198003 — 24/00570/CON | Planning Portal IoM

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      24/00570/CON                                     Page  1  of  10

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 24/00570/CON Applicant : Hesketh Investments Limited Proposal : Registered Building Consent for demolition elements to PA 24/00569/B Site Address : The Former Empire Garage Showroom Marine Parade Peel, IM5 1PA

Planning Officer: Toby Cowell Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 21.10.2024 __

Conditions and Notes for Approval

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions

C 1. The works hereby granted registered building consent shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this consent.

Reason: To comply with paragraph 2(2)(a) of schedule 3 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented registered building consents.

C 2. Development shall not commence, including any demolition works, until a programme of historic building recording of the existing buildings and structures on the site, together with the present site arrangement including the configuration of Gib Lane, has been undertaken and submitted to the Department for approval in writing. The programme of historic building recording must be undertaken in accordance with Level Two as set out in Understanding Historic Buildings: A guide to good recording practice.

Reason: To ensure and safeguard the recording and inspection of matters of historical importance that will be lost in the course of works.

C 3. No development shall commence, including any demolition works, until sample details of wall cladding, roof finishes, windows and external doors have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details and be retained thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of preserving the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and surrounding area.

C 4. No development shall commence, including any demolition works, until panels of the facing stonework, including any copings or movement joints, have been erected on site (or an

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      24/00570/CON                                     Page  2  of  10

alternative location) and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details and be retained thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of preserving the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and surrounding area.

C 5. Works of demolition shall not be carried out until a contract that allows for the carrying out of works of redevelopment has been made and planning permission has been granted for the redevelopment for which the contract provides.

Reason: In order to prevent a gap site/sites in the Conservation Area, which would harm its character and appearance.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposed development is considered to amount to a highly efficient reuse of a brownfield site within an urban area, whilst being of an appropriate layout, scale and density to ensure that the general character and appearance of the wider Conservation Area would be preserved. The proposals would provide a high standard of living for future occupants, without resulting in a detrimental impact upon the amenities of surrounding residential properties. The development would further provide sufficient off-street parking provision and give rise to improved highway safety following alterations to Gib Lane. The proposals are therefore in compliance with Strategic Policies 4 and 5, General Policy 2 and Environment Policies 35, 42 of the Strategic Plan (2016).

Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the following drawings and documents referenced;

Bat Emergence Survey Received 02.10.24

P03 Rev A - Proposed Marine Parade streetscene elevations Received 27.08.24

P04 Rev B - Proposed Street Elevations Received 24.08.24

ITB19672-SK-003 Rev A - Access Arrangement Comparison Plan ITB19672-GA-001 Rev K - Proposed Access Arrangement P01 Rev B - Proposed Site Plan P07 Rev A - Proposed Image View East Received 23.08.24

P02 Rev A - Proposed Plans and Elevations P05 RevA - Proposed Site Drainage Plan Received 05.08.24

EX01 - Location Plan EX02 - Existing Site Layout EX03 - Existing Street Elevations P06 P08 P09 P10 P11 - Proposed Site Images Design Statement Structural Appraisal Transport Statement Received 23.05.24

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      24/00570/CON                                     Page  3  of  10

Interested Person Status

It is recommended that the following government departments should be given Interested Person Status:

Department of Infrastructure Flood Risk Management Division

It is further 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 4(2):

12 Stanley Road, Peel 21 Cleiy Rhennee, Kirk Michael

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

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE DIRECTION OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT

1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site relates to the former Empire Garage showroom and vehicle workshop and an additional disused commercial building located on the corner of Marine Parade (north) and Stanley Road (south/south-west) in Peel. The site is effectively split into two distinct sections by Gib Lane running between the two buildings.

1.2 A row of residential properties immediately adjoin and extend eastward from the site (former showroom building) along Marine Parade, which further back onto Gib Lane. Likewise, a Masonic Hall further adjoins the site along Stanley Road (commercial building and associated car park). A further row of terraced properties are present to the immediate south on the opposite side of Stanley Road.

1.3 The existing buildings on the site vary in age and form. A mid-20th century building occupies the north-western portion of the site, while the buildings in the north-eastern section and those between Gib Lane and Stanley Road vary in age and form, with some historic elements and some 20th and 21st century elements. The elevations along Gib Lane in particular feature exposed local sandstone walls, with various historic openings and alterations is evidence that do illustrate the site's history and each building's historic use.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Registered Building Consent is sought for the demolition of all existing buildings and structures on site in connection with PA 24/00569/B for the comprehensive redevelopment of the site to provide 7 no. dwellings with associated parking areas together with alterations to the alignment of Gib Lane.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The site has been the subject of a number of applications for alterations of the existing garage buildings, none of which is considered relevant to the consideration of the current application. Moreover recently however, planning permission was refused for 2 schemes either side of Gib Lane. The northern section (Area A) occupying the former showroom was subject to PA 19/00199/B for the demolition of the showroom and related structures and erection of a three storey building to provide ground floor commercial/retail units (Use Class 1, 2 and 3) with

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      24/00570/CON                                     Page  4  of  10

seven apartments above with associated parking and facilities. This application was refused for the following reasons:

R 1. The building, by virtue of its height, mass and design, would not preserve or enhance the character or appearance of Gib Lane for the benefit of users thereof and whereby the height of the building would remove certain public views of the Castle and the sea. The development would therefore be contrary to Environment Policy 35 and General Policy 2e of the Strategic Plan.

R 2. The proposed development would not make adequate provision for car parking spaces within the building in accordance with the standards of the Strategic Plan (Appendix Seven) and there is insufficient information to demonstrate that this would not have an unacceptable impact on on-street parking and highway safety in the area. The development is therefore contrary to Transport Policy 7 and General Policy 2h of the Strategic Plan.

R 3. The development does not demonstrate that it would have an acceptable impact on highway safety, through the inclusion of features within or above the public highway which are not acceptable to the highway authority and by the absence of correctly drawn visibility splays at junctions. It has not been demonstrated that there is sufficient visibility for users of the proposed garaged parking spaces for them to be used safely. The proposal is therefore contrary to Transport Policy 4 and General Policy 2h and i of the Strategic Plan.

R 4. The proposal makes no provision for public open space or affordable housing. Given that the adjacent site is also owned by the applicant and is being proposed for development at the same time, and particularly as the development of site A relies upon the demolition of the buildings on site A, or at least some of them, to provide the bin store and the widening of Gib Lane, it is considered appropriate to consider the cumulative impact of the developments which would together result in sufficient housing numbers to warrant requiring both affordable housing and public open space. No provision is being made for affordable housing and whilst a commuted sum has been referred to in respect of public open space, there is nothing definitive in the application to demonstrate the impact of this. It cannot be concluded that there is sufficient provision for affordable housing or public open space. The development is therefore contrary to Housing Policy 5 and Recreation Policies 3 and 4 of the Strategic Plan.

R 5. The development of this site is inextricably linked to the demolition of buildings on the site on the other side of Gib Lane as the widening of the lane and the provision of bin storage is on that site where there are currently buildings. This demolition is not part of the current application and as such, the application is deficient and incapable of being implemented on its own. The demolition of the other buildings is the subject of 19/00202/CON which is recommended for refusal and the redevelopment of that site is proposed in 19/00201/B is also recommended for refusal. As such, were this current application to be approved and the buildings demolished on the other side of the lane with no redevelopment, the rear of the proposed building would be publicly visible and it is not considered that the functional design and appearance of the rear elevation would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area at this point, nor provide an acceptable visual impact, contrary to Environment Policy 35 and General Policy 2b, c and g of the Strategic Plan.

3.2 Likewise the southern section (Area B) was subject to PA 19/00201/B for the demolition of garages and related structures and erection of a three storey building to provide ground floor commercial/retail units (Use Class 1, 2 and 3) with seven apartments above with associated parking and facilities. This application was also refused for the following reasons:

R 1. The proposed development would neither preserve nor enhance the Conservation Area by virtue of the presentation of the rear elevation to Gib Lane. In addition, were the development of Site A not to be undertaken, the rear elevation of the proposed building would be visible above the existing car showroom with a resultant deleterious effect on the character and

==== PAGE 5 ====

                                      24/00570/CON                                     Page  5  of  10

appearance of the Conservation Area, contrary to General Policy 2b, c and g and Environment Policy 35 of the Strategic Plan.

4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 The site lies within an area of 'Mixed Use' as identified in the Peel Local Plan (1989), 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.

4.2 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, 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).

4.3 The plan refers to additional residential accommodation in the town as being a priority (paragraph 5.1).

4.4 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

==== PAGE 6 ====

                                      24/00570/CON                                     Page  6  of  10

standards of design and it respects the scale and character of its surroundings" (paragraph 9.17).

4.5 The following policies from the 2016 Strategic Plan are also considered pertinent in the assessment of this application;

Strategic Policy 4 Development to protect or enhance setting of Registered Buildings, landscape quality and biodiversity, and not result in unacceptable environmental pollution 5 Design and visual impact

General Policy 2 General Development Considerations

Environment Policy 35 Development in Conservation Areas

42 Designed to respect the character and identity of the locality

43 Development and regeneration of run-down urban areas

5.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999) states, "(4) Where any area is for the time being a conservation area, special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing its character or appearance in the exercise, with respect to any buildings or other land in the area, of any powers under this Act".

Given that the site is within a Conservation Area, the above requirements apply and appropriate consideration will be given in section 7.

6.0 REPRESENTATIONS 6.1 Peel Town Commissioners - no response received at the time of writing.

6.2 Highway Services - no response received at the time of writing.

6.3 Manx National Heritage - No response received at the time of writing.

6.4 Registered Buildings Officer - No objection subject to conditions. The application proposals would result in the loss of all of the existing buildings on the site and their replacement with two buildings, one with a frontage on Marine Parade and one along Stanley Road.

The existing appearance of the site when viewed from the Promenade (Marine Parade) is that of a garage complex (currently vacant) comprising a mixture of pitched roof and flat roof buildings, a rendered pitched-roof gable wall, corrugated metal and asbestos cement roofs, portions of floor-to-ceiling glazing, corrugated metal fascias and an exposed sandstone wall visible along Gib Lane behind. A review of the iMuseum images along Peel Promenade shows that historically the site has been occupied by buildings with a variety of forms and styles, as is currently the case. Historic photographs of the site, together with an extract from the First Edition Ordnance Survey Map are included at the end of this submission for reference.

Along Marine Parade, the application proposes to replace the existing buildings with a terrace of four dwellings. The terrace would have a pitched roof finished in standing seam zinc, and walls finished in painted render. The terrace's roof would be broken up by the introduction of balcony areas at second floor level at one side of each dwelling, while each dwelling would also have a section of curtain walling alongside windows in a more traditional rhythm. The west- facing gable of this terrace would have an exposed sandstone finish at ground floor (with

==== PAGE 7 ====

                                      24/00570/CON                                     Page  7  of  10

painted render around the door opening) and a standing seam zinc finish above. Second floor windows on this gable would follow the pitch of the ridge line.

The overall appearance of this Marine Parade terrace is one that might be described as mildly contemporary, particularly in respect of the glazing and use of zinc. The use of painted render with a variety of colours is something that is judged to be appropriate. Ordinarily, colour changes along a terrace would be property by property, with vertical transitions at the party walls. These proposals do not follow this pattern, with panels at ground and first floor in a different colour to the second floor of some properties and colours running through property boundaries. Although this approach is obviously an intended feature of the design approach, it should be emphasised that this approach would unlikely to be judged appropriate on an existing building as it could harm a key element of a building's special character.

The proposal along Marine Parade would replace the varied mix of buildings that have been in existence on the site historically with a single building in one style and with a clear rhythm to its roof form and position of openings. I judge the scale and massing of the proposed terrace to be acceptable in comparison to the adjacent buildings along Marine Parade, and the overall aesthetic to be one that does not harm the character of the street. With the above factors in mind, I would consider that in comparison with the existing buildings, the proposed appearance of the site when viewed from Marine Parade would present a degree of aesthetic benefit, and not harm the special character of the Peel Conservation Area.

The terrace proposed along Stanley Road would have two, five bay, dwellings with a small step at their party wall, and a third property positioned perpendicular to these at their western end. This end property would have a principal elevation that looked out across Peel Bay towards the castle. The Stanley Road elevation of this terrace would have a more traditional appearance than the Marine Parade terrace, with painted render wall finishes, slate pitched roofs and chimney stacks on the gable and party walls. The end property would have an exposed sandstone wall finish from ground to first floor level. Although the rhythm of window openings is not exactly the same, the form of these dwellings is judged to be similar to those on the other side of Stanley Road. The overall massing, form and the finishes proposed are judged to be appropriate and in keeping with those found in this part of the Peel Conservation Area.

The proposed site plan submitted with the application shows that the existing routing of Gib Lane would be altered by the development. Whilst the actual width of the carriageway would only increase slightly, the current impression of a relatively narrow lane bordered by small- scale industrial/storage buildings would be lost in favour of a wider area between the proposed blocks containing parking, landscaping and circulation space for both pedestrians and cars. It is judged unfortunate that the historic street position would be lost as a result of the current proposals. While the justification for this alteration, to enable appropriate and usable parking provision for the dwellings, is acknowledged, I judge that this element of the proposals does cause a degree of harm to the character of the conservation area. I would, however, judge the proposed form and finishes of the Gib Lane elevations of the two buildings to be appropriate to the character of the conservation area. As with the existing historic buildings on the site, I do judge the existing Gib Lane position and form to have a degree of historic significance. In the event that the application is approved, I would therefore request that the position of the lane and the existing buildings be recorded prior to the commencement of works.

Overall, I consider the existing buildings and their relationship to Gib Lane to have a degree of evidential and historic significance. Their loss does therefore, in my judgement, cause harm to the character of the Peel Conservation Area, albeit to a limited (and less than substantial) level. I judge that the proposed buildings, when compared to those currently in existence on the site, represent a degree of aesthetic benefit to the conservation area. On balance, I judge that this benefit offsets the harm resulting from the loss of historic fabric, and that the overall impact of the proposals would be neutral.

==== PAGE 8 ====

                                      24/00570/CON                                     Page  8  of  10

The above conclusion is dependent on the inclusion of a condition to appropriately record the existing condition and arrangement of the site, and upon conditions to ensure that the finishes of the proposed development are appropriate and respect the character of the conservation area. (04.09.24)

6.5 Ecosystems Policy Officer - No Objection subject to condition. The Ecosystem Policy Team can confirm that Ecology Vannin's Protected Species Survey dated October 2024 and the Manx Bat Group's Bat Emergence Survey dated August 2024, are all in order and that a suitable level of assessment has been undertaken.

Feral pigeons were definitely nesting within the buildings, though mitigation is not required for the loss of their nest sites. House sparrow were recorded as likely breeding for which mitigation is required. Ecology Vannin recommended that at least 4 swift nest boxes are affixed to the new buildings at eaves level to provide this mitigation and suitably positioned boxes are already shown on the proposed elevation drawings, though a type suitable for swifts has not yet been specified.

No evidence of roosting bats was found, but the development will result in the loss of potential roost features. Ecology Vannin recommended that at least 2 bat boxes suitable for crevice dwelling bat species are affixed to the new buildings at eaves level and suitably positioned boxes are already shown on the proposed elevation drawings, Ecology Vannin also recommended the installation of low level lighting to minimise impacts. 02.10.24)

6.6 Flood Risk Management Division - No objection following submission of additional information. (11.06.24)

6.7 Highways Drainage - no response received at the time of writing.

6.8 Manx Utilities Authority - no response received at the time of writing.

6.9 Two letters of representation had been received objecting to the proposals. A summary of their comments is listed as follows:

Design, layout and density of development is out of keeping with the area and would result in a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the conservation area;

Highway safety impact as a result of increased vehicles associated with the development and increased on-street parking issues;

Loss of privacy to surrounding properties;

Overshadowing and loss of light to surrounding properties;

Impact on outlook and views across towards the castle and bay

Increased noise and light pollution, particularly during construction phase;

Impact on property values.

7.0 ASSESSMENT 7.1 The proposals seek a comprehensive redevelopment of the site to provide a total of 7 no. dwellings (3 x 4-bed and 4 x 3-bed), with development proposals either side of Gib Lane following its realignment. From a visual standpoint, the development would be most prominent in the context of Marine Parade, particularly from the west when viewing eastward back towards the site. This particular section of the proposals would result in a marked uplift in scale, bulk and massing following the loss of the existing single-storey showroom and garage, and subsequent replacement with a row of three storey terraced dwellings.

7.2 Nevertheless, the development would follow the scale and massing of the existing row of terraced housing extending further eastward from the site and therefore not appear out of context or incongruous in this respect. The general design language of the proposals are however notably more modern as opposed to a pastiche of historic architecture, and this is

==== PAGE 9 ====

                                      24/00570/CON                                     Page  9  of  10

evident through the use of a greater proportion of glazing, including marginally recessed glazed patio style doors at second-floor level for each unit which span the eaves. Likewise, the proposed materials palette, and in particular the use of zinc standing seam for the roof and parts of the exterior, clear deviate from what could be conceived as traditional.

7.3 Notwithstanding this however, existing development along the Promenade is notably varied in terms of design and at times also scale. This arguably allows for a bolder design language to be employed when done so to a high standard and with a degree of sensitivity, which the current proposed are considered to have successfully achieved. Indeed, the use of enclosed second-floor terraces for each dwelling serves a dual purpose by reducing the bulk and massing of the development when viewed as a whole, and providing clear visual distinction between each unit. Moreover, the double height (ground and first floors) glazing effectively provides a modern take upon a traditional bay window, which add to the overall horizontal emphasis of the development with corresponding fenestration for each dwelling.

7.4 Turning to the western elevation of Plot 1 at the junction, the design language on this elevation is even more visually bold through the use of standing seam cladding for the majority of the exterior, angled windows mirroring the pitched of each roof slope and a projecting bay at ground floor. Such a design approach is considered generally appropriate here given that the Plot occupies a landmark position within the site on the corner of the junction, and therefore a more striking statement piece of architecture and finish is considered to successfully tie off this section of the development as it turns the corner.

7.5 When reviewing the proposed development of Plots 5-7 off Stanley Road in the southern section of the site, it is clear that the design language is far more traditional in nature and more closely reflective of surrounding architecture within Stanley Road itself which is notably less varied. Nevertheless, the proposals do include a slightly modern take on fenestration detailing on the Stanley Road elevation through the use of a narrow double height glazed section in the centre of Plots 5 and 6.

7.6 Overall, the design, scale, form and massing of the development as a whole is considered to be of a high standard and largely innovative, which has sought to move away from design an historic pastiche of traditional architecture within Peel. It is further notable to point out that the existing level of development on site is not particularly attractive from a visual standpoint, with its presence giving rise to a degree of harm to the character and appearance of the wider Conservation Area.

7.7 It has been recognised by the Registered Buildings Officer (RBO) that a sandstone wall of some historic value is present on the southern side of Gib Lane and forms part of the larger commercial garage building, which it clearly pre-dates. Nevertheless, the wall itself is not Registered and has been notably altered over the years, including poorly and crudely applied mortar and modern infilling of previous openings. The RBO has however requested that a photographic record of the wall and present configuration of the site be undertaken prior to its demolition, and has recognised that its loss in isolation would result in a degree of harm to the historic significance, character and setting of the Conservation Area.

7.8 It is also however been recognised that, given the harmful impact the current level of built development has upon the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, it's redevelopment as proposed would, when also factoring in the loss of the abovementioned wall, give rise to a largely neutral impact upon the character of the Conservation Area. From a clear visual standpoint however, it is the opinion of officers that the proposals would give rise to a positive impact insofar as the development would introduce a high quality and innovative form of development that provides a greater degree of architectural interest to the site's immediate setting, whilst still respecting the massing and form of surrounding development. The use of sandstone for the ground-floor exterior on both sides of Gib Lane is also noted and welcomed, and provides a nod to the historic sandstone walls currently present.

==== PAGE 10 ====

                                      24/00570/CON                                     Page  10  of  10

7.9 The general layout of the proposals is further considered to be appropriate and provides a greater degree of legibility, particularly through the introduction of 'marker' buildings either side of Gib Lane at the junction, together with the realignment of Gib Lane itself which provides greater functionality and improved highway safety. The hard landscaped areas at each corner are also welcomed and further add to the general visual improvement provided as a result of the site's comprehensive redevelopment.

7.10 In summary, the proposals will allow for an efficient reuse of a brownfield site that would, on balance, result in a positive impact upon the character and appearance of the streetscene and wider Conservation Area relative to the current situation. The development is therefore deemed to be acceptable from a design and visual impact perspective, in compliance with Strategic Policies 4 and 5, General Policy 2, and Environment Policies 35, 42 and 43 of the Strategic Plan.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 The proposed development is considered to amount to a highly efficient reuse of a brownfield site within an urban area, whilst being of an appropriate layout, scale and density to ensure that the general character and appearance of the wider Conservation Area would be preserved. The proposals are therefore in compliance with Strategic Policies 4 and 5, General Policy 2 and Environment Policies 35, 42 of the Strategic Plan (2016), and therefore recommended for approval.

8.0 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) Manx National Heritage; and (c) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated

8.2 In addition to those above, the Regulation 9(3) requires the Department to decide which persons (if any) who have made representations with respect to the application, should be treated as having sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application. __

I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to that body by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status and/or rights to appeal.

Decision Made : Permitted

Committee Meeting Date: 8.10.2024

Signed : T COWELL 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 office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/customers and archive record.