Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
25/90441/B
Page 1 of 32
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 25/90441/B Applicant : Kelman Ltd Proposal : Erection and conversion of eight apartments and two retail units (in association with 25/00442/CON) Site Address : 22-26 North Quay Douglas Isle Of Man IM1 4LE
Principal Planner: Chris Balmer Photo Taken : 02.06.2025 Site Visit : 02.06.2025 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Approve subject to Legal Agreement Date of Recommendation: 02.06.2025 __
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 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 2. For the avoidance of doubt no approval is hereby given for any hoardings, existing shores as shown on drawing 112-01 in relation to Nrs 27-28 (Newson's building).
Reason: This site falls outside the development site and such works have not been considered.
C 3. Before the commencement of any works on site, details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department setting out the method of construction and ensuring the safety and stability of the adjacent registered building. Such details to include structural engineering drawings and/or a method statement to a suitable level of detail. The work shall be carried out fully in accordance with the method statement approved.
Reason: In order to ensure that the special architectural and historic interest of registered building 289 is retained and preserved.
C 4. Noise emissions resulting from operation of the internal domestic air source heat pump shall not exceed 42 dB LAeq, 5 mins.
==== PAGE 2 ====
25/90441/B
Page 2 of 32
Reason: In order to protect the environmental quality of the surrounding area and to safeguard the amenities of those living and working in the locality.
C 5. Prior to the commencement of construction works above slab level, or refurbishment works to an existing building details of cladding, window frames, external doors/frames and roof finishes i.e. all external finishes have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be occupied/brought into use unless the external finish has been applied in accordance with the approved details, and shall be retained thereafter.
Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development, the visual amenities of the area and preserving the character and appearance of the Conservation Area."
C 6. No demolition or development shall commence until a bat survey of the buildings has been undertaken and the results submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The bat survey shall identify any impacts on bat species together with a scheme of mitigation, where appropriate, including a timetable for its implementation. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To provide adequate safeguards for a protected species, pursuant to the provisions of Environment Policies 4 and 5 of The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
C 7. No part of the development hereby approved shall be occupied/brought into use until swift boxes have been installed in accordance with details that have previously been submitted to and approved by the Department. The details to be submitted shall include the design, locations and post-installation maintenance arrangements. Once implemented, the bird boxes shall be retained and maintained thereafter in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To provide adequate safeguards for the swifts, pursuant to Environment Policies 4 and 5 of The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
C 8. Prior to the commencement of development, a scheme detailing noise insulation between the ground floor bars/restaurants and the apartments against the transmission of noise and vibration shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and the measures shall be retained thereafter.
Reason: In order to provide acceptable living conditions for future residents, pursuant to General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 22 of The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
C 9. The ground floor units hereby approved shall be used only for purposes falling within Class 1.3
Reason: In order to safeguard future residents, given the location of the site within an area at high risk of flooding, in accordance with Environment Policies 10 and 13 of The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
C 10. No part of the development hereby approved shall be occupied/brought into use unless the associated bin storage area and secure bicycle storage has been provided in accordance with
==== PAGE 3 ====
25/90441/B
Page 3 of 32
the approved plans and details. Once provided, the areas shall thereafter be permanently retained for the intended purpose.
Reason: To promote sustainable travel in the interests of reducing pollution and congestion in accordance with Strategic Policy 10 of The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, the aims of the Active Travel Strategy and the Climate Change Act.
C 11. Prior to the commencement of construction works above slab level, details of all Air Source Heat Pumps, fume/ventilation flues, rainwater goods, soil stacks, soil vent pipes, extraction plant, air conditioning units, flues, ductwork or any other pipework shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In order to preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area pursuant to the provisions of Strategic Policy 4 and Environment Policy 35 of The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and Planning Policy Statement 1/01 and in order to ensure satisfactory living conditions for residential occupiers.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. As outlined in this report the main issue is the potential impact upon the character and quality of the Conservation area/street scene and the setting of the Registered Building. In relation to these matters, although the loss of the existing history fabric weighs against the proposal, it is considered the proposals would represent an overall enhancement to the Conservation Area/street scene and would not adversely harm the setting of the adjacent Registered Building. The proposals would therefore comply with Section 16 (3) and Section 18 (4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999), GP4, EP30, 35 and 39 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016; policies RB/6, CA/2 and CA/6 of PPS1/01.
The proposal in terms of parking/highway safety raises no concerns. The site is within a sustainable location and provisions adequate number of secure bicycle spaces within the building for use by the residents of the apartments. The proposal has been designed to reduce energy consumption, reduce fossil fuels consumption and reduce emissions which are also matters which Net Zero and the Climate Change Bill seeks. The proposal would have no significant impacts upon neighbouring annuities to warrant a refusal. All other matters are considered acceptable.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawings reference numbers all received;
30.04.2025 110-00 110-01 110-02 110-03 110-04 110-05 111-00 112-00 112-01 112-02 112-03 112-04
==== PAGE 4 ====
25/90441/B
Page 4 of 32
Design and Access Statement Flood Risk Assessment JA- Solar Datasheet Renusol Datasheet
__
Right to Appeal
It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal:
DOI (Highways/Flood/Estates and Housing) - No Objection Local Authority - No Objection/no comments received __
Officer’s Report
THIS PLANNING APPLICATIONS IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS A SECTION 13 LEGAL AGREEMENT IS REQUIRED TO BE UNDERTAKEN
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITES 1.0.1 The application site comprises of Nr's 22, 23, 24, 25 & 26 North Quay which form part of a row of properties of various styles along the northern side of North Quay with Queen Street running along the northern boundaries (rear) of the properties. 1.0.2 It should be noted that Nr 27 & 28 which are Registered Buildings (known as the Newson's building) does not fall within the application site, but is within the same ownership as the applicant. 1.0.3 The site is very close to the Lord Street bus Station and within walking distance of Douglas Town centre facilities. There are a number of other public and private car parks within the area. Queen Street has very limited formal footpath provision, whilst North Quay is substantially pedestrianised, with some limited vehicle lay-by type parking for loading and disabled drivers. Queen Street provides access to a number of car parks and 'The Saddle' public house is located at the Eastern end at its junction with North Quay. 1.0.4 As mention the application properties vary in style, height, scales, form, finishes and overall design. Accordingly the below comments on each of the properties individually;
Nrs 22 - 23 1.0.5 The applicant has indicated that the existing No. 22-23 property consists of a traditional three & half-storey plus basement building facing North Quay, constructed of rendered Manx stone walls under pitched slated roof. To the rear is a later two-storey addition which houses a garage and rooms above, together with a three-storey rendered and pitched slate roofed former storage building. The site has a footprint of 188 square metres. The applicant has noted that the application site is currently accessed via Queen Street to the rear and North Quay to the front (both having one-way direction of travel for vehicles). The application site currently has a garage and a storage building. The former is difficult to access safely and the latter has only pedestrian access. The building dates to the 19th century probably mid. The buildings can be seen in historic photos of the quay, the building makes a positive contribution to the character of the conservation area being traditional quayside buildings in their original context.
Nr 24 (Merchant House) 1.0.6 The applicants have indicated that this is an office building over three full floors of accommodation with the roof space served by roof lights. There are four parking spaces at the rear at ground floor level underneath the upper floors. It is a fairly imposing building of three storeys, and with a well-proportioned frontage attractively decorated with consistent render detailing around windows and doors, at eaves level and in the form of prominent pilasters.
==== PAGE 5 ====
25/90441/B
Page 5 of 32
Nos 25 - 26 1.0.7 The applicants have indicated that the existing No. 25 property consists of a traditional four-storey building facing North Quay, constructed of rendered Manx stone walls under a pitched slated roof. To the rear is a number of single-storey additions which house a portion of sales floor, together with outbuilding stores, and which are constructed of Manx stone and brick under pitched slated roofs. The applicants have indicated that the existing No. 26 property is a vacant site formed from the remnants of a former traditional four-storey building facing North Quay, but which had suffered a fire in the early part of the 20th Century, and which was substantially demolished in the 1960's. The North Quay elevation had been enclosed using a profiled asbestos cement agricultural sheet, and the roof has been created using profiled metal sheeting. The rear elevation is a mix of Manx stone and concrete blockwork. This section of the building was formerly used as a parking and delivery bay for the former Newson's warehouse/shop. The applicants have indicated that the combined site for No. 25-26 has a footprint of 128.41 square metres. 1.0.8 The applicants have indicated that the application site is currently accessed via Queen Street to the rear and North Quay to the front (both having one-way direction of travel for vehicles). No.25 is a shop with dwelling above. No.26 was a delivery bay and limited parking for the adjacent retail unit. The latter is difficult to access safely as entry was from North Quay and then exit via Queen Street which has very limited visibility. The building dates to the 19th century probably mid. The site also contains a vacant site which once was an identical building to the one still standing and probably constructed at the same time. The surviving building can be seen in historic photos of the quay, the building makes a positive contribution to the character of the conservation area being a traditional quayside building. The site is adjacent to the registered building the former Newsons' warehouse.
2.0 PROPOSAL 2.0.1 The application seeks approval for the erection and conversion of eight apartments and two retail units (in association with 25/00442/CON). 2.0.2 The applicant's Planning Statement indicates; "2.13 Proposed is the redevelopment of the group to Classes 1.1 - shops and 1.3 - food and drink on the basement and ground floors with the first floor converted to Class 3.4 (flats) including demolition and rebuilding of numbers 22/23, 25/26 and physical changes to the internal layout of the existing building to be retained, number 24. 2.14 The registered buildings are not included within this application. 2.15 As the registered buildings (nos 27/28) and Merchants House (no.24) are retained the proposal has the appearance of two infill schemes either side of Merchants House - although in reality the proposed accommodation proposals are continuous through nos 22- 26 North Quay inclusive. This approach offers opportunities for height variations and architectural contrasts with the existing buildings. 2.16 Two meetings with the planning authority were held before the proposed solution was arrived at. The new build structures adopted a modern architectural approach to offer the contrasts referenced above whilst the height variations have been achieved with gables and accommodation being set back from the frontage at the upper levels. 2.17 There are two bar/restaurant buildings proposed at ground floor level. These units open out onto a raised terrace with external seating. This terracing, ramped access and steps are all designed to be demountable to enable highway services and drainage maintenance. 2.18 The upper levels create eight apartments. Sizes vary from 105 sq m to 267 sq m and all have the principle rooms facing the Harbour. 2.19 The affordable housing provision will be discharged by way of a commuted sum after consultation with DoI Housing and as the number of units is below 10no the public open space provision is not applicable."
Nrs 22 & 23 2.0.3 The proposal which would replace Nrs 22 & 23 would be a four storey building which includes accommodation within the roof space and roof terrace set behind a glazed balustrade.
==== PAGE 6 ====
25/90441/B
Page 6 of 32
This building would have a pitched roof. The building would be framed in painted render with the central section made up of glazing, with the first and second floors setback from the front faced and the third floor set further back as outlined previously. From the front elevation (facing North Quay) the proposal would be approximately 16.5m in height (including fourth floor roof), albeit the front façade has a height of 11.7metres. To the rear, the proposal would have a height of 17m. This building currently has a height of 12.6m to the front elevation and 13.2m to the rear elevation. The rear elevation of this section of the building and which is opposite the rear of the multi storey car park would change significantly, from a low level three storey building with cat slide roof, to a full four storey property with pitch roof. An access ramp/stairs and glazed balustrades would front this new building.
Nr 24 2.0.3 The property Nr 24 (Merchant House) would be retained and externally would not be altered in the main, with the exception of roof lights to the front roof and an external ramp to the access onto North Quay. The rear elevation would be altered, with the current under croft parking being replaced with accommodation.
Nrs 25 - 26
2.0.4 The buildings in question would be demolished and replaced with a new four story building. The proposal as outlined in the applicants planning statement, is a more contemporary approach which is mainly made up of a large glazed gable feature which fronts onto North Quay. The central element (and the majority) of the front is made up of glazed windows/doors which are set back from the front façade of the gable facing element, which frames the glazing in a zinc cladding. 2.0.5 Currently, Nr 25 has a height of approximately 13m to the front and rear elevations. The building on Nr 26 has a height of approximately 10.8m to front and rear elevations. The new proposal which incorporates both Nr 25 & 26 would have a maximum height of 17.1m to the front elevation and 17.4m to the rear elevation. 2.0.6 The following points are noted from the applicant's Design and Access Statement in support of the application; "3. DESIGN CONCEPT 3.1 The site boundary for this development spans 22- 26 North Quay inclusive. It does not include the registered buildings for the reasons given in Section 1. Merchants House (no.24) is again proposed to be retained. This then creates two infill sites either side of Merchant's House. 3.2 In dialogue with the planning department we collectively took the view that two modern insertions into North Quay building fabric would be appropriate. To the left of Merchant's House a building of simple form with two recessed terraces and an elevated upper terrace is created. The elevated upper terrace allows the third floor apartment to be set back - visually limiting the frontage height. 3.3 To the right of Merchant's House a larger, bolder building introduces a gable frontage onto the Quay. This again has recessed balconies with a glass frontage enclosed by a metal clad surround. 3.3 The relationship between the existing buildings and these new structures is visually comfortable and allows a greater variety of height and level as requested by the Inspectors report accompanying the Appeal decision to 00148 and 149. 3.4 In its general plan arrangement, the buildings have two entrances to access six apartments and two penthouses. These apartments are of generous size (1,000 - 1,460sq. ft) with the two penthouses even larger (1130 sq. ft - 3055 sq. ft), and their outlook to the quayside marina is maximised as far as possible. 3.5 At ground level two bar/restaurant units have been created. These vary in size between 1,560 sq. ft and 2,875 sq. ft in size and although they use some of the ground floor area of Merchant's House, externally the appearance of no. 24 is unchanged. 3.6 Each of the two apartment entrances are taken from the North Quay but routes also exist from the entrance lobbies to the rear lane, as access to bin stores have been created. Cycle
==== PAGE 7 ====
25/90441/B
Page 7 of 32
storage is also included within each extended lobby to reinforce the active travel initiatives currently promoted by the Isle of Man Government. 3.7 The Bar Restaurant 'back of house' layouts are all subject to future alteration as each Tenant will have their own particular requirements. They have been provided therefore as indicative layouts to demonstrate that all the usual required accommodation can be accommodated and that refuse management for each unit is possible."
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.0.1 The following previous planning applications are considered relevant in the determination of this application; 3.0.2 Registered building consent for demolition of 22/23 North Quay and 25/26 North Quay (in association with 25/90441/B) - PENDING CONSIDERATION 3.0.3 Demolition of No's 22, 23 ,25, 26, 27 and 28 North Quay, conversion of No. 24 North Quay and redevelopment to provide ten apartments and three bar/restaurant units (use class 3) (in association with 22/00148/CON) - 22/00149/GB - REFUSED AT APPEAL on the following grounds: "R 1. Notwithstanding its general condition, sufficient justification for demolition of the Registered Building has not been demonstrated. Moreover, the design of the proposed redevelopment which includes demolition of Nos 22,23,25 and 26 North Quay (as well demolition of the Registered Building) is not of sufficient quality to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the North Quay Conservation Area, which would be harmed, bring the scheme into conflict with Urban Environmental Proposal 3 and 4 of the Area Plan for the East and Environment Policies 30, 35, 39, 42 and 43, Strategic Policies 4 and 5 and General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan." 3.0.4 Registered buildings consent for the demolition of the Registered Buildings No's 27 - 28 North Quay and Demolition of No's 22, 23, 25 and 26 North Quay which are buildings within a Conservation Area - 28 North Quay - 22/00148/CON - REFUSED AT APPEAL on the following grounds: "R 1. Notwithstanding its general condition, sufficient justification for demolition of the Registered Building has not been demonstrated. Moreover, the design of the proposed redevelopment which includes demolition of Nos 22, 23 ,25 and 26 North Quay (as well demolition of the Registered Building) is not of sufficient quality to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the North Quay Conservation Area, which would be harmed. There would be conflict in this regard with Environment Policies 30 and 35 and Strategic Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan." 3.0.5 Registered Building Consent for refurbishment and conversion of existing building to form cafe bar/restaurant at ground and first floor, with business hub/club on upper floors above - RB 289 (in connection with application 18/01333/GB) - Former Newson's Warehouse, 27-28 North Quay - 18/01334/CON - APPROVED 3.0.6 Refurbishment and conversion of existing building to form Cafe Bar/Restaurant at ground and first floor, with business hub/club on upper floors above (RB 289 - in connection with RB application 18/01334/CON) - Former Newson's Warehouse, 27-28 North Quay - 18/01333/GB - APPROVED 3.0.7 Registered Building Consent for the demolition elements of PA 18/01331/B - 25-26 North Quay - 18/01332/CON - APPROVED 3.0.8 Demolition of existing buildings and erection of building incorporating dining and support facilities for a restaurant/bar at ground floor level, and 6 apartments on the floors above (in connection with RB application 18/01332/CON) - 25-26 North Quay - 18/01331/B - APPROVED 3.0.9 Registered Building Consent for the demolition elements of PA 18/01329/B - 22-23 North Quay - 18/01330/CON - APPROVED 3.0.10 Demolition of part of existing building to rear, conversion of remaining building, erection of new build element to rear of site, all to form cafe/bar/restaurant at ground and basement levels and 6 apartments on floors above (in connection with RB application 18/01330/CON) - 22-23 North Quay - 18/01329/B - APPROVED
==== PAGE 8 ====
25/90441/B
Page 8 of 32
3.0.11 Demolition of existing building and replacement with mixed use development including restaurant/cafe/bar, 6 apartments on the upper floors, rooftop garden, and associated parking/refuse facilities - 22-23 North Quay - 17/01320/B - REFUSED on the following grounds; "R1. The proposal by way of its layout, scale, form and design would have a significant deleterious impact on the character and quality of the streetscene and is considered to be contrary to General policy 2 (b); (c) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 . R2. The proposed design of the front façade would fail to preserve or enhance the character and appearance within Conservation Area within which it is located and is therefore contrary to Environment Policy 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. R3. The application site is identified as being within a flood risk area and there is no flood risk assessment put forward or mitigating design measurers to protect occupants of the building or the building itself to address the concerns of flood risk, it is therefore contrary to EP10 and GP2(l). R4. In the absence of any evidence for consideration to override the general presumption to retain building in this conservation area, the proposal would be considered contrary to EP39 and PP 1/01 as there is no justification to warrant an exception for demolition. R5. The design of the proposal in relation to the access to the residential apartments does not take account of personal safety or security and so is considered contrary to Strategic Plan policy GP2(m)". 3.0.12 Conversion of existing shop, dwelling and warehouse to offices - 22 - 23 North Quay - 14/01243/B - APPROVED 3.0.13 Alterations and extension to office - The Merchants House, 24 North Quay - 00/02205/B
4.0 KEY DOCUMENTS 4.1 Material Considerations Town and County Planning Act 1999 4.1.1 Section 10(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act states: "In dealing with an application for planning approval... the Department shall have regard to - (a) The provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application, (b) Any relevant statement of planning policy under section 3; (c) Such other considerations as may be specified for the purpose of this subsection in a development order or a development procedure order, so far as material to the application; and (d) All other material considerations." 4.1.2 Section 68 of the Flood Risk Management Act (2013) indicates that any published Flood Risk Management Plan and the extent to which the proposed development creates an additional flood risk are material considerations. 4.1.3 Section 16(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999) states, "In considering - (a) whether to grant planning approval for development which affects a registered building or its setting, or (b) whether to grant registered building consent for any works, the relevant Department shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses" 4.1.4 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". 4.1.5 In light of (a) above, it is considered that two key documents are: o The Area Plan for the East (2020); and o The Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016). 4.1.6 These documents are considered in more detail in 4.2 and 4.3 below. 4.1.7 The following documents are also considered to be relevant:
==== PAGE 9 ====
25/90441/B
Page 9 of 32
o Our Island Plan 2025/26 Update "To work towards a more secure, vibrant and sustainable Island nation for all, our focus is on five interrelated priorities as developed from early engagement with Tynwald Members in October 2021. Each priority relies on cross-Government working and has its own vision, reflecting the aim, commitments and focus of this administration, which seeks to put people at the heart of service delivery and policy-making. The focus for Government must be on straightforward delivery on the issues that matter most, with clear emphasis on creating a sustainable future and being an attractive destination for people and business. Whilst Our Island Plan sets out a vision for the next 10-15 years, with the actions to be taken over the course of this administration, Government must be ready to adapt to changing priorities, updating policy and taking a long-term view." o Manual for Manx Roads - "The Manual for Manx Roads (MfMR) is published by the Isle of Man Government's Department of Infrastructure. Our aims are: o to ensure the highway network enhances accessibility to goods and services and encourage a diversity of transport modes o to ensure the highway network provides for safe interactions between transport modes o to maintain a safe, inclusive and serviceable highway network" o Planning Policy Statement 1/01 - Conservation Of The Historic Environment Of The Isle Of Man- POLICY CA/2 SPECIAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS. When considering proposals for the possible development of any land or buildings which fall within the conservation area, the impact of such proposals upon the special character of the area, will be a material consideration when assessing the application. Where a development is proposed for land which, although not within the boundaries of the conservation area, would affect its context or setting, or views into or out of the area; such issues should be given special consideration where the character or appearance of a conservation area may be affected. o The principles of the Residential Design Guidance 2021 which sets out a number of general development standards which are a material consideration. o The site is within an area identified as high tidal flood risk. o The site is within the North Quay Conservation Area. There are no Registered Buildings within the site. Immediately to the east of the site are Nrs 27-28 which are not part of the proposed development are included on the List of Registered Buildings (No.289). 4.1.8 All the documents are available on the government website.
4.2 The Area Plan for the East (adopted 2020) 4.2.1 The site is within an area designated as "Mixed Use Proposal Area - Quayside" by the Area Plan for the East. 4.2.2 The Area Plan for the East Written Statement states; 4.2.3 Mixed Use Area 7 - The Quayside states; "The Quayside area has undergone regeneration on its northern side which has enhanced the area as a destination for people visiting restaurants and bars. On its southern side, industrial uses in older warehouse type buildings predominate. Redevelopment of the southern side to complement the quayside as a whole is to be encouraged. The Quays are also strategic freight corridors and maintaining access for commercial vehicles, including HGV's, must be considered in any proposed development. Due to the former industrial uses of South Quay, significant site preparation including decontamination may be required." 4.2.4 Town Centre - Mixed Use Proposal 7 states; There will be a presumption in favour of food and drink and other leisure-type uses on North Quay. There will be a presumption in favour of the comprehensive re-development of the southern side of the quay, including the potential re-positioning of the highway of South Quay between Old Castletown Road and Fort Anne Road, for new uses in the following categories: o Tourism o Offices o Food and Drink o Leisure o Reception and function venues o Business hubs/share- service offices o Residential uses at first floor level and above." 4.2.5 Paragraph 6.8 of The Area Plan for the East Written Statement states; "The historic built environment
==== PAGE 10 ====
25/90441/B Page 10 of 32
Local character and key features within the built environment, such as Registered Buildings and other heritage assets play a significant role in promoting economic and social prosperity by providing attractive living and working conditions. In addition, they provide economic opportunities through tourism, leisure and recreational uses. It is therefore essential that local character is safeguarded, particularly those features which fundamentally define the historic built environment in the East. Particularly: o the buildings and structures associated with the roles of Douglas and Laxey as historic seaside resorts; o the harbours of Douglas and Laxey; o the historic infrastructure of the Steam Railway, Electric Tramway and Horse Trams; and o the historic grain of Douglas and Laxey old towns, including their street layouts, town yards, plot sizes and landscape settings. The significance of Manx heritage assets in the built environment is increased by their relative scarcity. Registered Buildings and Conservation Areas which might not necessarily achieve such status in the United Kingdom have gained a higher status in the Isle of Man where their contribution to national identity and the Island's story is highly valued. Existing and new development can exist side by side, even with some visual differences presented by old and new building styles. New development should not seek to mimic existing development but be of its own time. Such innovation is crucial and with good precedent: some of the Island's best architectural examples emerged from the building design competitions of the Edwardian era." 4.2.6 Urban Environment Proposal 3 states; "Development proposals must make a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. Traditional or contemporary approaches may be appropriate, depending upon the nature of the proposal and the context of the surrounding area." 4.2.7 Paragraph 6.9 of The Area Plan for the East Written Statement states; "Creative Re-use As stated in the Strategic Plan, Paragraph 7.25: 'Conservation of the built environment and archaeological features should be viewed as an asset to be promoted and not as a constraint to be overcome'. It is recognised that retaining the best examples of built heritage for future generations benefits the resident population by celebrating its unique national identity and increasing the sense of wellbeing and improved quality of life brought about by beautiful surroundings. The value of mid and late-20th Century architecture should not be ignored as the best examples of these periods contribute to a rich and vibrant built heritage. Supporting the continued use and retention of these buildings requires a pragmatic and dynamic understanding of different potential uses. A proposed use which retains a building of heritage value, but requires modification to that building, is superior to a proposal which leads only to demolition or decay of that building." 4.2.8 Urban Environment Proposal 4 states; "Proposals which help to secure a future for built heritage assets, especially those identified as being at the greatest risk of loss or decay, will be supported." 4.2.9 Paragraph 6.3 of The Area Plan for the East Written Statement states; "Area Plan Objectives; iv. To identify and celebrate the historic urban environment so that it retains an active and productive role in contemporary life." 4.2.10 Paragraph 6.4 of The Area Plan for the East Written Statement states; "Area Plan Desired Outcomes v. There will be greater recognition of the contribution the East's historic value to the local and visitor economy and to the quality of life on the Island. vi. The long term future of valuable heritage assets will be assured by creative reuse." 4.2.11 Transport Proposal 1 states; "Development proposals must take into account the Active Travel Strategy and any specific actions set out in the Active Travel Action Plan."
4.3 Isle of Man Strategic Plan (adopted 2016)
==== PAGE 11 ====
25/90441/B Page 11 of 32
4.3.1 In light of the above, it is considered the policies from the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (adopted 2016) set out below are relevant in the determination of this application. 4.3.2 The Strategic Plan takes its lead from the Government aims which include the pursuit of manageable and sustainable growth based on a diversified economy which is intended to raise the standard of living of the people of the Island and to provide the resources to sustain and develop public services. It also includes the protection and improvement of the quality of the environment such that it continues to be an asset for future generations. 4.3.3 The Strategic Aim is: "To plan for the efficient and effective provision of services and infrastructure and to direct and control development and the use of land to meet the community's needs, having particular regard to the principles of sustainability whilst at the same time preserving, protecting, and improving the quality of the environment, having particular regard to our uniquely Manx natural, wildlife, cultural and built heritage." 4.3.4 The Strategic Aim is noted but not considered directly further, as the relevant aspects are unpacked by the relevant detailed policies which are identified below. 4.3.5 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 reusing 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." 4.3.6 Strategic Policy 2 states: "New development will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions (2) of these towns and villages. Development will be permitted in the countryside only in the exceptional circumstances identified in paragraph 6.3." 4.3.7 Strategic Policy 3 states: "Proposals for development must ensure that the individual character of our towns and villages is protected or enhanced by: (a) avoiding coalescence and maintaining adequate physical separation between settlements; and (b) having regard in the design of new development to the use of local materials and character." 4.3.8 Strategic Policy 4 states: "Proposals for development must: (a) Protect or enhance the fabric and setting of Ancient Monuments, Registered Buildings (1), Conservation Areas (2), buildings and structures within National Heritage Areas and sites of archaeological interest; (b) protect or enhance the landscape quality and nature conservation value of urban as well as rural areas but especially in respect to development adjacent to Areas of Special Scientific Interest and other designations; and
(c) not cause or lead to unacceptable environmental pollution or disturbance." 4.3.9 Strategic Policy 5 states: "New development, including individual buildings, should be designed so as to make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island. In appropriate cases the Department will require planning applications to be supported by a Design Statement which will be required to take account of the Strategic Aim and Policies." 4.3.10 Strategic Policy 9 states: "All new retail development (excepting neighbourhood shops and those instances identified in Business Policy 5) and all new office development (excepting corporate headquarters suitable for a business park(1) location) must be sited within the town and village centres on land zoned for these purposes in Area Plans, whilst taking into consideration Business Policies 7 and 8." 4.3.11 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" 4.3.12 Spatial Policy 1 states: "The Douglas urban area will remain the main employment and services centre for the Island."
==== PAGE 12 ====
25/90441/B Page 12 of 32
4.3.13 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." 4.3.14 General Policy 4 states: "Where appropriate the Department will enter into Agreements under section 13 of the 1999 Town and Country Planning Act which may: (a) restrict the use of land; (b) require land to be used in a particular way; (c) restrict the operations which may be carried out in, on, under or over land; (d) require operations or activities to be carried out in, on, under or over land or; (e) require payments to be made to the Department either in a single sum or periodically, in particular as commuted sums for open space or parking provision, or other social or cultural provision, including public art, which is necessary and directly associated with the development proposed." 4.3.15 Environment Policy 4 states: "Development will not be permitted which would adversely affect: (a) species and habitats of international importance: (i) protected species of international importance or their habitats; or (ii) proposed or designated Ramsar and Emerald Sites or other internationally important sites. (b) species and habitats of national importance: (i) protected species of national importance or their habitats; (ii) proposed or designated National Nature Reserves, or Areas of Special Scientific Interest; or (iii) Marine Nature Reserves; or (iv) National Trust Land. (c) species and habitats of local importance such as Wildlife Sites, local nature reserves, priority habitats or species identified in any Manx Biodiversity Action Plan which do not already benefit from statutory protection, Areas of Special Protection and Bird Sanctuaries and landscape features of importance to wild flora and fauna by reason of their continuous nature or function as a corridor between habitats. Some areas to which this policy applies are identified as Areas of Ecological Importance or Interest on extant Local or Area Plans, but others, whose importance was not evident at the time of the adoption of the relevant Local or Area Plan, are not, particularly where that plan has been in place for many years. In these circumstances, the Department will seek site specific advice from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry if development proposals are brought forward." 4.3.16 Environment Policy 5: In exceptional circumstances where development is allowed which could adversely affect a site recognised under Environmental Policy 4, conditions will be imposed and/or Planning Agreements sought to: (a) minimise disturbance; (b) conserve and
==== PAGE 13 ====
25/90441/B Page 13 of 32
manage its ecological interest as far as possible; and (c) where damage is unavoidable, provide new or replacement habitats so that the loss to the total ecological resource is mitigated. 4.3.17 Environment Policy 10 states: "Where development is proposed on any site where in the opinion of the Department of Local Government and the Environment there is a potential risk of flooding, a flood risk assessment and details of proposed mitigation measures must accompany any application for planning permission. The requirements for a flood risk assessment are set out in Appendix 4." 4.3.18 Environment Policy 13 states: "Development which would result in an unacceptable risk from flooding, either on or off-site, will not be permitted." 4.3.19 Environment Policy 35 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." 4.3.20 Paragraph 7.32.2 states; "The general presumption will be in favour of retaining buildings which make a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the Conservation Area. When considering proposals which will result in demolition of a building in a Conservation Area, attention will be paid to the part played in the architectural or historic interest of the area by the relevant building and the wider effects of demolition on the building's surroundings and on the Conservation Area as a whole. In addition, 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 issue derived from its continued use (based on consistent long-term assumptions); o the adequacy of efforts made to retain the building in use; o the merits of alternative proposals for the site." 4.3.21 Environment Policy 39 states: "The general presumption will be in favour of retaining buildings which make a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the Conservation Area." 4.3.22 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." 4.3.23 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." 4.3.24 Housing Policy 1 states: "The housing needs of the Island will be met by making provision for sufficient development opportunities to enable 5,100 additional dwellings (net of demolitions), and including those created by conversion, to be built over the Plan period 2011 to 2026." 4.3.25 Housing Policy 4 states: "New housing will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions(1) of these towns and villages where identified in adopted Area Plans: otherwise new housing will be permitted in the countryside only in the following exceptional circumstances: (a) essential housing for agricultural workers in accordance with Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10; (b) conversion of redundant rural buildings in accordance with Housing Policy 11; and (c) the replacement of existing rural dwellings and abandoned dwellings in accordance with Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14." 4.3.26 Housing Policy 5 states: "In granting planning permission on land zoned for residential development or in predominantly residential areas the Department will normally require that 25% of provision should be made up of affordable housing. This policy will apply to developments of 8 dwellings or more."
==== PAGE 14 ====
25/90441/B Page 14 of 32
4.3.27 Business Policy 1 states: "The growth of employment opportunities throughout the Island will be encouraged provided that development proposals accord with the policies of this Plan." 4.3.28 Transport Policy 1 states, "New development should, where possible, be located close to existing public transport facilities and routes, including pedestrian, cycle and rail routes". 4.3.29 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." 4.3.30 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." 4.3.31 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. The current standards are set out in Appendix 7." 4.3.32 Community Policy 11: The design and use of all new buildings and of extensions to existing buildings must, as far as is reasonable and practicable, pay due regard to best practice such as to prevent the outbreak and spread of fire. 4.3.33 Energy Policy 5 states: "The Department will prepare a Planning Policy Statement on Energy Efficiency. Pending the preparation and adoption of that PPS the Department will require proposals for more than 5 dwellings or 100 square metres of other development to be accompanied by an Energy Impact Assessment." 4.3.34 General Policy 1 states: "The determination of matters under Part 2 (Development Control) and Part 3 (Special Controls) of the 1999 Town and Country Planning Act shall have regard to the provisions of the Development Plan and all other material considerations."
4.4 Planning Policy Statement 1/01 Policy and Guidance Notes for the Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man includes policies in relation to the following. o General criteria for registered building applications (PPS1-RB3) o Proposals for change of use of registered buildings (PPS1-RB4) o Alteration of Registered Buildings (PPS1-RB5) o Recording of Buildings prior to Demolition (PPS1-RB7) o Access for persons with disabilities (PPS1-RB8) o Giving Special Consideration to Conservation Areas (PPS1-CA/2) o Presumption against the demolition of buildings within Conservation Areas (PPS1-CA/6)
4.5 Net Zero Emissions by 2050 4.5.1 In July 2020, the Isle of Man Government published their Action Plan for Achieving Net Zero Emissions by 2050 - Phase 1 Progress Report & Delivery Strategy Post COVID-19 Pandemic (Version 2). The document provides an update on the progress of the Isle of Man Government Phase 1 Climate Action Plan, which was supported unanimously in January 2020, taking into account the positive impact that the lockdown as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic has had on sustainable travel habits, predominantly related to an increase in the number of people working from home. The document sets out a number of transport related actions for delivery to progress towards Net Zero by 2050, including the provision of cycle racks in public buildings, electric public service vehicles, hybrid buses, mobile working, promoting the use of public transport and active travel and developing an all-Island electric vehicle charging network. The implementation of this TP will assist the Island with progressing towards the Isle of Man Government's Net Zero emissions targets.
4.6 IoM Government's Active Travel Strategy (2018 - 2021) 4.6.1 The Isle of Man Government's Active Travel Strategy was published in May 2018 and sets out the strategy to increase the number of people using more active modes of travel on a regular basis, i.e. walking and cycling. The aim of the strategy is to put in place a series of mechanisms which will help facilitate more active travel, achieving a modal shift away from motorised transport.
==== PAGE 15 ====
25/90441/B Page 15 of 32
4.7 Climate Change Bill 2020 4.7.1 Climate Change Bill has received Royal assent, and parts have been adopted, for example the fossil fuel ban through Building Control Legislation; albeit the matters listed below require further work to be undertaken before they come into force. Accordingly, they have little planning weight; although it does give a clear direction of travel. "(a) demonstrate that the application has been made having regard to the following climate change policies - (i) the maximisation of carbon sequestration; (ii) the minimising of greenhouse gas emissions; (iii) the maintenance and restoration of ecosystems; (iv) biodiversity net gain; (v) the need for sustainable drainage systems; and (vi) the provision of active travel infrastructure; or (b) explain why consideration of one or more of those polices is not practicable in relation to the proposed development." 4.7.2 As mentioned, as it is not yet in force the application is not required to. However, while the application is perhaps silent on the "carbon sequestration" the submission does appear to cover the other points raised by the Bill. Further, the recently approved Residential Design Guide 2021 does include "Sustainable Construction" section which does include a number of aspects including, construction materials, building design and climate change resilience. While this design guide relates to residential development, it is considered it is still useful to consider and show the direction of travel of the Department/IOM Government. It also included the following; "2.5.4 As well as complying with relevant Legislation (Wildlife Act 1990) proposals should aim to: o protect and enhance the existing biodiversity on site through the retention and protection of existing wildlife features (as a priority); o compensating against their loss where retention is not possible (as a last resort); and o by providing enhancement measures. 2.5.5 The outcome should be to achieve an overall net gain in biodiversity. Consideration should be given to the following points. o Retention and protection of important habitats for wildlife such as mature trees, hedges, sod banks, ponds & semi-natural habitats. o Protection of features from the impacts of artificial lighting. o Retention and protection of bat roosts or bird nest sites within buildings (e.g. designing roof space to retain bat roosts or swift nest sites). o Where reasonable and proportionate, providing alternative wildlife features as compensation, should retention of existing features not be possible (e.g. creation of a new sod bank or the erection of integrated bat and bird bricks). o Providing additional opportunities for wildlife on site via the creation of natural or artificial features (e.g. creation of ponds, provision of bat or bird boxes, choosing landscaping plants that are good for insects)."
4.8 Our Island Plan 2025-26 Update states; "Our priority in 2025 and 2026 is to increase the number of homes available to Manx residents, now and into the future. We continue to modernise the planning system. Since the start of this administration, over 1,000 new homes have been approved - with 320 recently approved for Braddan. Efforts will be made to ensure these homes are occupied as soon as possible." 4.8.1 And
"The Isle of Man is the place for entrepreneurially minded individuals and businesses. It is home to a large number of prominent and high-quality global brands across a diverse spread of business sectors, including aviation, tourism, finance, e-business, e-gaming, esports, manufacturing, agriculture, construction, retail, food & drink, aerospace, shipping, biomed and more." 4.8.2 Further the Our Island Plan states;
==== PAGE 16 ====
25/90441/B Page 16 of 32
"The regeneration of brownfield sites will carry on, accelerated by the Island Infrastructure Scheme."
5.0 CONSULTATION RESPONSES Full comments can be viewed via the online planning website. 5.1 Local Authority 5.1.1 Douglas Borough Council as with all consultees where initially consulted on the 01.05.2025. The following comments where received (16.05.2025); "Will be considered by the Council's Environmental Services Committee at a meeting to be held on the 16th June. We will provide our comments shortly after this meeting has concluded. I would kindly ask should you require our comments prior to this date that you get back to me at your earliest convenience." 5.1.2 The Department advised that the planning application was going to the Planning Committee of the 09.06.2025 and sought any further comments by this date. No further comments have been received at the time of writing this report (30.05.2024). Should further comments be received, these will be updated at the Planning Committee meeting.
5.2 Government Departments 5.2.1 DOI Highway Services made the following comments (06.05.2025); "Highway Services HDC have reviewed the planning application 25/90441/B details and can comment as follows: o This application is similar to application 22/00149/GB which Highway Services eventually did not oppose. o The site is in a sustainable location in Douglas Centre and so relaxed parking standards are still acceptable for the multiple proposed uses on the site. The Applicant has provided cycle parking for staff/residents, and users of the site can easily arrive/leave the site by walking and public transport options. o The Applicant has conducted pre-application discussions with Highway Services regarding the raised outside seating arrangement and ramps and these are acceptable to use at a structure that can be removed if necessary. o The rear access door arrangements, bin storage and cycle storage proposals are acceptable. HDC therefore does not oppose the application (DNOC) subject to conditions on:- o 180 degree swing doors or roller shutter doors onto Queen Street, o cycle parking, and o bin storage, shown on the approved plans being implemented before first use of the proposals and retained thereafter.
A note to attached to permission: A Street Café Seating Licence from Douglas Borough Council is required for the proposed outside seating area."
5.3.1 The DEFA Registered Buildings Officer makes a detailed comments which are viewable online. Below is an extract of these comments (23.05.2025); "...Potential Impact of Proposals Douglas (North Quay) Conservation Area No Character Appraisal exists for the North Quay Conservation Area. In their comments for applications 22/00148/CON and 22/00149/GB, the Department's Principal Registered Buildings Officer at the time stated the following:-
"The North Quay Conservation Area is an historic quayside it is of historic and architectural interest as a 18th century quayside that developed from plots that were divided and sold off from the Nunnery Estate. The Quay's development was key to the development of Douglas in becoming a prominent town and becoming capital of the Island. The quay is also a surviving remnant of historic Douglas that predates the 19th tourism boom most of which has been lost due to extensive urban clearance in the late 19th and early 20th centuries."
==== PAGE 17 ====
25/90441/B Page 17 of 32
One of the defining characteristics of the North Quay Conservation Area is the variation in window sizes, floor-to-floor heights, eaves levels and roof pitches. This variety helps tell the story of the area's history, through the development and progression of building techniques, styles and materials, as well as through the shifting uses of buildings along the quayside over the last 200 years. One of the reasons that the proposed scheme within 22/00148/CON and 22/00149/GB was judged not to be of sufficient quality to preserve or enhance the character of the conservation area was the replacement of this variety in form with uniform window cill and head heights, eaves heights and roof forms, resulting in an overall horizontal emphasis. This was judged to be a departure from the historic character along the quayside, and to cause harm.
The scheme now proposed has three distinct building forms when viewed from the principal (North Quay) elevation. The proposed replacement for numbers 22-23 would have a predominately-glazed shopfront at ground floor, with a two storey element above containing a recessed glazed frontage behind glass balconies, framed by a painted render 'box'. Set back from the frontage, a further storey would sit behind a parapet wall that would again have a predominantly-glazed front with a pitched roof over that is proposed to be finished in 'synthetic slate'. The proposed replacement for 25-26 would have two forms in its upper storeys. At ground floor level, a glazed shopfront similar to that proposed at 22-23 would occupy the majority of the façade, framed in 'zinc effect cladding', with a further portion of glazing at its eastern side running down from the upper floors. At first, second and third floor levels, the link portion nearest Merchants House would have a flat roof and be finished in 'zinc effect standing seam cladding. At the eastern end of the proposed site, adjacent to the former Newson's building (RB 289), a substantial gable-fronted element is with glass balustrades.
When viewing the scheme overall, and with specific regard to the appearance of the Conservation Area, I consider the proposed North Quay elevation to be varied in its form, massing and finishes. Although very few traditional materials are proposed, which is preferred by Environment Policy 34, I judge that the variety of building form and massing that is a characteristic of the North Quay Conservation Area would be maintained by the proposals.
Setting of Registered Building 289 The statement of common ground, agreed by the Department and the appellants (the same applicants as the current applications) for the Planning Appeal in respect of applications 22/00148/CON and 22/00149/GB included the following comments relating to the special interest of registered building 289:- "The former Newson's Warehouse, no 27-28 North Quay is a registered building dating back to the late 18th century when the quay was developed from lands in the ownership of the Nunnery estate. No 27 was constructed as a warehouse and has been used for that purpose for most of its life and remains mostly unaltered. No 28 would appear to have been constructed possibly as a house put quickly to use as a public house up until 1913 after which time it was used by a chandler prior to being used as part of the Newson's shop. They are important survivors illustrating the development of Douglas' quayside and emerging industry of trade. They are good examples of the island's vernacular urban quayside architecture particularly in an area that was cleared in the late 19th century then again in the 1930's. The buildings now represent the only surviving warehouse and the oldest buildings on the entire quay, they are unique and a surviving remnant of older Douglas that predates the City's 19th Century tourism boom expansion and extensive clearing and re-development of the 1930's."
As mentioned previously, these applications propose no work to the registered building, which is outside of the application red line. If approved, the proposed buildings would be physically attached to the registered building, and in pre-application meetings with the applicant's agent it has been acknowledged that a registered building consent application would be required for works physically attached to the registered building.
==== PAGE 18 ====
25/90441/B Page 18 of 32
With regard to the setting of the registered building, the existing setting is formed by the harbour itself, the pedestrianised North Quay highway, the row of buildings stretching west from the building's western gable, and the narrow Queen Street highway at the rear. North of Queen Street, the building's backdrop is formed of a modern two storey car park, the historic Saddle Public House, and taller buildings along Lord Street and further northwards in the distance. Given the form and massing of the proposed buildings as described in the previous section, and the fact that the footprint of the proposed buildings would match the existing buildings, I judge that the setting of registered building 289 would be preserved by the proposals.
Conclusion The reasons for refusal for recent applications 22/00148/CON and 22/00149/GB specifically stated that the replacement buildings on the sites of 22, 23, 25 and 26 North Quay were 'not of sufficient quality to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the North Quay Conservation Area, which would be harmed.' This being the most recent planning decision on the site, it is judged to be of significant weight with regard to the assessment of the current proposals. In their comments for the above applications, the Principal Registered Buildings Officer described the existing buildings as dating 'to the 19th Century and form part of the historic quayside townscape by virtue of their scale, massing and survival they make a positive contribution to the character of the Conservation area'. As historic buildings dating from the 19th century, regardless of their current condition, I judge the existing buildings to make a positive contribution to the historic character of the conservation area. With this in mind, I consider that the proposed loss within this application would result in a degree of harm to the character of the conservation area. However, given the size of the conservation area and the relative contribution of the existing buildings to that character, on balance I judge the harm to be less than substantial, as in my view their loss would not seriously impact a key element of the conservation area's special interest.
Although there are no reasons for approval within applications 18/01329/B, 18/01330/CON, 18/01331/B and 18/01332/CON, these applications were submitted alongside 18/01333/GB and 18/01334/CON. In the assessment of those applications, it is clear that the conservation benefits resulting from works to preserve the registered building were set against the harm that resulted from the loss of historic fabric at 22, 23 and 25 North Quay. To demonstrate this, the reason for condition 8 states 'The development hereby approved includes the demolition of a building within a Conservation Area which is being approved on an exceptional basis on the grounds that the development represents enabling works to facilitate the renovation and conversion of the adjacent Registered Building'. The current applications do not include any such works to either repair or bring the registered building back in to use. As such, from a building conservation point of view and given the loss of historic fabric discussed in the previous paragraph, I judge that the proposals would result in a degree of harm to the historic character of the Douglas (North Quay) Conservation Area. It is a matter for the case officer to judge whether this harm is outweighed by any other possible benefits that may exist within the overall planning balance of the scheme.
CONDITIONS Without prejudice, in the event that the applications are recommended for approval, I would request that the following conditions be added to any approval in order to safeguard the adjacent registered building and the character and appearance of the conservation area:-
Before the commencement of any works on site, details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department setting out the method of construction and ensuring the safety and stability of the adjacent registered building. Such details to include structural engineering drawings and/or a method statement to a suitable level of detail. The work shall be carried out fully in accordance with the method statement approved.
==== PAGE 19 ====
25/90441/B Page 19 of 32
Reason: In order to ensure that the special architectural and historic interest of registered building 289 is retained and preserved.
The development shall not commence until a programme of historic building recording of the buildings on the application site has been undertaken, submitted to and agreed in writing by the Department. The programme of 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.
No above ground works relating to the development shall commence until sample details of cladding, windows, external doors and roof finishes have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be occupied/brought into use unless the external finish has been applied in accordance with the approved details, and shall be retained thereafter.
Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development, the visual amenities of the area and preserving the character and appearance of the Conservation Area."
5.4.1 DOI Flood Risk management Division comment (22.05.2025); "Flood Risk Management Representational History for this case: The proposed property is within a tidal flood zone Conditions Recommend that section 3.1 of the FRA is conditioned to the application and that there should be no sleeping accommodation in the basement of the property."
5.5.1 DOI Public Estates & Housing Division comments (02.06.2025); "We refer to the aforementioned planning application, and we can confirm that we have held discussions with the applicant's agent regarding the provision of affordable housing as part of the proposal, with reference to Housing Policy 5 as set down in the Island Development Plan IOM Strategic Plan 2016.
Current data drawn from Housing Division records for Douglas and the East of the Island indicates that there are 281 persons on the general public sector waiting list for affordable housing to rent. The great majority of these persons are seeking housing rather than apartments. The demand for apartments for public sector rent in Douglas was to some extent satisfied by the creation of 70 new apartments built for Douglas City Council on Peel Road in 2022. There are plans for a further substantial number of apartments in Upper Douglas for which Douglas City Council has expressed an interest in acquiring 45 units.
There are 141 persons on the Department's First-time Buyers Register seeking to purchase a first home in Douglas and the East of the Island. Of this number, 79 are on the Active Buyer List intending to purchase a home within the next 12-24 months. This figure is not indicative of likely final purchases as the ability to progress to completion would depend upon personal circumstances and mortgage ability at point of allocation. Until 2023, the Department did not accept apartments for first time buyers as the additional financial burden of ground leases and service charges at a time when buyers could least afford to pay these costs was seen as unacceptable. However, the Department has in the very recent past contacted single persons and couples on the FTB Register, who might qualify as purchasers of affordable apartments in Douglas and the East, to establish likely demand for apartments.
There is clearly current demand for a small number of apartments however the drawn proposals for this application indicate that the apartment floor areas vary between 105m2 and
==== PAGE 20 ====
25/90441/B Page 20 of 32
267m2, greatly in excess of the specified gross internal floor areas of 63-66m2 for affordable apartments, as set down in the Design Guide for Affordable Housing Standards 2016.
Accordingly, the Department recommends in this case that the applicant is asked to provide Commuted Sums in lieu of the affordable housing contribution, which for this application for eight apartments will be two affordable units. The Commuted Sum in lieu of each affordable dwelling is calculated as the difference between the open market selling price of a new apartment of 63m2 in this location, and the selling price of £150,000 for a 63m2 affordable apartment (£2,381 per sq.m.) as prescribed in the August 2022 SEPA Scheme (Fixed) adopted by Tynwald. The average selling price per square metre floor area of a similar higher quality new apartment on the open market in a location with sea or harbour views is assessed as being approximately £3,500 per square metre. The Commuted Sum is therefore £1,119 (£3,500 - £2,381) x 63m2, equating to £70,497 per affordable dwelling.
The total Commuted Sum payable for this residential element of the scheme would therefore be £140,994, which could be paid in instalments as agreed with the applicant. The Sum would be placed into the Housing Reserve Fund and utilised exclusively in the construction of new, and maintenance of existing, affordable housing.
The Department would request that consideration be given by the Planning Committee to include a requirement, in respect of any approval granted for this site, for the applicant to enter into a Section 13 Agreement with the Department to provide a Commuted Sum in lieu of two affordable apartments.
Thank you for giving the Department the opportunity to comment on the content of the application."
5.6.1 Ecosystem Policy Team comment (30.05.2025); "The Ecosystem Policy Team would be supportive of the below conditions. Due to the condition and location of the buildings they have potential for both bats and birds. A bat assessment is therefore appropriate, as is the inclusion of swift boxes.
The applicant is also reminded that thorough checks for bats and birds must be made in and around the building prior to alteration/demolition. If bats or birds, or evidence of bats and birds, such as nesting material or piles of droppings, are discovered, all work must stop and advice be sought from the DEFA Ecosystem Policy Team on 01624 651577. Alterations/demolition without checks would be considered reckless."
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.0.1 Main Issues o Conservation Area/Registered Building Statutory Test (Town and County Planning Act 1999); o Principle of Development (Local Plan land use allocation, MUP7, UEP3 & 4 from the Area Plan for East Written Statement and StP 1, 2, 9 & 11, SP1, GP 1 & 2, HP1, EP43, BP1, 9 & 10 of the IOMSP); o Potential impact upon the visual amenities of the street scenes and whether the development proposed would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the North Quay Conservation Area. (Town and County Planning Act 1999, StP 4 & 5, GP2, EP 30, 35, 39, 42 & 43 & UEP 2& 3 and Planning Policy Statements: 1/01); o Affordable housing provision (GP4, HP1, HP 4, HP 5 and Our Island Plan); o Impact on Neighbouring Residential Properties (GP2(g)); o Traffic Impacts / parking provision (StP10, GP2, TP 1, 4, 6, 7 & 8 and TP1 from Area Plan for East; Active Travel; Climate Change; and Net Zero 2050); o Potential impacts upon ecology (EP4, EP5 & GP2); o Energy/Climate Change (EP5); o Drainage/Flooding (GP2, EP13); and
==== PAGE 21 ====
25/90441/B Page 21 of 32
o Fire provisions (CP10 & CP11). 6.0.2 CONSERVATION AREA/REGISTERED BUILDING STATUTORY TEST 6.0.3 Prior to the assessment elements of this application, it is necessary to apply the Conservation Area statutory test as referenced in sections 4.1.3 and 4.1.4 of this assessment on whether the proposal would preserve or enhance the Conservation Area character or appearance and whether the development would affect a registered building or its setting. 6.0.4 Applying s. 16(3) TCPA 1999, the proposed development preserves the Registered Building (Newson's) as this submission does not proposed to demolition this building nor forms part of the development site. The proposed works, namely to Nrs 25 & 26 will have the greatest impact, namely to the setting of the Registered Building, given the works are immediately adjacent and their scale and overall design approach. The Senior Registered Building Officer comments on this matter are important and comment that "...Given the form and massing of the proposed buildings as described in the previous section, and the fact that the footprint of the proposed buildings would match the existing buildings, I judge that the setting of registered building 289 would be preserved by the proposals." 6.05 Accordingly, it is considered the setting of the Registered Building would be preserved and therefore comply with the Statutory Test i.e. Section 16(3) TCPA 1999. 6.0.6 In terms of the Statutory Test relating to Conservation Areas, Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999), special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing its character or appearance. Again comments made by the Senior Registered Building Officer have significant weigh attached, where he comments; "When viewing the scheme overall, and with specific regard to the appearance of the Conservation Area, I consider the proposed North Quay elevation to be varied in its form, massing and finishes. Although very few traditional materials are proposed, which is preferred by Environment Policy 34, I judge that the variety of building form and massing that is a characteristic of the North Quay Conservation Area would be maintained by the proposals." 6.0.7 With regards to whether the proposal preserves or enhances the Conservation Area it is considered that overall the proposal could be considered to be an enhancement. The element that weights against the proposal is the loss of the historical fabric of the existing buildings. However, this is not considered to outweigh the overall enhancement and benefits of the scheme. Therefore it is considered the proposal would comply with Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999).
6.1 PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT 6.1.1 The site is within an area designated as "Mixed Use Proposal Area - Quayside" under the Area Plan for the East 2020. The proposed scheme is for a mix of restaurant/bar use and residential, the main amount of the created and converted floor space being for residential use. The applicants comment; "In its general plan arrangement, the buildings have two entrances to access six apartments and two penthouses. These apartments are of generous size (1,000 - 1,460sq. ft) with the two penthouses even larger (1130 sq. ft - 3055 sq. ft), and their outlook to the quayside marina is maximised as far as possible.
At ground level two bar/restaurant units have been created. These vary in size between 1,560 sq. ft and 2,875 sq. ft in size and although they use some of the ground floor area of Merchant's House, externally the appearance of no. 24 is unchanged."
6.1.2 Mixed Use Proposal 7 comments that; "There will be a presumption in favour of food and drink and other leisure-type uses on North Quay." The Area Plan isn't entirely clear if this seeks these leisure use to be accommodated through the building i.e. upper floors as well as ground level. If it does, then this proposal would be contrary to this. It is noted that Mixed Use Proposal 7 in terms of the South Quay it does specifically mention;"...Residential uses at first floor level and above.". The Plan does also mention the use of upper floors within other areas of Mixed Use Area within the Town Centre. However, if the Area Plan is seeking the North Quay to be used for leisure purposes (i.e. bars/clubs/restaurants etc); the introduction of residential uses in this area will likely be impacted by such leisure's use, which operate during
==== PAGE 22 ====
25/90441/B Page 22 of 32
anti-social hours and will more likely to raise issues such as general disturbances and noise issues to the residents. 6.1.3 Accordingly; while the proposed uses could be considered contrary due to the wording of the Mixed Use Proposal 7; it is considered on balance that the use of the upper floors for residential purposes to be acceptable. Furthermore, the previously refused application contained similar uses and no refusal on this ground was given.
6.2 POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON THE VISUAL AMENITIES OF THE STREET SCENES AND WHETHER THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED WOULD PRESERVE OR ENHANCE THE CHARACTER OR APPEARANCE OF THE NORTH QUAY CONSERVATION AREA. 6.2.1 Arguably the main issue to be considered in the assessment of this application, is the impact of the proposed development upon the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The Department has a duty to determine whether such proposals are in keeping with not only the individual building, but the special character and quality of the area as a whole. With this in mind it is very relevant to consider Environment Policy 35 which indicates that development within Conservation Areas will only be permitted if they 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. Furthermore, as mention earlier in this report, Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999) also requires that special attention is paid the desirability of preserving or enhancing its character or appearance in the exercise. 6.2.2 With the above in mind the initial elements to consider in terms of the impacts upon the Conservation Area, firstly the demolition of buildings within a Conservation Area and second the potential impact of the whole development upon the character and quality of the Conservation Area. 6.2.3 Regarding the first part the proposal results in the demolition of Nrs 22, 23 and 25 & 26. Please see sections 1.0.5, 1.0.7 and 1.0.8 for details of each building. It should be noted the previous approved applications did included Nrs 22 & 23 and Nrs 25-26 North Quay being demolished, which raised no objection from the Department or the Minister. It should be noted the Nr 26 is a cleared site in the original building having been destroyed by fire a number of decades ago and asbestos sheeting installed to front elevation and roller shutter door. 6.2.4 In terms of policy Environment Policy 35 indicates that 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 indicates that there will be general presumption will be in favour of retaining buildings which make a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the Conservation Area. Paragraph 7.32.2 of the IOMSP goes into additional detail and outlines that in additional to the above there will also be consideration to: o the condition of the building; o the cost of repairing and maintaining it in relation to its importance and the issue derived from its continued use (based on consistent long-term assumptions); o the adequacy of efforts made to retain the building in use; o the merits of alternative proposals for the site. 6.2.5 Planning Policy Statement 1/01 - Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man CA/2 and CA/6 also requires consideration; albeit this outlines similar consideration to the polices indicated above. As mentioned earlier in this report, Section 16(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999) also requires that the Department shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.
Nrs 22 & 23 6.2.6 While no structural survey has been included in this submission, the previously applications did, where it raised a number of structural concerns. However, the then Registered Building officer raised concerns in the previously refused application that;
==== PAGE 23 ====
25/90441/B Page 23 of 32
"...the current application fails to demonstrate that any attempt has be made to try to work with the existing structures nor has it demonstrated this is not possible in terms of fabric or economic viability. No evidence has been submitted to show that any meaningful repair or maintenance has been undertaken during their current ownership with the minimum of at least try to prevent any further decline in their condition." 6.2.7 Comments made by the current Senor Registered Building Officer are noted which he comments; "...the current application does not include any such works to either repair or bring the registered building back in to use. As such, from a building conservation point of view and given the loss of historic fabric discussed in the previous paragraph, I judge that the proposals would result in a degree of harm to the historic character of the Douglas (North Quay) Conservation Area" 6.2.8 Without any new structural report or information, potentially the same concerns can be raised now. However, the existing buildings considering on their own context do not have significant architectural interest and arguably have lost a number of original features; including chimney stacks, original roof altered, perhaps taller roof added (a new roof has been added as noted by structural report), sliding sash windows removed and alterations to the ground floor to create shop windows. Eaves decorative details have also been lost to Nr 23. It is also noted that the previous scheme proposed to remove the majority of the building; only leaving the front and sections of the rear façades. It is also noted that to retain the existing front faced will require to remove 25% of the existing façade (demonstrated in previous application) to make the necessary repairs to the lintels. 6.2.8 Accordingly, again it is considered given the existing properties in question individually are not of high architectural value and have had significant alterations in the past and would result in further loss to repair, it is considered the principle of the loss of these buildings is acceptable.
Nrs 25 & 26 6.2.9 Again details of these buildings are within sections 1.0.7 & 1.0.8 of this report. Comments made by the Senior Registered Buildings officer above applies in the consideration of Nrs 25-26 as well that there is a harm to the loss of the historic fabric, 6.2.10 It first should be noted that the structure currently occupying Nr 26 is the asbestos sheeting structure which was installed a number of decades ago when the original building was demolished following a fire. There are no objections to the removal of this structure. This currently has a negative visual impact upon the Conservation Area and the adjacent registered buildings. Its removal is a beneficial aspect of the proposal. 6.2.11 In relation to Nr 25, again a structural report was undertaken by the Morton Partnership with a previous application. This did not appear to raise any significant structural issues with the building, only making recommendations for repairs, clearing gutters etc. In the previous application (22/00149/GB) a further structural report (Curtins) which concluded that Nr 25 is in a very dilapidated condition with the front wall being supported on two steel beams which are severely corroded. The front wall as a consequence is not robust and is unstable. Curtins further recommend its demolition as a temporary shoring system is impractical for a number of reasons. The report also indicated that the Morton report does not mention these steel beams or their condition and concludes very few remedial measures are necessary. These conclusions miss the serious structural issues that this building exhibits and does not address them. 6.2.12 The existing building (Nr 25) does have a greater level of architectural interests compared to Nr 22 & 23; albeit again has been altered in the past. The changes include the installation of a large more modern shop window at ground floor level, original windows removed. Further Nrs 25 and 26 share a party wall, which is understood could not practicably be retained on demolition of 25 North Quay. It is noted that it was previously accepted (22/00149/GB) that these buildings could be demolished. 6.2.13 Overall, there could be arguments that the application has not fully met the considerations outlined in Paragraph 7.32.2 of the IOMSP, namely condition of the buildings, cost of repairing and maintaining or adequacy of efforts made to retain the building in use. However, for the reasons outlined the principle of the demolition of the buildings in question
==== PAGE 24 ====
25/90441/B Page 24 of 32
are again considered acceptable. The final element of the four consideration is the merits of alternative proposals for the site which will be considered below. 6.2.14 When considering the proposal General Policy 2 (b, c &g) needs to be addressed to ensure any development respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; and does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality. 6.2.15 In support of the application and the reasons for the design approach, the applicants have commented; "In dialogue with the planning department we collectively took the view that two modern insertions into North Quay building fabric would be appropriate. To the left of Merchant's House a building of simple form with two recessed terraces and an elevated upper terrace is created. The elevated upper terrace allows the third floor apartment to be set back - visually limiting the frontage height.
To the right of Merchant's House a larger, bolder building introduces a gable frontage onto the Quay. This again has recessed balconies with a glass frontage enclosed by a metal clad surround.
The relationship between the existing buildings and these new structures is visually comfortable and allows a greater variety of height and level as requested by the Inspectors report accompanying the Appeal decision to 00148 and 149." 6.2.16 In terms of the massing, scale and form of the proposal overall; it is considered the proposal is acceptable. A previous concern of the development of the site (which also included the neighbouring Newson's site) which result part of the refusal was the designs uniformed appearance, especially given windows levels at each floor being the same throughout the entire development, including the main roof ridges and eves line. The Inspector on this point commented: "In further contrast to the existing variety, the scheme proposes homogenous floor and cill levels across the development site, all aligned with No 24, cutting across the verticality that is so characteristic of the buildings here. Moreover, there is currently a hierarchy to the fenestration of the appeal properties - in essence, the windows decrease in proportion with building height. The windows proposed would be the same size on each of the upper floors. Furthermore, the windows shown to Nos 22/23 are large and square, their proportions creating a jarring contrast with the verticality of this group of buildings. There appears to be a profusion of glazing, at variance with the robust solidity of the existing buildings." 6.2.17 In considering the design it is perhaps worthy to note comments made by the previous Inspector in terms of the context of the site and immediate area. The Inspector commented; "There is considerable variety in the streetscape here, with no two buildings being exactly the same. The four-storey Merchant's House (No 24) sits cheek by jowl with smaller, more domestic scale three/four storey properties, which in turn sit adjacent to a 1980s four-storey development to the west, and the four-storey stone warehouse to the east (separated by the site of No 26) next to which is the diminutive two storey building that is No 28 North Quay. A diversity of architectural styles is apparent throughout this part of the Conservation Area, with corresponding variety in ridge, eaves and floor/window heights and fenestration. That variety gives the quayside here a rich architectural 'texture' that is unified by a rhythm of verticality and use of a limited materials palette, mainly stone and render." 6.2.18 Early pre application discussions, the applicants and Department felt a traditional approach i.e. replicating the existing Victorian design, namely in relation to Nrs 25-26 would potentially have an impact of Merchant House and dilute its quality and appearance. It was considered a more contemporary approach could be the best way forward. 6.2.19 The proposed designs overcomes this concern and also adds differing approach to the neighbouring properties, namely Newson's and Merchant House which of the existing properties in the area is one with a prominence and high architectural interest and quality. 6.2.20 The proposed scheme (as outlined in paragraph 2.0.3) at Nrs 22-23 would appear as a simple form of development, but affected with the front façade being made up of a framed
==== PAGE 25 ====
25/90441/B Page 25 of 32
painted render band with large amounts of central vertically portioned glazing being setback from the render frame. It is considered the scale, finish and overall design would site well within the street scene and ensure that Merchant House would still retain its importance in this part of the quayside, given Merchant House appearing taller (when viewed form North Quay), projecting forward of the new building on Nrs 22-23 and its decorative features and painted render being retained. From South Quay the upper floor of the proposal, which is setback from the front façade, would be apparent form public views. This top floor results the building on Nrs 22-23 having a similar height to Merchant House. However, given the setback position, dark colour finishes (slate roof, dark frames) and large amounts of glazing, it is considered from this view the proposal at Nrs 22/23 would sit well with the street scene and neighbouring properties.
Nr 24 (Merchant House) 6.2.21 The works to Merchant House raise no concerns. The main alterations to the front elevation are the installation of four roof lights and external ramp to the access onto North Quay.
Nrs 25 - 26
6.2.22 The buildings in question would be demolished and replaced with a new four story contemporary building. The proposal is made up of a large glazed gable feature which fronts onto North Quay. The central element (and the majority) of the front is made up of glazed windows/doors which are set back and at a slight angle from the front façade of the gable facing element, which frames the glazing in a zinc cladding. This gable element would be the tallest building within the site, including Merchant House. This gable form is a feature found along North Quay e.g. Clinch's tower, Douglas Power Station, St Matthew's Church, 17/21 North Quay & The British pub and with more recent development at Quay West. This gable form is a historical feature found with warehouse type buildings on quaysides on the IOM. This design approach and finishes would ensure the proposal would continue the variety of build forms along the North Quay, whilst also ensuring verticality given its vertical proportions both in terms of the front facade and glazing designs. The zinc cladding would add a new material to this area (generally render and stone), albeit would not be a prominent feature given its dark colour and as the majority of the front façade has a glazed finish with only modest sections of cladding used.
Rear elevations of entire development 6.2.23 A further concern of the prevision application related to the uniformity of the rear elevation. The Inspector commented; "Although of little architectural merit, the rear elevation to the appeal site is very varied, telling the historic story of the buildings as they evolved over time. It is very characteristic of this older part of Douglas.
That varied roofscape and texture would disappear with the scheme as proposed, with little if anything recognisable remaining for instance, in terms of any expression of the individual, historic plots, or variety in materials, roof slopes, eaves and ridge heights etc. Instead, the building would appear as one large, monolithic block of institutional appearance."
6.2.24 The proposal, again is considered to overcome this concern, with each roof of the proposal to the rear elevation being different heights, eves level, window proportions and sizes.
Impact upon the setting of the Registered Building (Newson's building) 6.2.25 As outlined by the Registered Building Officer, no works are proposed to the registered building with is immediately to the east of the site. Substantial weight is attached to the comments made by the Registered Building Officer who comments that; "With regard to the setting of the registered building, the existing setting is formed by the harbour itself, the pedestrianised North Quay highway, the row of buildings stretching west from the building's western gable, and the narrow Queen Street highway at the rear. North of
==== PAGE 26 ====
25/90441/B Page 26 of 32
Queen Street, the building's backdrop is formed of a modern two storey car park, the historic Saddle Public House, and taller buildings along Lord Street and further northwards in the distance. Given the form and massing of the proposed buildings as described in the previous section, and the fact that the footprint of the proposed buildings would match the existing buildings, I judge that the setting of registered building 289 would be preserved by the proposals." 6.2.26 The proposed building on Nrs 25 - 26 would clearly have the greatest potential impact, given the proximity and the proposed scale, form and design of the new building. There could be some concern that the gable features scale/height may become a more dominating feature and detract from the registered building character and quality. However, with its more contemporary approach with essentially a front façade made up of mainly glazing it is considered the approach would have a clear contrast of the new and the old and enable the appreciation of the historic building. Furthermore, as outlined previously the quayside is made up of a variety of building types, forms, scales/heights, design so while this proposal would be greater in scale, it is not considered for the reasons outlined and by the Registered Building Officer the proposal would not have an adverse impact upon the setting of the registered building.
Conclusion 6.2.27 Overall, in terms of the massing, scale and form of the proposal overall; it is considered the proposal is acceptable and overcome the previous concerns of a more uniformed appearance, with differing roof ridges, eaves levels, fenestration and overall design approaches and built forms. The proposal would be a continuation/addition of the existing diversity of architectural styles found along North Quay and within the Conservation Area and ensure the character and quality of North Quay is retained. Accordingly, whilst the loss of the existing historical built fabric weighs against the proposal, overall it is considered the proposed scheme would represent an enhancement to the Conservation Area and outweigh any harm. The proposed approach would also meet the aims of Urban Environment Proposal 3 as the development would make a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness with a contemporary approach and the context of the surrounding area. Therefore complying with Town and County Planning Act 1999, StP 4 & 5, GP2, EP 30, 35, 39, 42 & 43 & UEP 2 & 3 and Planning Policy Statements: 1/01.
6.3 AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVISION 6.3.1 Housing Policy 5 of the Strategic Plan indicates that the Planning Authority will normally require that 25% of provision should be made up of affordable housing. This policy will apply to developments of 8 dwellings or more. Given submission proposes 8 dwellings this equates to 2 affordable dwellings. A Section 13 Legal Agreement would need to be entered into by the applicant and the Department to ensure the affordable housing is provided. The applicants have proposed a commuted sum payment in lieu of Affordable Housing. Public Estates & Housing Division have given a figure of £140,994. The proposal therefore complies with Housing Policy 5.
6.4 IMPACT ON NEIGHBOURING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES 6.4.1 The residential properties mostly likely to be affected by the development would be the apartments to the northwest of the site, Hanover House (15 flats) which is a six storey building with the first three levels being car parking. The element of the proposal which raises potential impacts (i.e. loss of light, overbearing impacts and/or overlooking) is the redevelopment of Nrs 22 & 23, as this element is directly to the south of these neighbouring apartments. The new building at Nrs 22-23 would have a height of 17m which is an increase over the existing height of 13.2m. The rear elevation of Hanover House faces towards the application site. The first three floors of Hanover House is made up of a multi storey car park. The fourth, fifth and sixth floor of Hanover House has a number of windows served bedrooms, lounges and kitchens. Therefore there are primary habitable room's windows which view towards the site. 6.4.2 Due to the four storey multi storey car park which directly faces towards the rear of Nr 22- 23 the proposed first three storeys of the building will have no greater impact that already
==== PAGE 27 ====
25/90441/B Page 27 of 32
exists. The element of the new development at Nrs 22-23 which would have the greatest impact would be the fourth floor (top floor), which has a total of three windows and a Juliet balcony which face towards the neighbouring building. These windows serve a kitchen, utility and bedroom. The windows would be approximately 18+m to the windows to the rear of Hanover House. Accordingly, whilst this is generally below the general guide of 20m distance between directly facing windows, the Residential Design Guide does indicated that this distance maybe reduced in urban areas. The proposed windows would also not serving be primary habitable rooms (living rooms), as the primary outlooks and amenity/light for the new development is in the south elevation (opposite side of new building) towards the quay side. It is also notes that there are already a number of windows with the neighbouring buildings which look towards the rear elevation of Hanover House and therefore, there is already a level of impacts upon residential amenities. 6.4.3 Overall, while the proposal would increase the potential impacts over what currently exists, it is not considered the impacts would be so adversely significant to warrant a refusal. Therefore, it is considered the proposal would comply with General Policy 2 and the Residential Design Guide 2020.
6.5 TRAFFIC IMPACTS / PARKING PROVISION 6.5.1 The IOMSP Appendix 7 indicates the relevant parking standards for various developments. In this case the 8 residential units would generate a total requirement of 2 spaces per two bed unit (8 x 2 = 16) therefore these generate a total requirement of 16 parking spaces. The ground floor bar/restaurants uses the IOMSP fall silence on the parking requirement; albeit for shops (similar uses age/generation) the IOMSP indicates that in town centres there should be "Space for service vehicle use". 6.5.2 The proposal does not provide any off-street parking within the site. Currently there are 4/5 off street parking spaces within the site (rear of Nr 22-23). However, the IOMSP indicates that the parking standards outlined 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. 6.5.3 In this case, it is considered paragraphs b, c and d are relevant and apply. A concern with the provision of parking in this situation, can be the visual impact of ground floor parking and creation of accesses to the main elevations which have a detrimental visual impact to the street scene. Further, basement parking in flood areas can cause concern; albeit other development in the area have overcome this aspect. 6.5.4 As identified in paragraph 6.7.3 provision of parking can adversely affect the Conservation Area and certainly having car parking at ground floor level on this site, especially to the front elevation would cause concern. However, as existing today there is scope for parking at the rear of the building, but this has not been proposed, instead additional accommodation for the bar/restaurant uses. 6.5.5 The final exception (d), this is where the proposal does meet one of the exceptions in that it is with close proximity if existing bus routes (main bus station on Lord Street). In terms of the second aspect of this exception, the applicants have not provided any information to demonstrate a reduced level of parking will not result in unacceptable on street parking in the locality i.e. parking survey etc.; albeit given the limited amount of on street parking in the vicinity of the site it is unlikely such survey would demonstrate that the proposal would not have any impact to off street parking. 6.5.6 The applicants have commented that; "2.32 Car parking is required by the Strategic Plan to be provided (Transport Policy 7) although Appendix Seven explains that "Most shopping facilities in established centres do not have onsite parking provided due to the intensive form of development and their location off the main highway, often in pedestrianized streets" with particular reference to Castletown,
==== PAGE 28 ====
25/90441/B Page 28 of 32
Ramsey, Peel and Douglas and goes on to state that it is "impractical" to require on-site parking for either staff or customers in such locations although it must be feasible for retail developments to be serviced. It also states that it is essential that there are sufficient areas of public car parking either in car parks or on street and that adequate controls are in place for these spaces to be available to those who need them. The previous application(s) 148 + 149 did not require a parking provision from DoI Highways." 6.5.7 It is also important to consider that the principles of the IOMSP seek for sustainable development and that Transport Policy 1 which seeks that new development should, where possible, be located close to existing public transport facilities and routes, including pedestrian, cycle and rail routes. The preamble to this policy is paragraph 11.2.3 which states that to meet environmental objectives new development should where possible be located and planned so as to reduce the need for travel and encourage means of travel other than by private car, in particular walking, cycling, and public transport use. It further goes on to state that such sites should be within or contiguous with existing built centres which are well served by public transport and which are within walking or cycling distance of the new development, and this will have the added benefit of strengthening the services, shops, employment opportunities and overall vitality of those centres. 6.5.8 Further, within the Area Plan for the East Written Statement Transport Proposal 1 states; "Development proposals must take into account the Active Travel Strategy and any specific actions set out in the Active Travel Action Plan.". 6.5.9 The proposal includes a secure bicycle store for 8 bikes (i.e. one per apartment). 6.5.10 It is noted that Highway Services have considered the application in detail both from a highway safety point of view, traffic generation and parking provision standpoint. 6.5.11 Overall, while the proposal would not provide on-site parking, it is considered the uses proposed on this specific site; especially given the number of apartments being fairly low in number, located in the centre of town, close to public transport links and good sustainable links, would all help meet the overarching aims of the IOMSP which seeks to promote sustainable development and travel, which seeks to reduce the need for travel and encourage means of travel other than by private car, in particular walking, cycling, and public transport use. The main thrust of the applicants argument in the under provision of the site is the sustainable location of the site. It is therefore considered that the proposal would comply with GP2, TP 1, 4, 6 & 7 and TP1 from Area Plan for East. Further, it is concluded the proposal would comply with the following Government Strategies; Net Zero Emissions by 2050, IoM Government's Active Travel Strategy and the Climate Change Bill 2020 which all seek to reduce car travel for more sustainable means of travel.
6.6 ENERGY/CLIMATE CHANGE 6.6.1 Energy Policy 5 indicates that developments of this size will require an "Energy Impact Assessment". The applicants have outlined that the following measures will be included in the development; High performance building fabric and energy efficient lighting, services and equipment; Passive design measures to reduce energy demand for heating, cooling, ventilation and lighting; ASHPs for hot water production (apartments) & to provide heating and cooling to the ground floor units; Roof mounted PV linked to required apartments and communal to ensure Part L Building regulations compliance; MVHR ventilation through-out; No fossil fuels utilised; and Point of use electric water heaters (ground floor units). They further advise that the proposal is a low carbon development; and have a high level of air tightness is proposed. Accordingly, it is considered the proposal would comply with Energy Policy 5 and the aims of the Climate Change Act.
6.7 DRAINAGE/FLOODING 6.7.1 The site is within a High Flood Risk Area (tidal) and Environment Policy 13 indicates that development which would result in an unacceptable risk from flooding, either on or off-site, will not be permitted. A Flood Risk Assessment is included in the submission. The Flood Risk Management Division have no objection to the application subject to a condition restricting the ground floor uses to non-residential accommodation which is considered appropriate. 6.7.2 The Flood Risk Assessment recommends;
==== PAGE 29 ====
25/90441/B Page 29 of 32
"Due to the coastal flood risk posed to the site within its 100-year design lifetime, it is recommended that flood resilience measures are adopted to minimise or delay the ingress of floodwater into the development, and reduce the impact of floodwater within the building. It is recommended that a water exclusion strategy be pursued due to the proposed basement modifications. Recommended measures include use of low permeability materials on the exterior of the building to at least 0.30m elevation from ground level, raised electrical sockets within the building, barrier protection, waterproofing for the basement, and ensuring all areas likely to be affected by flooding have easy access for cleaning and drying In combination with flood resilience measures, it was recommended that persons responsible for day-to-day management of the site make use of the Isle of Man Government Notification System, which shares information on flooding and other emergencies to enable early evacuation and preparation if needed..." 6.7.3 In terms of finished floor levels (FFLs) and predicated flood levels the assessment states; "Modelled maximum extreme water levels for the 0.5% AEP (Annual Exceedance Probability) event for the present day (2013) and climate change (2115) events are 4.83mAOD and 5.48mAOD respectively. FFLs across the development are proposed to be raised from roughly 4.75mAOD to 5.10mAOD." 6.7.4 And "Flood depths reach 0.38m across the site where FFLs are at 5.10mAOD. The surrounding access roads on North Quay and Queen Street are inundated to depths of 1.00m and 1.30m respectively." 6.7.5 Accordingly, the worst case scenario for flooding is that the flood levels would be 0.38m above the proposed finished floor level at ground floor level. Accordingly the proposed mitigation measures would essentially prevent water entering the building (including basement) are proposed. It is noted that the proposal are increasing the finished floor level (new buildings) over the current levels which is of benefit. Furthermore, while the levels could potential be increased, this would therefore have a knock on effect on the overall floor levels of the development which are proposed to be all at one level (5.10). Merchant House which is proposed to be retained and is centrally positioned, would potentially be impacted if the floor levels where raised (if possible). Accordingly, the approach taken would seem to be reasonable and mitigate any significant floor events in the future. It should be noted that if the maximum flood events where to occur, flood depths of 1m on North Quay would occur and 1.3m to Queen Street. 6.7.6 Overall, the finished floor levels of the ground floor is set at a level to mitigate the flood risk. Noting the type of flooding is tidal, which can be predicated significant more so than river flood and with the appropriately worded condition as suggested, the proposal would be acceptable from this respect.
6.8 FIRE PROVISIONS 6.8.1 Building Control will also consider the application in terms of fire related matters and during this process the IOM Fire and Rescue Service will comment further. It is considered the application from a planning perspective is acceptable in this respect.
6.9 ECOLOGY 6.9.1 Environment Policy 4 indicates that development will not be permitted which would adversely affect various protected species/habitats etc. Further Environment Policy 5 indicates that where development is allowed which could adversely affect protected species/habitats, conditions will be imposed and/or Planning Agreements sought to mitigate these impacts. 6.9.2 The Ecosystem Policy Officer has made comments that they support the conditions that where previously proposed for the last application. Previously the officer had sought that given the traditional nature of the buildings and as that there are numerous potential entry points for bats including slipped slates, holes under and around the guttering, holes in the stonework, holes under the ridge tiles and as the buildings are also located next to a river corridor in an area with multiple bat records, of numerous species, within a 1km radius. Therefore they confirm these are all features which increase the likelihood of bats being present.
==== PAGE 30 ====
25/90441/B Page 30 of 32
6.9.3 Further, they previously sought a preliminary assessment for bats (bat survey) is undertaken prior to determination of this application. It is noted that the officer did also indicate that; "The presence of bats and birds will not prevent the building from being redeveloped, or areas demolished, but provision must be shown for their ongoing protection.". 6.9.4 It is considered a condition could be attached which undertakes a bat survey prior to the commencement of any development, including demolition. Further as previously recommend by the Officer a condition could be attached for multiple integrated swift nest boxes to be installed high up in the north face of the buildings.
7.0 SECTION 13 LEGAL AGREEMENTS 7.1 Should the application be approved S13 Legal Agreements would be required to be undertaken for commuted sum payment in lieu of Affordable Housing. For the AFH, a fee of £140,994 would be sought.
8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1.1 As outlined in this report the main issue to the potential impact upon the character and quality of the Conservation area/street scene and the setting of the Registered Building. In relation to these matters it is considered the proposals would represent an overall enhancement to the Conservation Area/street scene and would not adversely harm the setting of the adjacent Registered Building. The proposals would therefore comply with Section 16 (3) and Section 18 (4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999), GP4, EP30, 35 and 39 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016; policies RB/6, CA/2 and CA/6 of PPS1/01. 8.1.2 The proposal in terms of parking/highway safety raises not concerns. The site is within a sustainable location and provisions adequate number of secure bicycle spaces within the building for use by the residents of the apartments. 8.1.3 The proposal has been designed to reduce energy consumption, reduce fossil fuels consumption and reduce emissions which are also matters which Net Zero and the Climate Change Bill seeks. 8.1.4 The proposal would have no significant impacts upon neighbouring annuities to warrant a refusal. 8.1.5 The loss of the existing history fabric weighs against the proposal. 8.1.6 All other matters outlined in this report are considered acceptable. 8.1.7 In conclusion while the proposal does comply with the relevant planning polices and other material planning matters. Accordingly, for these reasons it is recommended the application is approved.
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: 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.
==== PAGE 31 ====
25/90441/B Page 31 of 32
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.
This Officer recommendation to approve this application subject to the applicant entering into a legal agreement was originally considered at a meeting of the Planning Committee where the members determined to approve the application subject to a legal agreement securing provision of
At that meeting the Members wished it minuted that once such agreement was in place the decision to approve the application could be issued.
__
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 Date: 09.06.2025
Signed : Presenting Officer Chris Balmer
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.
==== PAGE 32 ====
25/90441/B Page 32 of 32
PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 09.06.2025
Application No. : 25/90441/B Applicant : Kelman Ltd Proposal : Erection and conversion of eight apartments and two retail units (in association with 25/00442/CON) Site Address : 22-26 North Quay Douglas Isle Of Man IM1 4LE
Presenting Officer : Chris Balmer
Addendum to the Officer’s Report
Planning Committee - 25/90441/B The Planning Committee approved the application subject to a S13 Legal Agreement, but with the following amended conditions;
C 5. Prior to the commencement of construction works above slab level, or refurbishment works to an existing building details of cladding, window frames, external doors/frames, roof finishes, balustrading and outdoor raised decking/ramps/stairs i.e. all external finishes have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be occupied/brought into use unless the external finish has been applied in accordance with the approved details, and shall be retained thereafter.
Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development, the visual amenities of the area and preserving the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
C 10. Prior to the commencement of construction works above slab level, or refurbishment works to an existing building details of the bin storage areas and secure bicycle storage areas have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be occupied/brought into use unless the bin and cycle store has been applied in accordance with the approved details, and shall be retained thereafter.
Reason: To promote sustainable travel in the interests of reducing pollution and congestion in accordance with Strategic Policy 10 of The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, the aims of the Active Travel Strategy and the Climate Change Act. __
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal