Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
24/91195/C Page 1 of 10
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 24/91195/C Applicant : Thyme Ltd Proposal : Continued use of 22 temporary car parking spaces Site Address : 20 St Georges Street Douglas Isle Of Man
Principal Planner: Chris Balmer Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 17.01.2025 __
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. The use of the site as a temporary car park for a further two years would reduce the likelihood of a prominent brownfield site being brought forward and this would be contrary to Strategic Policy 1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, the policy on car parks as set out in "Reform of the Planning System - Programme for Government 2016 - 2021" and the Area Plan for the East 2020.
R 2. The use of this site as a temporary car park would have a detrimental visual impacts upon the visual amenities of the area and detrimentally affect important views into the immediately adjacent Athol Street/Victoria Street Conservation Area, especially when viewing St Georges Church contrary to General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 36 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
R 3. The proposed use as a temporary car park would not be in accordance with the land use designations and Mixed Use Proposal 4 of the Area Plan for the East 2020.
__
Right to Appeal
It is recommended that the following organisations should be given the Right to Appeal on the basis that they have submitted a relevant objection:
Local Authority
It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal:
DOI Highway Services - No Objection __
==== PAGE 2 ====
24/91195/C Page 2 of 10
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE ACTING HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application is an almost-triangular parcel of land situated at the south-eastern corner of St. George's and Hope Streets. Also within the control of the applicant are two parcels of land on Circular Road to the northwest, on which planning approval was granted for the construction of a large office block connected by an over-highway walkway, which is now complete and occupied.
1.2 The site slopes downward from north west to south east and is consistently hard surfaced with the access and exit from the west onto St. Georges Street. The site is bordered by timber post-and-rail fencing on the north-western and south-eastern sides. On the other boundaries are a stone and patched rendered wall adjacent to the church and the remaining buildings on St George's Street. At the time of the first site visit there were weeds growing at the edges of the hard surfaced area and the wall bordering the Church was finished in a patchy mix of stone and render.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application seeks approval for continued use of 22 temporary car parking spaces for a period of three years. It is noted visiting the site that a large section of the site is fenced off, (approximately only a third was in use) with Harris fencing given the rear wall has partially collapsed and therefore it is presumed the Harris fencing has been installed due safety concerns. Accordingly, only approximately 4/5 spaces are in use.
2.2 Permission was granted in 1998 and 2003 for this use and it has continued as such, with and without permission, since under 98/00320/B, 03/00533/B, 15/00232/B, 17/00169/B, 19/00734/C and 21/01398/C with the last of these extending the approval until 01.04.2024.
2.3 The applicant clarifies the situation by explaining that the site has been used as a temporary car park for 16 years and latterly by Thyme Limited whose tenant is Microgaming Ltd and whose approval for new offices on Circular Road (14/00113/B) required a parking strategy, part of which was a transport plan which aims to reduce transport to and from work by car by its staff and partly by the use of the temporary and permanent car parks on this site. 43 car parking spaces were to be provided on site (Circular Road) with a further 22 elsewhere (indicated at the time to be on this site).
2.4 When the previous planning application was submitted (21/01398/C) the applicants indicated that the site has been used as a temporary car park for 16 years and latterly by Thyme Limited whose tenant is Microgaming Ltd and whose approval for new offices on Circular Road (14/00113/B) required a parking strategy, part of which was a transport plan which aims to reduce transport to and from work by car by its staff and partly by the use of the temporary and permanent car parks on this site. 43 car parking spaces were to be provided on site (Circular Road) with a further 22 elsewhere (indicated at the time to be on this site). Since that time Microgaming have been considering their options for the application site with potentially office space above the car park as the further needs of their company emerge. However, this process was halted by Covid and the resultant economic consequences and therefore Microgaming are unable to carry out the capital investment of a multi-story car park.
2.5 Since the expiry the applicants have now submitted the current application and are again seeking to extend the temporary period by 2 years. In support of the application the applicants have stated:
==== PAGE 3 ====
24/91195/C Page 3 of 10
"Thyme Ltd on behalf of the Microgaming group of companies advise that they have considered a number of development options for this site including a three deck car park, offices with parking, and apartments (for their own use) and car park. None of these options have proven financially viable as the returns on any of the three proposals do not justify the development expenditure. Instead it has been easier to provide necessary parking - the prime driver for development - via third party alternatives.
Following the covid pandemic construction costs have endured their highest levels of inflation in decades. This has effectively prohibited development for the reasons given above. The recent market indicators suggest that tender prices are now returning to pre covid normality. As such Thyme shortly intend to revisit the options listed above. To reach a conclusion however may take up to 2 years as the design will have to be tested as acceptable to the planning department and re tested financially. As such this period of extension would benefit the company not just in their short term parking needs but as time to reconsider the development potential for the site."
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area of "Mixed Use Proposal Area - 4 St George's" on the recently adopted Area Plan for the East 2020. The site abuts the Athol Street/Victoria Street Conservation Area.
3.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016) contains a number of relevant policies.
3.2.1 Strategic Policy 10 states: "New development should be located and designed such as to promote a more integrated transport network with the aim to: (a) minimise journeys, especially by private car; (b) make best use of public transport; (c) not adversely affect highway safety for all users, and (d) encourage pedestrian movement" 3.2.2 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; (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."
3.2.3 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
==== PAGE 4 ====
24/91195/C Page 4 of 10
pedestrian journeys generated by that development in a safe and appropriate manner, and in accordance with the environmental objectives of this plan."
3.2.4 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."
3.2.5 Environment Policy 36 states: "Where development is proposed outside of, but close to, the boundary of a Conservation Area, this will only be permitted where it will not detrimentally affect important views into and out of the Conservation Area."
3.2.6 Environment Policy 43 states: "The Department will generally support proposals which seek to regenerate run-down urban and rural areas. Such proposals will normally be set in the context of regeneration strategies identified in the associated Area Plans. The Department will encourage the re-use of sound built fabric, rather than its demolition."
3.2.7 Paragraph 11.5.3 indicates that the long term the 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 but sets out a general policy (Transport Policy 7) "in the shorter term" which sets out parking standards for new developments.
4.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 The Council of Ministers have approved an Action Plan to Reform the Planning System (hereafter "The Action Plan"). The document "Reform of the Planning System - Programme for Government 2016 - 2021" GD2018/0031 was laid before Tynwald on 15th May 2018. One of the actions set out within this is that, "Council of Ministers have agreed the following Policy with immediate effect: In order to continue to incentivise and support site redevelopment and the associated economic development, Planning Approval should not normally be given for brownfield sites to be used as temporary car parks" and that this is important, "To ensure faster brownfield site redevelopment and encourage socio-economic development".
4.1.1 This "Action Plan" was approved by the previously Administration; albeit has not been annulled. However, the Area Plan for the East Written Statement objectives continues the theme of promoting and reuse of brownfield land, especially in Douglas to reduce the impact upon the countryside (paragraphs 8.3 & 12.11).
4.2 Report of the Select Committee of Tynwald on the Development of Unoccupied urban sites (2017-2018) (hereafter "The Select Committee Report" recommended that, "Tynwald calls upon the Council of Ministers and all Departments to use every means at their disposal to encourage and prioritise the development of unoccupied or previously developed urban sites ahead of building on greenfield sites in the Manx countryside; and in particular that Tynwald is of the opinion that urgent action should be taken ... (iv) to use the planning system, taxation and other potential incentives to discourage greenfield development; (v) to use the planning system, taxation and other potential incentives to encourage brownfield development in Development Zones in Douglas and in other urban areas".
4.3 The Manual for Manx Roads (published by the Department of Infrastructure) sets out detailed guidance on highways matters.
4.4 The Area Plan for the East has been approved by Tynwald and came into operation on the 1st December 2020. This identifies that the application site is proposed for allocation as, "Mixed Use". The written statement indicates that:
"Mixed Use Area 4 - St George's This is the business district of Douglas and is characterised by offices, many serving financial institutions. Athol Street is notably the core of this area and is representative of the economic
==== PAGE 5 ====
24/91195/C Page 5 of 10
well-being of the Island. There is a smattering of food and drink uses supporting the area. The primary office frontage along Athol Street is notated by the hatched line on Map 5.
Town Centre - Mixed Use Proposal 4 There will be a presumption in favour of offices and financial and professional services along Athol Street. Within the area, but outside of Athol Street, offices, financial and professional services, food and drink and some residential uses will also be acceptable. Uses which conflict with these will generally not be supported. As this area lies partly within a Conservation Area, development plans should pay regard to the Conservation Area Character Appraisal for Athol Street and Victoria Street."
5.0 PLANNING HISTORY 5.1 There have been a number of applications on the site, which are considered relevant in the consideration of this application:
5.2 Continued use of 22 temporary car parking spaces - was approved under 21/01398/C, subject to the following condition;
"C 1. The use of the site as a temporary car park may continue until 2 years from the date of this decision notice whereupon the use must cease.
Reason: to reflect the intention of the application and to coincide the temporary period to that of recent approvals for temporary car parks in Douglas, all to accord with the COMIN directive on temporary car parks."
5.2.1 It is noted that this application was approved by the Planning Committee where the Minutes of this meeting indicated;
"The Members expressed that they also felt a scheme should be coming forward for the development of the site. They further expressed that should they be minded to approve the proposal, that a time limit of 2 years be applied in this case. The Case Officer confirmed that he was not willing to change his recommendation to 2 years.
The Members opined that they did not wish a further application for temporary parking on this site to be brought before them, and they encouraged the applicant to submit a suitable scheme for the development of the site. The HDM advised that a condition could not be applied which prevent future applications, but it would be in the committee's remit to determine such applications as they felt appropriate."
5.2.2 It is noted the reason for the approval stated; "It is concluded that there is sufficient justification in this case; again, to approve the use of this site as a temporary car park until 2024. By then a new scheme could be implemented or the car park use of this site will cease. This was stated by the last approved application; however given the Covid pandemic it is considered reasonable to allow the applicants perhaps a final chance to develop the site."
5.3 Temporary use as a car park (retrospective) was approved under 19/00734/C, subject to the following condition; "The use of the site as a temporary car park may continue until 20.09.20 whereupon the use must cease.
Reason: to reflect the intention of the application and to coincide the temporary period to that of recent approvals for temporary car parks in Douglas, all to accord with the COMIN directive on temporary car parks."
==== PAGE 6 ====
24/91195/C Page 6 of 10
5.3 Further, the permanent car park was approved under 16/00835/B, subject to conditions including the following:
"The land the subject of this application shall be used solely for the parking of motor vehicles of those employees working on or within the land parcels edged in blue on the submitted plan SC1328-00-10, date-stamped as having been received 14th February 2017.
Reason: Without this condition, it is possible that a planning approval on the land edged in blue could not be lawfully implemented, and is in any case intended to be used in connection with that land. Such a condition is therefore in the interest of highway safety generally and in the interest of providing sufficient car parking space more specifically."
5.4 The Microgaming offices (14/01131/B) were approved subject to conditions including the following: "Prior to the occupation of the new building hereby approved, the applicant must have approved by the Department details of the provision of car parking to serve the development. This must address the total number of spaces required to be provided under the terms of the Strategic Plan or a justification for any reduction in this provision such as a Travel Plan, and with a phasing arrangement for the delivery and retention of the spaces and the monitoring of the Plan. Once provided, the car parking spaces must be retained for use by those employed within or in association with the development hereby approved.
Reason: in the interests of road safety and reducing vehicular traffic to the development."
5.4.1 This condition was approved by the Department in September 2016 including a parking strategy, part of which was a transport plan which aims to reduce transport to and from work by car by its staff and partly by the use of the temporary and permanent car parks on this site. 43 car parking spaces were to be provided on site (Circular Road) with a further 22 elsewhere (indicated at the time to be on this site).
6.0 REPRESENTATIONS 6.1 Highway Services make the following comments (19.11.24): "After reviewing this Application, Highway Services HDC finds it to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and/or parking as the continued use as a car park would not be detrimental to Douglas centre and transport policies due to its modest size."
6.2 Douglas Borough Council has objected on the following grounds (17.12.2024): "The above planning application was considered by the Council's Environmental Services Committee at a meeting held on the 16/12/24 when the Committee resolved to raise an objection against the application for the following reasons.
It was considered that the application did not comply with Strategic Policy 1 from the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016: 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 reusing scarce indigenous building materials. It was also considered that the application did not align with the COMIN policy from the Reform of the Planning System Program for Government 2016 - 2021:
"In order to continue to incentivise and support site redevelopment and associated economic development, Planning Approval should not normally be given for brownfield sites to be used as temporary car parks'"
==== PAGE 7 ====
24/91195/C Page 7 of 10
The Council would like to make it known that a previous application for a multi-storey car park was supported by the Council and should the site owner put forward a revised scheme for a multi-storey car park the Council could reconsider its current stance on the site's development."
7.0 ASSESSMENT 7.1 The principle issues with the application are the land use zoning & principle and whether the use of the site on a temporary basis for car parking is acceptable and the potential visual impact.
The land use zoning / use of site & principle 7.2 The proposed use as a temporary car park, does not fit with the uses outlined within the Area Plan for the East. It is therefore not in accordance with the land use designation of the Area Plan for the East 2020.
7.3 The use of brownfield sites for temporary uses raises various questions - the extent that the use of the site as a temporary car park discourages investment in its more permanent development, the likely condition of the site in the interim if approval is not given for a temporary use and the extent to which the latter outweighs the former. The answers to these questions are to some extent conjecture. However, the previously adopted Council of Ministers policy gives a firm view as to how these issues might be considered. Therefore the issue is whether there are exceptional circumstances which would indicate that the 'normal' position as set out in the policy should not be followed.
7.4 While the applicants have outlined the history of the site and why no development has not been undertaken. Further a similar application was approved in September 2019 (19/00734/C) which considered the adopted Council of Ministers policy. At that time the Planning Committee report stated: "Whilst planning approval was granted relatively recently for the temporary use of the site for car parking, this was for a single year (proposed as such) and since then, Government has published the findings of a Select Committee which supports the development of brownfield over greenfield land development and the Reform of the Planning System report where the Council of Ministers direct that there should normally be a presumption against the use of vacant sites for temporary car parks. It is important to note that the reason for the direction relates to the desire to ensure faster brownfield site redevelopment and encourage socio- economic development and the consideration that temporary car parks obstruct this objective.
The application is slightly different from other recent proposals for temporary car parks where the operators were running a business where others paid to use the parking spaces: here the car park is owned by the user. A refusal to allow the continued use of this site as a temporary car park could be more likely to encourage the owner to develop it than an approval as it would need to find alternative car parking facilities for its staff which are likely to come at a financial cost. However, if the applicant is considering how to develop the site - i.e. whether to implement the currently approved scheme or to develop in an alternative form, it is not likely that a refusal would be a significant element in progressing the development of this site any faster than if the current application were refused.
It is important that the proposed period of use is only one year which would not be inconsistent with the timescale of the two recent approvals for car parks on South Quay notably due to this being a period in which a significant amount of public car parking is not available through the redevelopment of the promenade (although much of this area is usually subject to two hour restrictions which would not suit those looking for all day parking). This current time is therefore a period which is not considered to be "normal" when referring to the COMIN direction. The refusal of this application is not likely to result in any change to the appearance of the site and whilst the local authority has power under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1984 to address open land which is in a condition which is detrimental to public enjoyment through its appearance, in this case, this is one of a number of
==== PAGE 8 ====
24/91195/C Page 8 of 10
sites in the immediate area which have been cleared and are devoid of structures, some of which are being used as temporary car parks. The fact that the Central Douglas Masterplan refers to a potential need for car parking in this area is also a material consideration."
7.5 It is noted since that approval (19/00734/C) the planning approval for the multi storey car park (17/00169/B) has now expired and there are no extant planning approvals on this site.
7.6 It was previously commented within the planning officers report of application 21/01398/C; which was approved, that soon after the permission of the application 19/00734/C in September 2019; Covid pandemic occurred, which has had financial implications and also changed how the office environment works. Furthermore as the site would be used by the applicants (rather than rented out to other parties) and as the last full permission on the site was for a car park; it is considered this application would meet the Council of Ministers Policy which does give some flexibility by stating "should not normally be given for brownfield sites to be used as temporary car park".
7.7 However; it is noted, that over two years have now passed since the last approved application and no new scheme has been submitted and/or approved. The Area Plan for the East has designated the site for development and the site is a brownfield site within Douglas centre where there is a continued aim to re develop such sites. The site is not identified within the "The Select Committee Report" as an unoccupied sites, but is identified within the Central Douglas Masterplan as a site of "Potential Development" (Figure 14 page 59).
7.8 The Department has asked the applicants whether any development is to take place and a timescale for such work. Their response is within paragraph 2.5.
7.9 It is noted Minutes of the Planning Committee for the previously approved scheme where Members commented; "...The Members expressed that they also felt a scheme should be coming forward for the development of the site. They further expressed that should they be minded to approve the proposal, that a time limit of 2 years be applied in this case. The Case Officer confirmed that he was not willing to change his recommendation to 2 years. (The Officer had recommend 3 year period). The Members opined that they did not wish a further application for temporary parking on this site to be brought before them, and they encouraged the applicant to submit a suitable scheme for the development of the site. The HDM advised that a condition could not be applied which prevent future applications, but it would be in the committee's remit to determine such applications as they felt appropriate."
7.10 The reasons for the approval where given as; "It is concluded that there is sufficient justification in this case; again, to approve the use of this site as a temporary car park until 2024. By then a new scheme could be implemented or the car park use of this site will cease. This was stated by the last approved application; however given the Covid pandemic it is considered reasonable to allow the applicants perhaps a final chance to develop the site."
7.11 Arguably in favour of the development is that a number of parking areas (some unlawful) in Lower Douglas have submitted planning applications or are potentially earmarked for development and the loss of such spaces would increase the level of parking demand in Douglas while the redevelopment takes place. It should be noted though that only limited weight could be attached to this argument, given a number of areas have not benefited from planning approval and or the temporary approvals have since expired. Further planning approval on a number of lower Douglas site have not yet been approved. A further argument is that the last approval on the application site was for a multi storey car park and therefore the "use" on the site was for parking; albeit the multi storey car park (three storeys) would have been a purposes designed and built car park, while larger and have a greater visual
==== PAGE 9 ====
24/91195/C Page 9 of 10
impact (given its height and scale) would make more efficient use of the site (99 spaces) which Strategic Policy 1 seeks and would appear as a proper developed site, rather than a site which is clearly a "gap site" which has not been developed in a positive manner, to the detrimental of the site and surrounding area.
7.12 Overall, the applicants (Thyme Ltd) first planning application was made in 2015 for temporary parking on the site (although there are applications back to 1998 for similar temporary parking on the site) and it is considered there has been more than sufficient time to re development the site. The evidence before the Department and the lack of any planning approval on the site for the redevelopment of the site, causes the Department concern that any further continuation of the temporary car park will not encourage and positive development in the centre of Douglas. Accordingly, it is considered the principle of allowing the 22 temporary car parking spaces is not acceptable.
THE POTENTIAL VISUAL IMPACT 7.13 While the site remains as a temporary car park; the fact remains the site visually does not add to the character or street scene. The boundary is fenced with timber post a rail fencing which is not a boundary feature in keeping with the area, the rear boundary walls are in a poor state of repair/collapse, the boundaries are overgrown with vegetation and the surface is clearly a temporary finish made up of hardcore (likely from the demolition of the previous buildings on the site) with a gravel finish. The site appears as undeveloped brownfield site in the heart of Douglas, detrimental to the prominent corner location and to the detriment of the immediately adjacent Athol Street/Victoria Street Conservation Area, especially when viewing St Georges Church from the junction of Hope Street and St Georges Street and along the site boundaries, where such views look towards the site and the boundary walls to the beyond St Georges Church (Church tower is especially apparent). Accordingly, the proposal has a detrimentally affect upon the important views into the Conservation Area, namely the area of St Georges Church and to the visual amenities of the street scene of Hope Street and St Georges Street and therefore contrary to General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 36.
8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 Overall, it is concluded that there is not sufficient justification in this case; to approve the use of this site as a temporary car park until 2027 and would have a detrimental visual impacts upon the visual amenities of the area and would be contrary to the COMIN policy from the Reform of the Planning System Program for Government 2016 - 2021, the Area Plan for the East 2020 and Strategic Policy 1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
8.2 The application is recommend for a refusal.
8.3 Should the Planning Committee disagree it is recommended the following condition be attached to any approval: C 1. The use of the site as a temporary car park may continue until 2 years from the date of this decision notice whereupon the use must cease. Reason: to reflect the intention of the application and to coincide the temporary period to that of recent approvals for temporary car parks in Douglas, all to accord with the COMIN directive on temporary car parks.
9.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE
9.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted).
9.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to:
==== PAGE 10 ====
24/91195/C Page 10 of 10
o applicant (in all cases); o a Local Authority; Government Department; Manx Utilities; and Manx National Heritage that submit a relevant objection; and o any other person who has made an objection that meets specified criteria.
9.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10.
9.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required): o any appellant or potential appellant (which includes the applicant); o the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, the Department of Infrastructure and the local authority for the area; o any other person who has submitted written representations (this can include other Government Departments and Local Authorities); and o in the case of a petition, a single representative.
9.5 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 the Right to Appeal.
__
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 : Refused
Committee Meeting Date: 27.01.2025
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 office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/customers and archive record.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal