33151

==== PAGE 1 ====

Planning Officer Report 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 The aim of this statement is to provide background information to the pianning application and to set out the relevant poiicies to consider in respect of the proposed deveiopment. 1.2 The site is owned by the Department of Infrastructure, and the appiication has been submitted on iand owned by that Department, As such, the appiication must be considered by an Independent Inspector and the decision taken by the Councii of Ministers as set out in paragraph 10(l)(b) of the Town and Country Pianning (Deveiopment Procedure)(No 2) Order 2013, 1.3 The Department has no other interest in the proposai. 2.0 THE APPLICATION SITE 2.1 The appiication site is a smaii area of land that comprises pubiic highway of both road and pavement on Waipoie Avenue near to its junction with Loch Promenade to the north. It is within the Douglas Promenade Conservation Area, 3.0 THE PROPOSAL, PLANNING HISTORY AND PLANNING POLICY Retrospective pianning approvai is sought for the change of materials on the footways aiong two stretches of footpath within Waipoie Avenue, Planning approvai was previously granted for these footways to be laid with granite under PA 12/01327/B, but instead they have been iaid with tarmac. 3.1 3.2 The Department of Infrastructure's Highway Services Division has submitted a Retrospective Statement of Case to outiine the reasoning behind their use of different materiais to those approved under PA 12/01327/B, As the Jubiiee Clock is a Registered Buiiding iocated in Douglas Promenade Conservation Area, designated on the 9th August 2002, the content of this appiication shouid be considered with particular regard to RB/3: GENERAL CRITERIA APPLIED IN CONSIDERING REGISTERED BUILDING APPUCATIONS, POLICY RB/5 ALTERATIONS AND EXTENSIONS and Poiicy CA/2 SPECIAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS as set out within Planning Poiicy Statement 1/01 - Poiicy and Guidance Notes for the Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isie of Man. Regard shouid aiso be had to Environment Poiicy 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007. 3.3 3.4 Planning Poiicy Statement 1/01 RB/3: Generai Criteria Appiied in Considering Registered Buiiding Appiications states;'' The issues that are generally relevant to the consideration of all registered building applications are: • The importance of the building, its intrinsic architectural and historic interest and rarity, relative to the Island as a whole and within the local context; • The particular physical features of the building (which may include its design, plan, materials or location) which justify its inclusion in the register; descriptions annexed to the entry in the register may draw attention to features of particular interest or value, but they are not exhaustive and other features of importance, (e.g. Interiors, murals, hidden fireplaces) may come to light after the building's entry in the register; • The building's setting and its contribution to the local scene, which may be very important, e.g. Where it forms an element in a group, park, garden or other townscape or landscape, or where it shares particular architectural forms or details with other buildings nearby (including other registered buildings)."

==== PAGE 2 ====

3.5 RB/5; Alterations and Extensions states; "In considering whether to grant planning approval for development which affects a registered building or its setting and in considering whether to grant registered building consent for any works, 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. "Registered Building consent is required for the building's alteration in any way which would affect its special architectural or historic character. There will be a general presumption against alteration or extension of regis^red buildings, except where a convincing case can be made, against the criteria set out in this section, for such proposals. "Applicants for registered building consent for alteration or extension to a registered building must be able to justify their proposals. They will be required to show why the works which would affect the character of the registered building are desirable or necessary and they should provide full information to enable the Department to assess the likely impact of their proposals on the special architectural or historic interest of the building and on its setting. Where registered buildings are the subject of successive applications for alteration or extension, consideration will also be given to the cumulative affect upon the building's special interest as a result of several minor works which may individually seem of little consequence." Policy CA/2 - Special Planning Considerations states: ” 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. 3,6 " 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." That proposed, is the relocation of the Jubilee Clock, a matter of 7.9m to the south west of its current location, The relocation is necessary because of the re-configuring of the junction, itself part of the wider redevelopment proposals for the whole Promenade, The Jubilee Clock has been moved several times in its history, John Millar Nicholson, the famous Manx artist, photographed it in the 1980s showing it in the centre of Victoria Street, closer to the former Villiers Hotel. The move to its previous location happened sometime in the i990s. The recent move, approved under the 2012 application, was not judged to in any way compromise the character or setting of the Registered Building and its location within the Conservation Area and was therefore acceptable. 3.7 Environment Policy 35 of the Strategic Plan, meanwhile, 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." 3.8 4.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of all the Representations received are attached at Appendix A to this report. For ease of reference, summaries thereof are provided below. It was thought that it might be helpful for the Inspector to have a formal response from the applicant to these Representations; this is attached at Appendix B. 4.1 Twickenham Investments Limited, in a letter date-stamped as having been received 20'^'’ October 2014, object to the planning application. They identify the fact that the site is a highly important part of the Regeneration Zone and Conservation Area of Douglas, and query the factual 4.2

==== PAGE 3 ====

accuracy of the applicants' Retrospective Statement of Case and also query the reasoning behind the v/orks being undertaken. They also believe that the granting of the application would set a regrettable precedent, Chapman Chartered Surveyors, in a letter date-stamped as having been received 22'^ October 2014, comment primarily on procedural matters and outline the history and outcomes of meetings that took place between themselves, their client (Twickenham Investments Limited), Curtins Consulting Engineers and the applicants. Curtins Consulting Engineers, who were engaged to design repairs to the basement light wells of the Jubilee Building by Twickenham Investments Limited, in a letter dated 28"’ October 2014, comment primarily on procedural matters and outline the history and outcomes of meetings that took place between themselves, their client (Twickenham Investments Limited), Chapman Chartered Surveyors and the applicants, They also indicate that there is only one basement light well in the Jubilee Building and that this did not prevent the majority of the pavement to be laid with paving. 4,3 4.4 5.0 ASSESSMENT 5.1 The key matters for assessment are whether or not the proposed works will affect the setting of the Registered Building and whether or not they would preserve or enhance the Conservation Area. 5.2 In terms of the former, it is considered that the works previously approved in 2012 were far more significant in terms of the impact of the setting of the Registered Building - which was, in fact, moved as part of those works. Given the location of proposed tarmac around a corner from the clock tower, it is considered that its setting is satisfactorily preserved. Turning to the latter, which is perhaps the more crucial issue, the concerns raised are noted. It would be preferable for the more attractive, granite paving to be used for the entirety of the works as previously proposed / approved. However, it also goes without saying that the granite would still have to end at some point in the roadway so, at that point, there would have been an unfortunate 'break' between the more attractive granite and the more utilitarian concrete. It is of course a fundamental principle that retrospective planning application should not be treated any differently to those that are not retrospective. It is also true that what is now proposed must be balanced against what was in situ previously, which, as noted on the 2012 application, gave a poor impression. The Inspector appointed to report on that application at the time noted the following points at his paragraphs 16 and 18 respectively: 5,3 5.4 "16 - There is no doubt that a comprehensive scheme to refurbish the full length of the Promenade is required." " 18 - The existing highways and streetscape finishes and street furniture are in poor condition and neither enhance nor preserve the character or appearance of the Promenade Conservation Area. The proposed works would certainiy improve the character and appearance of this 'gateway area'and the surface materials and finishes, comprising high to medium quaiity natural stone, asphalt and concrete would provide a much improved streetscape." 5.5 It is considered that a different conclusion on this occasion would be difficult to sustain. While tarmac is clearly less attractive than granite, it is considered that the tarmac still represents an improvement over the previous road surface. 6.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 6.1 It is recommended that interested person status be granted as follows. 6.2 In line with Article 6(4) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure)(No2) Order 2013, the following Persons are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of

==== PAGE 4 ====

the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application: the applicant or, if there is one, the applicant's agent; the owner and occupier of the land the subject of the application; Highway Services, and the Local Authority in whose district the land the subject of the application sits. In line with Article 6(3) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and Article 2(1) of Government Circular No, 01/13, the following persons who have made representation to the planning application are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application; 6.3 Twickenham Investments Limited, who is the owner of Jubilee Buildings, which is immediately adjacent the application site. In line with Article 6(3) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and Article 2(1) of Government Circular No, 01/13, the following persons who have made representation to the planning application are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application: 6.4 Chapman Chartered Surveyors, and Curtins Consulting Engineers. 7.0 CONDITIONS 7.1 The Inspector appointed to report on the 2012 application recommended a standard set of conditions in respect of (I) timescales, (ii) plans and (iii) a sample of materials to be submitted and approved in writing. None of these conditions is recommended to be applied in this instance. Firstly, the application is retrospective and therefore a timescale (or a condition requiring the works' retention) would be unnecessary. Secondly, plans are now referred to on approval notices by way of an informative. Thirdly, and again since the application is retrospective, a material sample is unnecessary. 7.2

==== PAGE 6 ====

Varley House 29/31 Duke Street Douglas Isle of Man IM1 2AZ T. 01624 624 585 F. 01624 624 532 0curtins www.curtins.com At the time of meeting the Department of Infrastructure on site to review the basement light well on Walpole Avenue, it appeared that the urgency to complete the resurfacing works determined the use of bitmac surfacing. Yours faithfully. Ian Copley For and on behalf of Curtins Consulting Engineers

==== PAGE 7 ====

Appendix B - Applicant's Response to Representations Received