of the Strategic Plan and CA/6 of Planning Policy Statement 1/01.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal