Loading document...
| Application No.: | 14/00450/B |
| Applicant: | Derby Road Limited |
| Proposal: | Re-surfacing of site and creation of a car park (retrospective) |
| Site Address: | Site Of Former Group Practice Centre Derby Road Peel Isle Of Man IM5 1HP |
| Case Officer: | Miss S E Corlett |
| Photo Taken: | 15.05.2014 |
| Site Visit: | 15.05.2014 |
| Expected Decision Level: | Officer Delegation |
1.1 The site is the curtilage of the former Peel GP surgery situated on the northern side of Derby Road between the Shoprite grocery store and the residential properties on Derby Drive and Derby Road to the west. The Shoprite site has a large car park which abuts the application site. The site has a width of 20m and a length of 40m. The area at the front of the site which is laid out as car park is not included within the site but is within the control of the applicant.
2.1 Proposed is the laying out and use of the site as a car park. This is retrospective as the doctors' surgery building was demolished and the site cleared and finished in tarmacadam and is used for parking as part of the larger car park which principally serves the Shoprite store as well as the recycling bins which are sited within the car park.
3.1 The site lies within an area designated as Retail on the Peel Local Plan of 1989. This plan acknowledges the need for appropriate levels of parking to be provided but warns that "Great care must be taken in linking such spaces to the street system in order to avoid adverse effects on the streetscape".
4.1 There was an intention to consider Registration of the building formerly on the site and a Building Preservation Notice was issued in this respect in 2012. However, Registration was not pursued and the buildings on site were subsequently demolished.
4.2 The car park on the site was approved, with the vehicular access under PA 86/00059.
5.1 The owner of 44, Derby Road expresses concern at the safety of the increased use of the access which was previously only used for around ten vehicles.
5.2 Peel Commissioners indicate that they do not oppose the application.
5.3 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services indicate that due to the limited visibility available at the access, the present arrangement enables users of the wider car park to use
the access, significantly increasing the amount of traffic using an egress which is unsafe. The existing access should be closed off to vehicular traffic.
6.1 The key issues in this case are the visual impact of the hard surfacing and the parked vehicles and the acceptability of cars from the car park being able to access and egress from the car park using this access. There is no indication on the plans that the existing access is to be closed off or signed such that access or egress is controlled in any way.
6.2 On egressing the car park in a vehicle, one's visibility is impaired to the left by the existing stone wall and to the right by the wall on that side when the front of the vehicle is not encroaching onto the footway. Moving slightly further out onto the footway but not yet encroaching onto the carriageway, visibility to the left is available to up to 90m on the far side and 35m to the nearside. To the right, towards town visibility is impaired by the existing wall, lamppost and the wall of Sunny Mount, all of which give a limited visibility of around 20m at most. Whilst the access from the former car park in front of the surgery is not included in the application site, there is nothing to prevent vehicles in the new car parking area from exiting through this access.
6.3 Following discussion with the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services and the planning officer, the applicant has explained that they are happy to install bollards such that either the existing access is pedestrian only, or, preferably that bollards are erected to prevent vehicles from the wider car park from using the former surgery entrance. The latter would allow for the recycling facilities operated by the Commissioners to be located on the application site rather than within the Shoprite car park. The applicant has liaised with Department of Infrastructure Highway Services regarding the likely traffic amounts resulting from the latter bollard option and they are happy that this is not significantly more than is acceptable bearing in mind the previous use of the site.
7.1 The local authority, Peel Town Commissioners are, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, paragraph 6 (4) (e), considered "interested persons" and as such should be afforded party status.
7.2 The Highway Authority is granted interested party status under the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 paragraph 6 (4) d.
7.3 44, Derby Road is not opposite the site and not reasonably affected by the proposal and as such should not be afforded interested person status in this case.
Recommended Decision: Permitted
Date of Recommendation: 05.12.2014
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
Within two months of the date of this notice there must be installed either:
a) a bollard or bollards which prevent vehicular egress from the site onto Derby Road, or b) bollards which prevent vehicular access from the wider car park into the application site
all to the satisfaction of the Department. REASON: in the interests of highway safety. This approval relates to drawings DRL/SP/001, DRL/SLP/001 both received on 9th April, 2014.
I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control /Head of Development Management/ Senior Planning Officer.
Decision Made : Permitted Date : 5/12/14
Signed : _________________________ Chris Balmer
Senior Planning Officer Signed : _________________________ Michael Gallagher Director of Planning and Building Control
Signed : _________________________ Sarah Corlett
Senior Planning Officer Signed : _________________________ Jennifer Chance Head of Development Management
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown