249373

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  1  of  43

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. 23/01223/B Applicant : Tevir Group Proposal Construction of mixed use commercial building including commercial office (class 1.2 & 2.1), retail (class 1.1) and leisure uses (class 4.4) complete with basement parking, food & drink (class 1.3 and 1.4), and 80 bedroom hotel including restaurant and operational areas (class 3.1) Site Address Villiers Square Fort Street Douglas Isle Of Man IM1 2AX

Case Officer :

Toby Cowell Photo Taken :

Site Visit :

Expected Decision Level Planning Committee

Recommendation

Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation 16.04.2024

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. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or operated until the means of vehicular access has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans, and shall thereafter be retained for access purposes only.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

C 3. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or operated until the parking and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans. Such areas shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking and turning of vehicles associated with the development and shall remain free of obstruction for such use at all times.

Reason: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for off-street parking and turning of vehicles in the interests of highway safety.

C 4. Prior to the occupation of the development a replacement bus stop and bus shelter on Loch Promenade shall be provided.

Reason: To ensure the delivery of a replacement bus stop following completion of the approved development.

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  2  of  43

C 5. Notwithstanding the level of information provided to date, a hard and soft landscaping scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department prior to the commencement of above ground works relating to the development. This shall include details relating to all green roofs associated with the development. All landscaping shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed in writing with the Department. Any trees or plants indicated on the approved scheme which, within a period of five years from the date of planting, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced during the next planting season with other trees or plants of a species and size to be first approved in writing by the Department.

Reason: To ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development and to assist the creation and management of biodiversity.

C 6. Prior to the commencement of any demolition works on site, a preliminary bat roost assessment shall be undertaken on the buildings by a suitably qualified ecological consultancy and a report detailing the findings submitted to the Department and approved in writing. Should the assessments find evidence of roosting bats, then further survey may be required as will details of avoidance and mitigation measures which may include requirements for the timing of building demolition and the provision of new roosting spaces.

Reason: To safeguard roosting bats and in the interests of biodiversity.

C 7. Prior to the commencement of development, a breeding bird assessment plan shall be submitted to the Department and approved in writing. The plan should contain the results of a breeding bird assessment on the buildings, including the process and timing for checking for their presence, or the measures to be put in place on the assumption that breeding birds are present in the buildings including any proposed mitigation measures. The proposed mitigation measure must also as a minimum contain details of at least 1 swift nest brick to be built into the new buildings.

Reason: To safeguard breeding birds and in the interests of biodiversity.

C 8. No above ground works relating to the development shall commence until sample details of cladding, windows, external doors and rooftop plant room louvres 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 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 9. No above ground works relating to the development shall commence until panels of all variations of brickwork proposed, including movement/mortar joints, have been erected on site (or an alternative location) 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 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. No development shall take place until a written methodology for an archaeological watching brief relating to the site groundworks has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The programme of archaeological monitoring shall be fully implemented in accordance with the approved written methodology.

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  3  of  43

Reason: To ensure that any archaeological remains are appropriately recorded and/or assessed prior to their damage or destruction by the development in accordance with Environment Policy 41 of The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

C 11. The development shall be undertaken in full accordance with the mitigation and flood risk prevention measures outlined in Section 7 of the approved Flood Risk Assessment (Waterco) received 30.10.2023.

Reason: To ensure that the development would be appropriate from a flood risk perspective.

C 12. Prior to the commencement of above ground works, and notwithstanding the level of information already provided, full details relating to the design, form and layout of the approved substation shall be submitted to the Department for approval in writing. This shall also include details relating to flood resistance and mitigation measures in line with the recommendations provided within the approved Flood Risk Assessment.

Reason: To ensure that the final design and appearance of the substation is satisfactory and to reduce the risk of flooding.

C 13. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Telecommunications) Development Order 2019 or any order amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order no telecommunications apparatus shall be erected or installed under Schedules 2 or 3 to that order without an express grant of planning approval from the Department.

Reason: In the interests of the wider strategic views of the area, the character and appearance of the development and the visual amenity of the conservation area.

C 14. There must not be any building, engineering or other work which will involve increasing the height of the building above what is shown on the approved plans and other documents listed on this decision notice.

Reason: In the interests of the wider strategic views of the area, the character and appearance of the development and the visual amenity of the conservation area.

C 15. Other than those shown on the approved drawings, no soil stacks, soil vent pipes, flues, ductwork or any other pipework shall be fixed to the elevations of the building hereby approved.

Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out to the highest standards of architecture and materials and in the interests of the character and appearance of the development.

C 16. Any telecommunications apparatus (not for the purposes as set out under Town and Country Planning (Telecommunications) Development Order 2019), extraction plant, air conditioning units and any other plant or equipment that is required on the exterior of the buildings shall be installed in accordance with details to be submitted to the Department in writing to be agreed. The details shall include: proposals for communal provision of television receiving equipment, wherever possible; siting; appearance; any arrangements for minimising the visual impact; and any arrangements for mitigating potential noise and vibration.

Reason: To ensure that any telecommunications apparatus and other plant or equipment that is required on the exterior of the buildings preserves the highest standards of architecture and materials as a key feature building.

C 17. In the event that piling is used, no piling shall take place until a piling method statement (detailing the depth and type of piling to be undertaken and the methodology by which such piling will be carried out, including measures to prevent and minimise the potential for damage

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  4  of  43

to subsurface sewerage infrastructure, and the programme for works) has first been submitted to the Department in writing to be agreed. Any piling must be undertaken in accordance with the terms of the approved piling method statement.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of local residential and businesses.

C 18. The development and use hereby approved shall not be brought into use unless its loading, offloading, turning and parking areas have been provided and surfaced in accordance with the details shown on the approved plans, for each block. Once provided, the loading, offloading, turning and parking areas shall thereafter be permanently retained as such.

Reason: To ensure the timely completion and retention of the on-site facilities to an adequate standard in the interests of road safety.

C 19. In the event that car park ventilation is required, no part of the development hereby approved shall progress above lower ground level until there has first been submitted to the Department in writing to be agreed, a scheme to ventilate the car park and minimise the ingress of polluted air, and management thereof. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the report so agreed, and shall be retained as such thereafter.

Reason: To ensure that the amenity of future occupiers of the development is protected.

C 20. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2012 or any order amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order no means of enclosure, other than that shown on the approved plans and other documents listed on this decision notice, and any drawings approved subsequently in writing by the Department pursuant to any conditions on this decision notice, shall be erected on the site under the terms of Class 39 of Schedule 1 to that Order without an express grant of planning approval from the Department.

Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the development.

C 21. Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans all glass balustrades/balconies shall be installed with measures to prevent bird strikes to be either etchings on the glass or use of ultraviolet decals.

Reason: To prevent bird strikes, due to proximity of nearby nesting birds.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The application site is identified for development and the proposal is judged to comply with the site allocation, as further detailed within Comprehensive Treatment Area Proposal 1. The proposals are considered to constitute a high standard of development in a prominent location within the Conservation Area, without resulting in a significantly adverse impact upon the amenities of occupants of surrounding buildings, including the amenities of future residential properties within the site's immediate vicinity. The proposals are deemed to give rise to a positive impact upon the character and appearance of the wider Conservation Area by redeveloping a prominent gap site, whilst further providing increased employment opportunity and additional serviced tourist accommodation, to the benefit of the local economy.

The proposals would further not result in a detrimental impact upon the safety and convenience of the local highway network, whilst further bringing about improvement to the immediate highway network. The development is therefore deemed to comply with Strategic Policies 1,2,4- 6,9,10, Spatial Policy 1, General Policy 2, Environment Policies 4,5,10,22,35,41-43, Business Policies 1, 7-11, Recreational Policy 3, Transport Policies 1,2,4-8, Infrastructure Policies 1,5 and Community Policies 7,10,11 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, relevant policies of the Area Plan for the East 2020 and the Residential Design Guide 2021.

==== PAGE 5 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  5  of  43

Plans/Drawings/Information;

21141S-56T-P0-00S-D-A-001 P04 - Proposed Site Plan 21141A-56T-P4-B1F-D-A-001 P03 - Block A Proposed Basement Floor Plan 21-491-ATR-010 Rev E - Refuse Vehicle Track Received 16.04.24

Applicants Response to Highways Received 28.03.24

21141S-56T-P3-00S-D-A-001 P02 - Downtakings Plan 2319-EXA-XX-XX-DR-L-00200 P05 - Planting Plan Received 08.02.24

Transport Technical Note (except appendices BGH3, BGH5 and BGH6) Revised Travel Plan Received 01.02.24

21141-56T-P0-00S-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Location plan 21141S-56T-P2-00S-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Existing Site Plan 2319-EXA-XX-XX-DR-L-00100 Rev P09 - General Arrangement Plan 21141S-56T-P5-ZZZ-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Proposed Sections 01 and 02 21141S-56T-P5-ZZZ-D-A-002 Rev P01 - Proposed Section 03 21141S-56T-P5-ZZZ-D-A-005 Rev P01 - Proposed Section 04 21141S-56T-P5-ZZZ-D-A-003 Rev P01 - Proposed Sections 05 and 06 21141S-56T-P5-ZZZ-D-A-004 Rev P01 - Proposed Sections 07 and 08 21141A-56T-P4-00F-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Block A Proposed Ground Floor Plan 21141A-56T-P4-01F-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Block A Proposed First Floor Plan 21141A-56T-P4-02F-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Block A Proposed Second Floor Plan 21141A-56T-P4-03F-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Block A Proposed Third Floor Plan 21141A-56T-P4-04F-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Block A Proposed Fourth Floor Plan 21141A-56T-P4-05F-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Block A Proposed Fifth Floor Plan 21141A-56T-P4-06F-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Block A Proposed Sixth Floor Plan 21141A-56T-P4-RFF-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Block A Proposed Roof Plan 21141A-56T-P6-ZZZ-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Block A Proposed Elevations 21141A-56T-P6-ZZZ-D-A-002 Rev P01 - Block A Proposed Elevations 21141A-56T-P6-ZZZ-D-A-003 Rev P01 - Block A Proposed Elevations 21141B-56T-P4-00F-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Block B Proposed Ground Floor Plan 21141B-56T-P4-ZZF-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Block B Proposed First to Third Floor Plans 21141B-56T-P4-ZZF-D-A-002 Rev P01 - Block B Proposed Fourth to Fifth Floor Plans 21141B-56T-P4-06F-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Block B Proposed Sixth Floor Plan 21141B-56T-P4-RFF-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Block B Proposed Roof Plan 21141B-56T-P6-ZZZ-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Block B Proposed Elevations 21141S-56T-P6-ZZZ-D-A-001 Rev P01 - Proposed Contextual Elevations Flood Risk Assessment Landscape Statement Planning Statement Drainage Report Ground Investigation Report Heritage Impact Assessment Transport Assessment and Travel Plan (except appendices BGH2 and BGH10) Design and Access Statement Energy Statement Preliminary Ecological Appraisal Report Received 30.10.23

==== PAGE 6 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  6  of  43

Interested Person Status - Additional Persons

It is recommended that the following Government Departments should be given Interested Person Status on the basis that they have made written submissions relating to planning considerations:

Isle of Man Fire Service Isle of Man Constabulary Manx Utilities Authority Planning Policy, Cabinet Office Visit Isle of Man Agency Business Isle of Man, Department for Enterprise Department of Infrastructure Flood Risk Management Division Manx National Heritage

It is recommended that the following should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings:

Chapman Brothers Ltd, 30 Athol Street, Douglas (owners of 7 Regent Street, Douglas) Lloyds Bank Plc, Villiers House, 2 Victoria Street, Douglas Duke Street Commercial Ltd, Stevenson House, 10 Prospect Hill, Douglas (owners of 42-50 Dukes Street, Douglas)

as they have explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy.

It is further recommended that the following should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 4(2):

Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, 95 Malew Street, Castletown

as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy. __

Officer’s Report

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

1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site relates to a parcel of largely undeveloped land bordered by Loch Promenade to the east, Regent Street and the rear of a terrace of properties within Regent Street to the north, the rear of nos. 42-58 Duke Street to the west and nos. 2-14 Victoria Street to the south. The Raad ny Foillan coastal footpath commences at the Sea Terminal and runs along the adjacent walkway on the opposite side of the promenade.

1.2 Presently the site is largely open with some paving, seating and bicycle/motorcycle stands, with hoardings which separate the interior of the site from Loch Promenade, and is used casually by those passing between Villiers House and Fort Street to Regent Street as well as hosting infrequent events such as sports events, Christmas markets and music shows on

==== PAGE 7 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  7  of  43

temporary stages. The lane which skirts around the west of the site, linking Regent Street with Fort Street comprises a rear service lane fronted by the rear elevations of buildings which front onto Duke and Regent Streets. The lane is dominated by a commenced development comprising steelwork and concrete but which has not progressed for a number of years.

1.3 The site lies within an area which is already highly developed along the Promenade, including the modern office building to the south known as Villiers House which wraps around the corner of Loch Promenade and Victoria Street. The buildings to the north which front Loch Promenade are however original, starting with the tall tower of Admiral House with this building only incorporating the rhythmic bays to the north of the entrance portico. The terrace continues with repeated three storey bays for the rest of this section with a modern church building commencing the subsequent terrace on the northern side of Howard Street.

1.4 Turning south, Villiers House contrasts with the yellow/buff brick of Jubilee Buildings, 1 Walpole Avenue and 6-7 Peveril Buildings with this block continuing around the corner to Peveril Square in a more modern form which is taller than the older buildings forming part of the block. Further west on Victoria Street, alongside Jubilee Buildings is a small gap alongside which is a new, modern building with significant glazed frontage, alongside more traditional, masonry and brick buildings with vertically oriented fenestration and detailed cornicing, string courses, mouldings and some with decorative ironmongery. Victoria Street accommodates a range of different styles of building which also range in age and function with shops and restaurants, offices, estate agent's and banking facilities.

1.5 The site wraps around the corner of Loch Promenade and Regent Street and sits opposite the side of the 1886 bar and restaurant. On the southern side of Regent Street is the vehicular opening into the site, alongside which is a two storey building, no.7 Regent Street, which is presently propped up by steelwork following a fire on the upper floors in 2016 which resulted in the demolition of part of the building. Beside this is a much lower two storey building before the block steps up to a three storey property on the corner of Regent Street and Duke Street. Turning west down Regent Street the large, a relatively modern building presently occupied by Marks and Spencer, is notably visible as an end feature to this particular highway and view from the promenade.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Planning permission is sought for the comprehensive redevelopment of the site in the form of two buildings. The principal building fronting the Promenade comprises a mixture of retail, office floorspace with associated gym, food and drink uses which will connect to Villiers House and continue along the promenade and onto Regent Street up to the existing access into the site from this side street. The second building is a detached, six storey hotel at the rear (west) of the site. The office and retail building is subdivided into two sections referred to in the application submission as the "Marker Building" which is the taller section on the corner of Loch Promenade and Regent Street and the "Promenade Building" continues to the south and attaches to the existing Villiers House office building.

2.2 The buildings will be accessed by pedestrians from Loch Promenade through a new link at ground floor level within the building footprint as well as from Regent Street and Fort Street. Vehicular traffic will make use of the rear service lane with a lay-by and a reorganised rear lane behind the Victoria Street properties. In between the buildings is proposed a landscaped public open space to be used in connection with the remainder of the development.

2.3 The "Promenade" and "Marker" buildings fronting Loch Promenade incorporate provision for 50 vehicular parking spaces and 57 bicycle stands at basement level, with the ground floor level proposed to accommodate a variety of uses, including retail (Class 1.1), office (Class 1.2), food and drink (Class 1.3) and food and drink takeaway (Class 1.4). The application submission notes that the ground floor space is designed to accommodate a variety of town centre uses and the application seeks flexibility in the opportunity for changes between these uses without

==== PAGE 8 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  8  of  43

the need for planning approval. The submission further notes that the proposed gym would be available only to occupants of the office space to enhance the quality of the office space and increase the attractiveness to potential occupants.

2.4 The first to third floors of the building would accommodate solely office provision, whilst the fourth floor has been laid out as two distinct spaces, one of which would be used for a variety of town centre uses (i.e. retail, office or leisure), with the small space to be used solely as an office. The fifth floor would further be available for a variety of town centre uses.

2.5 The submitted planning statement notes the following in terms of design and elevation treatment:

"The Marker and Promenade buildings complement each other in terms of architectural style with a distinction between each in terms of colour and materials and with the section which links to Villiers House being glazed, matching the link section above the pedestrian link within the site from the promenade to Villiers Square. The intention of the scheme is to create a landmark corner "marker" building to continue the character of the promenade which features a number of taller and more distinctive buildings on the corners of the promenades with its side streets including Admiral House, opposite the site, Peveril Buildings and Jubilee Buildings to the south, Marlborough Apartments and Empress Apartments either side of Empress Drive and the Imperial Hotel either side of Mona Drive and the Savoy Hotel on the corner of Castle Drive. The Marker Building will be one storey higher than the Promenade Building to which it would be attached, following the form of these other corner buildings. The top level of the Marker Building will be finished in glazing.

The Marker Building is to be finished in red coloured cladding with the Promenade Building to the south separated by a glazed link above the pedestrian walk way, finished in light buff coloured brick, resembling and complimenting the finishes on Jubilee and Peveril Buildings to the south. The brick section will have decorative pattern and "Villiers Square" incorporated into the northern section. Both buildings have the same vertical emphasis from the windows above ground floor level and with the marker building having piers from floor to roof, further emphasising the verticality.

The second, third and fourth floors of the Marker Building step out from the floors below and above as the building turns the corner from Regent Street into the access lane, There are a series of decorative, Y shaped support features above the space created by the set back of the ground and first floors at this point. The space at ground floor level could be used for outside seating/dining.

The ground floor windows are larger to reflect their commercial use which is not an uncommon treatment of buildings close to and part of the town centre with its shops, cafes, bars and offices at ground floor level (see image on next page).

The rear of the building will feature the same finishes as the front in terms of the Marker Building and the glazed link above the pedestrian walkway but the remainder of the building up to its meeting with Villiers House will be finished in coloured render with the same vertical proportioned windows but in champagne colour with similar coloured ventilator panels, a glazed section accommodating the stair well and the same decorative brickwork in a section alongside the glazed stairwell."

2.5 The proposed hotel building will sit within Villiers Square towards its western boundary with the rear service lane serving the properties on the eastern side of Duke Street and those on the southern side of Regent Street. It will accommodate a 52 cover restaurant, bar, kitchen, storage and staff facilities, entrance lobby, reception and lounge on the ground floor with a delivery lay-by at the rear, two stairwells and two lifts and a bin store. Above there will be five floors of hotel accommodation totalling 80 bedrooms. The building would be finished to match

==== PAGE 9 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  9  of  43

the rendered finish on the majority of the rear of the proposed office and mixed use building on the other side of the public space with similar decorative brickwork and the future opportunity for the hotel operator's branding on the side of the building facing towards Regent Street.

2.6 The submitted planning statement provides the following overview and analysis of the proposed landscaped area between the built development:

"The space around and between the buildings is predominantly to be used for public leisure with outside seating and landscaping. The space is designed as public space in its own right as well as overspill from the surrounding buildings. The space could also accommodate events all year round, market stalls and outside exercise classes.

Hard surfacing will be buff coloured granite pavers. Car park ventilation would be incorporated into the design of the hard landscaping. A range of furniture will be provided.

New planting will incorporate a range of the following: Grey Alder, Cut leaf grey alder, shadbush, rowan, Largest Masterwort, Japanese Spindle Tree, Mrs. Robb's Bonnet, Knotted Cranesbill, Cranesbill Rozanne, Chilean Iris, Helleborus Purpurea, Sweet Box digyna, Japanese Skimmia Kew White, David Viburnum, oregano, rosemary and common sage which include species recommended in the Preliminary Ecological Assessment Report.

Pre-application advice from the Ecosystems Policy Team advised that due to the location, local species of plants and trees would not be necessary but to avoid invasive species. The scheme has done this and has, as advised chosen species which will add colour and interest both to the people who will use it as well as local ecology through the inclusion of vegetation rich in pollen and of interest to wildlife."

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The site benefits from a very extensive history, however only the following are considered to be of particular relevance with respect to the comprehensive redevelopment of the site:

13/00163/B - erection of six storey residential development with underground parking and ground floor retail space (amendment to 04/00418/B) - permitted

04/00418/B - erection of a block of 60 residential units with ground floor retail space and basement parking on remainder of site - permitted

00/00638/B - erection of office building and basement level parking and formation of public open space - permitted

94/01480/B - development to site to provide multi-storey office accommodation with civic space and parking - permitted

92/00309/A - approval in principle for redevelopment to create office/retail accommodation with parking - permitted

91/00576/B - redevelopment of Villiers site - permitted

89/01194/B - construction of hotel/business centre with car parking - permitted

4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 Area Plan for the East (2020) 4.1.1 In accordance with the Douglas Central map within the Area Plan for the East, the site falls within the Strand Street Mixed Use Area and abuts the Maritime Gateway Mixed Use Area

==== PAGE 10 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  10  of  43

which lies to the north and across the Promenade to the east. The Promenade itself is designated as an area of Civic, Cultural or Other Use.

4.1.2 The Strand Street Mixed Use Area (3) is referred to in the Written Statement as follows:

"Mixed Use Area 3 - Strand Street This area forms the core of the retail shopping area and is characterised by shops, food and drink uses, financial and professional services and other associated town centre uses such as hairdressers, beauticians and so on. The area is currently busy during daytime but quiet of an evening and it is considered that more residential uses would benefit the area and help support the night time economy. The primary shopping frontage is notated by the hatched line on Map 5.

Town Centre - Mixed Use Proposal 3 There will be a presumption in favour of retail and ancillary town centre uses such as food and drink and health and beauty uses along the primary shopping frontage. Outside of the primary shopping frontage a wider variety of town centre uses including financial and professional services open to visiting members of the public will also be acceptable. Entertainment venues, offices and residential use will be acceptable at first floor level and above, but not at ground floor level where an active frontage should be maintained and enhanced. These active frontages are essential to sustain an attractive town centre."

4.1.3 The site is further identified as forming part of Comprehensive Treatment Area (CTA) 1 - The Villiers, as identified within the Douglas Central map. The objectives of CTA's as noted to be as follows:

i. Optimise use of land and buildings; ii. Unlock difficult sites; iii. Assist with a co-ordinated approach to development; iv. Improve the urban environment and visual amenity; v. Encourage further investment; vi. Provide for space for Douglas Town Centre to grow; and vii. Improve access and provide better linkages.

4.1.4 The following provides an overview of CTA 1 with respect to The Villiers site as noted in the Area Plan for the East, together with the corresponding proposal for the site:

"Despite planning approval for a variety of uses having been granted, much of the site remains undeveloped and has done for some time. The site has a negative effect on this prominent area of Douglas and impacts on the appearance of the Promenade as a whole. The area fronting the Promenade should either be developed or its appearance improved by creating an attractive public space. Re-development of the wider area would not be discounted, although where existing buildings are attractive and have a sound fabric, they should be incorporated into any wider scheme. The Central Douglas Masterplan suggests there is opportunity to support the intensification of the high street through the removal of some buildings on Duke Street. The Villiers site CTA is also a strategic freight corridor and maintaining access for commercial vehicles, including HGV's, must be considered in any proposed development.

CTA Proposal 1 - The Villiers (Treatment Plan) Development of this area shall include office, leisure, retail, hotel, residential, entertainment venues, food and drink uses and public open space or a combination thereof; or the laying out of the site as public open space/town square in its entirety. Should built development not be brought forward independently of Government intervention, then consideration will be given to compulsory purchase of the site for either of the options described above."

==== PAGE 11 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  11  of  43

4.1.5 Likewise, CTA Proposal 6 notes that:

"Within 12 months of the date when this plan is adopted, the Cabinet Office shall publish broad feasibility studies for each CTA reflective of the Treatment Plans set out above. The minimum details shall include:

i. A site context and existing conditions plan, showing levels at the appropriate local datum, existing land uses and building footprints, adjoining roads and access points and land in government ownership. ii. Detailed analysis of the issues and identification of possible solutions/options going forward.

4.1.6 The subsequently feasibility study produced by the Cabinet Office and published in August 2021 provided the following site recommendations with respect to driving forward the site's redevelopment:

o Early discussions with lenders and developers are recommended, to give greater clarity on current lending appetite and timing, post Covid, and the Loch Promenade site should be used as a test case for an assessment of viability and subsequent development of a tailored package of supporting measures to enable development to take place.

o A study in respect of soil stability could provide technical information at an early stage in the design process that can inform the design of structures at sub grade levels.

o The full extent of the underground car park needs to be ascertained, as this may impact upon the extent of floor plate that the site can accommodate, and affect building heights.

o Existing utilities provision should be assessed, particularly in respect of any utilities provision that crosses the Loch Promenade site.

o Discussions with the Department of Infrastructure are recommended, to explore the potential benefits for an additional vehicular access point onto Loch Promenade.

o Gutter clearance to buildings on Victoria Street.

o A building condition survey for retail premises on Regent Street and Duke Street should be undertaken to assess how these premises cater for the needs of modern retailing. This study may also be extended to premises on Victoria Street, to explore any deterioration in building condition due to gutters becoming blocked by vegetation.

o A designated bin store for hire by smaller retailers operating in the main shopping street is recommended within the extent of the CTA, and where wholesale re-development takes place, bin storage provision should be included within the building envelope.

o It is also suggested that current market demand for tourism uses on the Promenade are investigated, to determine whether a shift has occurred on Douglas Promenade from tourism accommodation to residential accommodation, or otherwise. This will enable a better understanding of future needs to be considered within the Promenade in the future.

o The location and size of the site within the townscape, and the use options available, provides an opportunity for a bold statement of urban regeneration in the island's capital. Such a scheme including an appropriately located new town square on Regent Street, overlooked by Marks and Spencer and 1886 could create significant opportunities for retail and leisure investment, whilst providing space for outdoor leisure activities in a well-designed and safe environment. In so doing, its development is part of a bigger strategic picture which can unlock benefits for everyone.

==== PAGE 12 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  12  of  43

o Whatever options are considered, the opportunity for such high quality proposition, incorporating much needed public realm, is a vitally important aspect of developing this part of Douglas which could act as a catalyst for the wider redevelopment of the town as previously envisaged in the Lower Douglas Master Plan.

4.1.7 Further to the above, it is also noteworthy that the site has been given a unique site number in the Area Plan for the East, DM003g, which has been included within the Summary of Residential Land Provision table and indicated as having the potential to provide a notional number of 17 dwellings. No further information is provided in this respect, nor indeed has a specific design brief been produced for the site over and above the previously referenced CTA treatment plan.

4.1.8 Additional policies from the Area Plan for the East of material relevance to the proposed development are as follows:

Landscape Proposal 1 Requires applications to demonstrate that consideration has been given to the broad landscape strategies and key views described throughout Section 4.7 of the Plan.

Natural Environment Proposal 1 States that the protection, creation and improvement of green infrastructure will be supported, particularly in those locations which have the potential to be part of a Green Infrastructure Network. Development proposals must identify how they contribute to the long term provision of a network of connected green spaces.

Urban Environment Proposal 2 All new development and regeneration proposals within the Comprehensive Treatment Areas and Douglas Town Centre must demonstrate design elements to provide and enhance areas of public realm through sensitive and context-specific design. 3 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.

Transport Proposal 1 Requires development proposals to take into account the Active Travel Strategy and any specific actions set out in the Active Travel Action Plan. 2 Seeks to help deliver integrated transport networks. A series of requirements are listed to coordinate the development of all transport modes to provide a comprehensive transport system centred on Douglas and the East.

Utilities Proposal 1 Requires all development to be connected to the appropriate service and utility, which must be capable of receiving a new connection and sustaining it. 2 Seeks manage the sequence of development in growth areas so ensure services are available from early in the life of new communities. 3 Sets out the approach to the provision of electricity, telecommunications and gas supply for new developments. 4 Seeks to ensure that water, gas, electricity and telecommunications are provided in shared trenching and routes to minimise construction costs and land allocation for underground services. 5 Sets out the requirements for development proposals with regard to the provision of water supply, sewerage and drainage services and how impacts on flood risk and drainage should be considered in the design of development proposals. 6 Sets out approaches to reducing the impact of flooding, stormwater and overland flow on catchments and neighbouring properties.

==== PAGE 13 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  13  of  43

Telecommunications Proposal 1 New developments should: a) Make provision for fibre optic cables directly to each dwelling or commercial premises. b) Within Comprehensive Treatment Areas, be phased so as to ensure that telecommunications structures are installed efficiently and will avoid ongoing disruption to site foundations. c) Design facilities so as to be able to host equipment from more than one operator, and that such sharing be encouraged. d) Demonstrate that the proposal has taken into account radio networks in particular those used by the emergency services (TETRA).

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

Strategic Policy 1 Efficient use of land and resources 2 Development focussed in existing towns and villages 4 Development to protect or enhance setting of Registered Buildings, landscape quality and biodiversity, and not result in unacceptable environmental pollution 5 Design and visual impact 6 Major employment generating development to be located in existing centre on land zoned for such purposes 9 New retail and office development to be located within existing town central on land zoned for such purposes 10 Sustainable transport

Spatial Policy 1 Development within the Douglas urban area

General Policy 2 General Development Considerations

Environment Policy 4 Protection of species and habitats 5 Mitigation against damage to or loss of habitats 10 Development and flood risk 22 Protection of environment and/or residential amenity from pollution 35 Development in Conservation Areas 41 Requirement of archaeological assessment 42 Designed to respect the character and identity of the locality 43 Development and regeneration of run-down urban areas

Business Policy 1 Growth of employment opportunities 7 New office development in town centre on land zoned for such purposes 8 Design and scale of new office development 9 Retail development to be at an appropriate scale to the existing area 10 Retail development in town and village centres 11 Sustainable tourism development

Recreational Policy 3 Requirement for landscaped amenity areas

Transport Policy 1 Proximity to existing public transportation services 2 Layouts to link to existing systems 4 Highway Safety

==== PAGE 14 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  14  of  43

5 Improvements to highway network 6 Equal weight for vehicles and pedestrians 7 Parking Provisions 8 Requirement of Transport Assessment for major development

Infrastructure Policy 1 Development to take place in areas which will be connected to the IRIS drainage system 5 Water conservation and management

Community Policy 7 Designing out criminal and anti-social behaviour 10 Proper access for firefighting appliances 11 Prevention for the outbreak and spread of fire

5.0 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

5.1 Our Island Our Future Economic Strategy (2022) and the Our Island, Our Future Visitor Strategy 2022-2032. Both of these documents emphasise the need for the Island to develop and grow and meet the needs of a targeted expanded national and visitor population and economy. The economic strategy includes objective to create better paid jobs and rewarding career opportunities for all, a modern, business friendly environment, infrastructure and amenities to be proud of and placing sustainability and climate change at the heart of the economy. The visitor strategy identifies the need to attract new modern serviced accommodation offers, such as coastal and harbourside boutique hotels, spa and thalassotherapy resorts and retreats, e-sports hotels, branded hotels, and contemporary pub rooms.

5.2 Climate Change Act 2021 completed its passage through Tynwald in April 2021 and subsequently received Royal Assent in December 2021. The Act requires a statutory five-year Climate Change Plan to be in operation at all times, ensuring a clear direction for the Island to achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2050.

5.3 The Climate Change Action Plan 2022-2027 was subsequently produced and published in July 2022 and outlines the actions Government must take to cut emissions over the next five years, so the Island remains on track to be net zero by 2050. The plan assigns a percentage emission reduction target to six policy areas, including energy, transport and agriculture that must be met. Some of the major actions include: o The provision of carbon neutral electricity supply by 2030 o Bringing forward building regulations to ensure 97% energy efficiency in new buildings o Seeking to bring forward a ban on fossil fuel heating systems in new builds to 2024 o The installation of 20MW of local renewables by 2026 o Future introduction of further support for homeowners and tenants to aid the transition o The setting of a new interim emissions target of 35% by 2030.

5.4 Isle of Man Economic Strategy 2022 Approved by Tynwald in November 2022, the Economic Strategy outlines a 10-15 year strategy which seeks to, "...build a strong and diverse economy, which is sustainable, ambitious and built on firm foundations to provide economic success, rewarding career opportunities and prosperity which positively impacts all residents on the Isle of Man".

To achieve this vision, the strategy aims to make the Island a more attractive and prosperous place to live and work which it states will sustain and grow productive businesses and services. The plan outlines a £1bn long term public and private investment programme to secure 5,000 new jobs and a £10bn economy with infrastructure that can support 100,000 Island residents over the next fifteen years to 2037.

==== PAGE 15 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  15  of  43

5.5 Built Environment Reform Programme (2022) BERP is a two year programme of work set out to develop commitments in the Island Plan to build great communities. The document also promotes brown field sites for regeneration and ways to stimulate development in the widest terms. (Strategic Objective 4)

6.0 REPRESENTATIONS 6.1 Douglas City Council - Following careful consideration of the above planning application at a meeting of the Council's Environmental Service Committee held on the 18th December 2023, the Committee resolved to support the proposed development with consideration being given to the following conditions should planning permission be granted.

The Council's support is conditional upon all matters relating to highways being satisfactorily resolved and that all waste and recyclables are stored within the designated waste storage areas shown on drawing reference "Proposed Site Plan". That no waste/recycling receptacles are placed outside of the designated bin storage areas and that the applicant provides details on their calculations for the number of waste storage bins for the hotel complex as part of their waste management strategy to the satisfaction of the Council's waste services management team.

Reason: To protect the open space amenity and to ensure that the streetscene along this part of the Promenade, Regent Street and within the proposed Villiers Square public space areas are maintained to a high standard and do not become negatively impacted by the waste created by businesses operating within the proposed new buildings. (18.12.23)

6.2 Highway Services

Initial comments

Further consideration on transport assessments, access, layout and off-site highway works are required to encourage visitors to the site to use sustainable transport modes, and off-set the development's impact on the local road network and parking.

These are summarised as follows:

A highway adoptions plan will need to be submitted for review/agreement, including any alterations for Fort Street and the bus shelter area on Loch Promenade.

Off-site highway works and bus stop/shelter design on the Promenade needs to be agreed with the DOI Highways Services and Bus Vannin. The current design made need alterations for current Bus/servicing operations and footway level design.

Large swept path tracking should include the exit onto Victoria Street from Fort Street and works to drop the footway and kerbs between buildings no. 14 and 16 on Victoria Street should be proposed to mitigate the impact of the development, as well as to help improve the public realm connections to and past the site. A servicing strategy for each land use and block should be provided within the TA.

Further details of the shared use area of the currently private section of Fort Street should be provided and agreed including adoption, design and construction. Forward visibility around the blocked paved bend should be considered and designed in as the current design appears to provide no forward visibility around the building. Additionally, the adjacent building is currently held up by structural support beams which appear to go through/situate on the proposed block paved area of Fort Street - how will this be removed to accommodate the proposals? The 0.5m width footway highlighted in the RSA should also be addressed/confirmed.

==== PAGE 16 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  16  of  43

5. Motorbike parking at 5% of total spaces on the site should be provided. Cycling parking for staff and visitors of the hotel (as proposed in the TA) should be provided on the layout plan as it appears this has not been shown.

A wind assessment should be provided for the development height due to the location being in a high wind area and the flat frontage design of the development on Loch Promenade.

Car parking assessment for inadequate parking on-site - more assessment on all parking requirements for the different land uses proposed on the site should be provide within the TA (not just the office parking standards), then the applicant should show where the additional supply would be available within the adjacent car parks in the city centre. Additionally, existing surface and basement parking within the site will be lost - where will this go? The Planning Statement says that the development relies on parking provided on a future development in the Lower Douglas masterplan - how will this parking be linked to the development?

The site should be included within the cumulative modelling assessment of the Central and Lower Douglas Masterplan sites development taking into account the proposed Villiers Square development and car parking demand from Villiers distributed within the Lower Douglas area in the future.

The travel plan should add specific measures for bus usage improvements, to encourage cycle usage for staff and visitors of the hotel, and monitoring and multi modal change targets should be the basis of future actions within the travel plan. Measures to reduce the impact of the loss of parking on the site during construction and once the site is delivered should also be considered, including car sharing bays marked in the basement car park.

RSA stage 1 - Issues around swept path tracking of large vehicles on Fort Street, and impacts on nonmotorised users, still need to be considered and addressed.

Gradients on the site should be provided for review including how this ties into proposed gradients on the proposed altered Loch Promenade footway frontage of the development (due to repositioned of Kassel kerbing for the bus stop). All gradients on the site should meet the Inclusion Mobility document standards.

Flood risk issues on-site and within Fort Street, and surface water drainage not draining onto the public highway, need to be resolved with DOI Flood Risk and Drainage Teams - for these teams to comment on further.

Wayfinding signs should be considered on the development or adjacent to the development on the public highway to improve non-motorised connectivity and public realm quality in this high demand and tourist area. Benches should also be considered within the public realm/square of the site if not done so already.

Corduroy pavement around the steps should not be on adopted highway where it is smooth currently - various different plans show different positioning within the layout plans and the plans within the TA. Confirmation of the corduroy pavement position should be provided that it is within the site boundary and not on the adopted highway.

The principle of the development is likely to be acceptable, but better planning and design of the site individually is needed along with consideration of the masterplan development sites impacts and improved proposals for off-site highway works to mitigate the impact of the development.

Separate permissions will be necessary with the DOI Highway Services after grant of planning consent for works in the highway under a S109(A) Highway Agreement. Highway Licences apply for temporary closures and traffic management on the public highway etc. An Oversailing

==== PAGE 17 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  17  of  43

of the Highway Licence will be required if the bus shelter is incorporated under the building and is on adopted highway land. (17.11.23)

Second round of comments following submission of additional information. Each comment is made against the previous points raised by Highway Services and in relation to the information provided.

The bus shelter area under the building will need to be adopted and then the applicant would need to apply for an overhanging the highway licence. This matter is still outstanding.

The applicant has not consulted Bus Vannin to agree the bus stop/shelter design and it would be unwise to not agree significant highway works during the planning application stage as abortive work and design will result if works need to be changed after permission is granted (a swell as amendment planning applications would be required). This matter is still outstanding.

The applicant has not addressed these items. The tracking on Fort Street onto Victoria Street in Appendix BGH2 has not been attached to the submission. We would not agree from the Bryan G Hall note that the proposals will not materially increase large vehicle trips on this narrow route - the development will exacerbate the damage along this section. Additionally, a servicing strategy has not been produced for the site - this was promised after discussions with Bus Vannin which has not materialised up until the date of this response. This matter is still outstanding.

The 2m notional offset from edge of adopted highway for pedestrian corridor is welcomed but this should be marked with blocked paving on the shared use area. In relation to the forward visibility around the Fort Street bend - this is acceptable for the slow speed nature of the street, providing the footway corridor on the shared surface area is marked with blocked paving to reduce vehicle pedestrian conflicts. In relation to the support beam issue, the applicant has provided a 0.8m strip that could be removed from the adopted highway if needed for support beams which is acceptable. In relation to the 0.5m footway offset, two plans shows different layouts where one has additional footway due to building overhanging (Dwg. EC PO2) and another plan doesn't (Dwg. 21/491/ATR/010) - clarification on if there is additional footway in this location is requested. The 2m notional footway and 0.5m offset footway items are therefore outstanding.

The motorcycle parking is welcomed. In relation to the hotel, although the cycle parking should ideally be within the hotel building and undercover, the outside cycle parking is acceptable. Therefore, this item is addressed.

The applicant has said that a wind assessment is not required, ''as the buildings are only one story higher than Villiers House and the buildings are generally orientated in North Easterly direction and are well sheltered from the prevailing South Westerly winds by the buildings along Duke Street and Strand Street to the West.'' Providing this is acceptable to the planning department, this response will be acceptable to DOI.

Following additional and commentary providing within the Bryan G Hall note, car parking issues and supply information are satisfactory and therefore this item is addressed.

The applicant has not provided information on how the sites trips have been included within the Lower Douglas model, as vehicle trip generation would be distribute throughout the Lower Douglas area. This matter is still outstanding.

The updated Travel Plan has been updated with the majority of requests. However, the proposed travel measures within the Bryan G Hall note includes wayfinding signs, but the actual Travel Plan measures section within the updated Bryan G Hall Travel Plan appears to not

==== PAGE 18 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  18  of  43

include these - where will this be proposed so they can be included as a development improvement? Therefore, this matter is still outstanding.

This issue is primarily addressing items 3 and 4 above which DOI Highway Services do not believe have been satisfactorily addressed as of yet.

This item has been addressed.

This item would need to be resolved with DOI Flood Risk and Drainage Teams.

If wayfinding signs are to be proposed after the development application, then a suitable condition would be needed on permission for the wayfinding signs to be agreed with planning and implemented before occupation of the site. This item has been addressed subject to the planning authority agreeing to a condition on wayfinding signs.

The corduroy paving has been removed from the adopted highway on the plan (Dwg. EC PO2) which is welcomed. Therefore, this item is addressed.

The principle of the development is likely to be still acceptable, but there are still some transport items that need to be addressed to resolved highway safety, planning, accessibility and servicing. Separate permissions will be necessary with the DOI Highway Services after grant of planning consent for works in the highway under a S109(A) Highway Agreement. Highway Licences apply for temporary closures and traffic management on the public highway etc. An Oversailing of the Highway Licence will be required if the bus shelter is incorporated under the building and is on adopted highway land. (19.03.24)

Following the submission of the above comments by Highway Services, the applicant provided the following responses in relation to the above points on 28.03.24:

A proposed Highway Adoptions plan has been included in the Technical Note submitted by Bryan G Hall (dated 30th January 2024)- please refer to Appendix BGH 1. This set out the extent of envisaged works to the junction of Regent and Fort Street. An additional plan can be produced for the integrated bus stop solution if this is agreed, and we note the comments raised in respect of overhanging etc. We respectfully suggest that this can be dealt with post planning as part of highway agreements.

While it is the Applicant's aspiration to include the bus stop in the location shown on the submitted drawings and to explore reconfiguration of the existing footpath, it is not essential that the geometry of the footpath is changed. The recessed façade shown on the elevations will be maintained in any event.

As previously advised and as outlined in the Technical Note prepared by Bryan G Hall, the Applicant has held discussions with Bus Vannin regarding the suggested location and style of the bus stop. A Bus Stop Concept Strategy document was provided in May 2023 which outlined 2 options. We enclose the document for your information. The Applicant was subsequently advised by Bus Vannin representatives that Option 2 was the preferred option and hence this idea was incorporated into the elevations.

Regarding the suggested realignment of the current bus stop / layby area that lies outside of the Villiers Square site along Loch Promenade, it is recognised that further discussion with Bus Vannin and DOI Highways will be required and again, we respectfully suggest that those discussions can be held as part of possible off-site works. The planning application drawings / documents indicated that approach. (It may well be that the current bus stop arrangements remain as they are currently configured, which is why the offsite works approach was adopted so as not to unduly delay the planning approval for the development).

==== PAGE 19 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  19  of  43

3. The Applicant refers the reader to Appendix BGH 2 of the Technical Note where a large / refuse vehicle is shown emerging onto Victoria Street from Fort Street. As referenced in the Bryan G Hall Technical note (pg 2 paragraphs 11 & 12, it must be recognised that Fort Street is an existing public highway that requires upgrading and is currently used by both large and small vehicles. This matter has previously been discussed with DOI representatives on the 14th June 2023 (Meeting with Highway Services) and the Director and CEO of DOI Highways at a meeting held on 7/11/23. The Applicant is happy to engage with DOI Highways regarding the future upgrade of Fort Street and has expressed that view accordingly however, these works were not included in the planning application because the Applicant does not control this public highway. For that reason, these are deemed to be off site highway works that require further discussion but should not prevent the planning application from being determined.

As stated in paragraph 13 of the Bryan G Hall technical note, the Applicant intends to discuss the servicing strategy for the development with both Bus Vannin and DOI as part of the proposed off-site works referenced above. It should be noted that the Applicant's design proposals improve the servicing arrangements for the development by including a layby to the rear of the hotel building along Fort Street - a significant betterment that is in addition to the servicing arrangements currently located along Loch Promenade and access to / from Regent Street and Strand Street. The Applicant respectfully suggests that the possible off-site works should not adversely impact the time for determining the current application.

Noted and this design intent will be captured during the detailed design stage and as part of Highway Agreements. Appendix BGH 3 of the technical note (drawing 21/ 491/ATR010 Rev B) set outs out the proposed offsets namely 0.8m off from the edge of Fort Street, 2m footway and additional offset or approximately 0.8m adjacent to the proposed highway. For clarity Bryan G Hall now submit drawing 21/ 491/ATR010 Rev C which describes the design intent.

Noted.

Noted.

Noted.

Following the meeting with DOI Highways on 26/1/24, it was the Applicants understanding that the Villiers Square development would not form part of the cumulative modelling assessment for the purposes of its current application. The Applicant refers the reader to Section 34 and 35 of the Technical Note prepared by Bryan G Hall.

In addition to the above, the Applicant understands that the Planning Department holds a similar view namely; that the Villiers Square development would not be required to be included in the cumulative assessment for the purposes of determining the current application. (As mentioned in the Technical Note, the Applicant will supply relevant trip data for inclusion in the Systra modelling - for information purposes only and to assist with this work.) In summary, the Applicant maintains that it was agreed with the Planning Department and DOI Highways that the Villiers Square development would not be included in the cumulative modelling assessment with respect to the current planning application.

Wayfinding will be addressed as part of detailed design development and the Travel Plan will be updated accordingly. This issue should not prevent or delay determination of the current planning application.

Refer to comments in relation to points 3 and 4 above.

Noted.

==== PAGE 20 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  20  of  43

12. A flood risk plan has been submitted with the planning application and ground floor levels for the building have been set accordingly. The development proposals have been discussion with both DOI Drainage Division and MUA Drainage. During discussions with the above authorities, it was highlighted that there are some existing drainage issues in Fort Street ( a public highway). The Applicant is happy to discuss this matter further as part of possible off- site works. The issue was also discussed with the Director of Highways Services held on the 31st March 2023. Note: At present, the drainage design for the development proposals outfall into Regent Street and Loch Promenade - not into Fort Street.

Noted. The Applicant will agree the wayfinding approach with DBC as part of detailed design proposals.

Noted.

In reply to the above points provided by the applicant, Highway Services provided a subsequent and final response in relation to their original points raised.

The applicant has not confirmed whether this area for the bus stop will be adopted highway or not (based on the second paragraph of their 28 Mar 2024 submission). The area should be designated as highway for adoption so Bus Vannin have control over the bus stop and its use. If this cannot be agreed now, then a condition regarding the bus stop design, and land designated as highway maintainable at public expense under the bus stop, could be placed on the permission.

The applicant has stated two options in the 28 March 2024 response - use the concept proposals within the application or leave the bus stop/off-site highway works design as it is as existing on-site. This could mean building and off-site highway works would need to change after planning permission is granted, therefore a new planning application would be needed if the building would need to be altered. As the applicant has not spoken to Bus Vannin (as of 8 April 2024) during the planning application being submitted, it is difficult to know if they would accept the design of the bus stop or off-site highway works as proposed in the application. This matter is still outstanding.

Assessments on servicing strategies need to be done during the planning application when the design and off-site highway works are being assessed and agreed. In terms of the swept path tracking, the tracking shows that large vehicles will overrun the kerbs and footway on the small section of Fort Street onto Victoria Street. This issue directly relates to the development so it should be resolved by the development through proposals supporting the planning application, regardless if it is public highway - off-site highway works can be secured via a S109 highway agreement.

The applicant discusses 0.8m, 2m and 0.8m offsets and refers to plan 21/ 491/ATR010 Rev C, but the measurements on the plan refer to the first section of the new Fort Street shared section. Apologies, the comments above refer to the footway and offset adjacent to the hotel building. I think this issue needs clearing up as submitted plans Dwg. DR L 00300 and Dwg. EC P01 and Dwg. EC PO2 and Dwg. 21/491/ATR/010 show different layouts around the hotel building. If Dwg. 21/491/ATR/010 is the final design then other layout plans need to be amended on the planning application.

No further comments.

No further comments.

No further comments.

==== PAGE 21 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  21  of  43

8. The applicant has said they will give trip information into the lower Douglas model so the development impact can be accommodated within the model completed by others, but has not confirmed this is the case. Once this has been confirmed this is the case, then this item will be addressed. The developments trips will have an impact on the local highway network so the information needs to be used in modelling assessments.

The applicant has not updated the Travel Plan to accommodate the wayfinding signs, but the implementation of these can controlled by condition on permission.

Items 3 and 4 still need to be addressed as discussed above.

No further comments.

No further comments - further comments by DOI Flood Risk and Drainage Teams is advised.

No further comments.

No further comments. (08.04.24)

6.3 Highways Drainage - No response received at the time of writing.

6.4 Manx Utilities Authority (Drainage) - Foul and surface water connections must be discussed with MU prior to any work commencing on site. (01.12.23)

MU can confirm we are happy with the drainage proposals. There is sufficient capacity where the SW discharge is being proposed, therefore we have no issues. (05.04.24)

6.5 Flood Risk Management - FRM are happy with the application and have confirmed that AOD = DO2. Recommend that Section 7 of the submitted FRA be conditioned. (13.11.23)

6.6 Registered Buildings Officer - The application proposes to construct three buildings, two of which are physically connected at high level. One proposed building sits on the corner of Loch Promenade and Regent Street, the second building sits along the site's Loch Promenade boundary, and the third building would be sited towards the eastern side of the site. The proposed buildings would be a mix of five and six storeys high, with areas of roof mounted plant above. A public space is proposed in the centre of the site, and parking accommodated within a basement. The external wall materials proposed are a combination of facing brickwork, painted render and metal cladding, with elements of curtain walling as well as windows.

A Heritage Impact Assessment has been submitted as part of the application documents. The document uses the measures of significance established in the Australia ICOMOS Burra Charter from 2013, which is considered to be an acceptable and well-established approach.

Paragraph 1.6.1 of the IOM Strategic Plan 2016 states that 'where there is no Manx guidance, it will often be appropriate and helpful to have regard to legal judgments or advice published in the UK or the EU.' With this in mind, it is considered appropriate to refer to the UK's National Planning Policy Guidance in relation to assessing potential harm to the significance of a heritage asset. Paragraph 18a-018 states 'Where potential harm to designated heritage assets is identified, it needs to be categorised as either less than substantial harm or substantial harm (which includes total loss)'. The paragraph goes on to state that 'in determining whether works...constitute substantial harm, an important consideration would be whether the adverse impact seriously affects a key element of its special architectural or historic interest.' In the absence of any Manx guidance, it is the above UK guidance that will be used to assess whether the level of harm from the proposals is likely to be substantial, less than substantial, or no harm (which includes enhancement).

==== PAGE 22 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  22  of  43

Impact on nearby Registered Buildings Jubilee Clock The application site is located approximately 100m from this Registered Building. The sweep of buildings along Loch Promenade form one of the principal backdrops of the Jubilee Clock, and make a significant contribution to its setting. Although obviously modern and in a form that is clearly intended to break up the development's overall massing, the proposed buildings are judged to respect the historic building line and to be of a height that is broadly commensurate with the surrounding townscape. It is considered that the re-introduction of the buildings along the Loch Promenade frontage of the application site in the manner proposed will cause no harm to the significance of the Jubilee Clock.

Douglas Borough War Memorial The application site is located approximately 600m from the War Memorial. Although not close enough to impact the memorial's immediate setting, the frontage along Loch Promenade does form part of the memorial's backdrop and has potential to impact its wider setting. When viewed from a distance of 600m, it is considered that only the form and massing of the proposed buildings would be significant within a view. As mentioned above in the section relating to the Jubilee Clock, the proposed buildings are judged to respect the historic building line and to be of a height that is broadly commensurate with the surrounding townscape. With this in mind, and particularly when compared to the currently vacant site, the proposals are considered to cause no harm to the setting of Douglas Borough War Memorial.

Other Registered Buildings The applicant's Heritage Impact Assessment analyses the potential impact on four other registered buildings in addition to the Jubilee Clock and Douglas Borough War Memorial. Given each building's respective position relative to the application site, I agree with the assessment's conclusion that the proposed development would cause no harm to these buildings.

Impact on the special character of the Douglas Promenades Conservation Area One of the most significant aspects of the special character of the Douglas Promenades Conservation Area is the sweep of buildings along its frontage. It is judged that the currently vacant nature of the application site causes significant harm to this element of the Conservation Area's character. Furthermore, it is judged that this harm is currently increased by the partly completed building site on Duke Street that is visible through the application site. The re- introduction of a strong building line along the Loch Promenade elevation of the site is considered to be a positive proposal. Although there is a significant difference in height between Admiral House and the building proposed in the northernmost corner of the application site, the overall height across the site is considered to be reasonable when compared to the surrounding townscape.

The proposed presence of rooftop plant on both buildings along the Loch Promenade boundary is unfortunate, and it is judged that this will reduce the otherwise positive impact that the buildings would have. These areas of plant would be particularly visible when viewing the site from further north along the promenade, and it is judged that the scheme would have been improved if this plant had been accommodated within the overall massing of the proposed buildings.

In addition to the assessment of the height mentioned above, the form and rhythm of the proposed Loch Promenade buildings is judged to be such that it respects the adjacent buildings. With the above factors in mind, overall the proposed Loch Promenade elevation is considered to cause no harm to the special character of the Douglas Promenades Conservation Area.

Impact on important views into and out of the Douglas Promenades Conservation Area Environment policy 36 uses the words 'Where development is proposed outside of, but close to, the boundary of a Conservation Area'. Although this application is sited inside the conservation area, it is still judged that the position and scale of development proposed could impact important views into and out of the conservation area.

==== PAGE 23 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  23  of  43

The application site is in a prominent position towards the southern end of the conservation area. The proposed design of the Loch Promenade elevation is considered to be in a manner that respects the existing building line and rhythm. Although the roofs of both buildings are judged to be negatively impacted by the visible areas of plant, and it is considered that the design would be improved greatly by their removal, overall this elevation is judged to cause no harm to the important views into and out of the conservation area.

In addition to the views along Loch Promenade, the view looking towards the sea from the western half of Regent Street (outside 1886) is considered to be an important view into the conservation area. The western elevation of the 'Block A Marker' building will be extremely prominent in this view. From the western end of Regent Street the solid wall at second, third and fourth floor on this elevation is of some concern, as it is judged to present a rather brutal and possibly unwelcoming entrance to both the proposed development and the conservation area. In my view, the proposed scheme would be significantly improved by a softer treatment being applied to this portion of the elevation. It is judged that the scale, form and massing of this particular elevation as currently proposed does harm this important view into the conservation area. I would consider this harm to be less than substantial, however, as it would not seriously effect a key element of the conservation area's special interest.

CONDITIONS It is considered that the overall appearance of the proposed development, and therefore to a certain degree its impact on the conservation area, will be significantly impacted by the standard of finishes used. With this in mind, the below conditions are suggested in the event that the application is recommended for approval:

External Finishes: No development shall commence until sample details of cladding, windows, external doors and rooftop plant room louvres have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details and be retained thereafter.

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

Facing Brickwork: No development shall commence until panels of all variations of brickwork proposed, including movement/mortar joints, have been erected on site (or an alternative location) and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details and be retained thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of preserving the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and surrounding area. (09.11.23)

6.7 Manx National Heritage - the site is largely on made ground, however I had noted that the Hotel / Block B partially overlies buildings that are marked on the Ordnance Survey First Edition of the 1860s. Part of the ground on which those structures stood is likely already to have been disturbed during excavation and construction of the underground carpark, the entrance for which is adjacent.

On further reflection, however, it is possible that elements of the sea-wall may survive under part of the footprint of the proposed hotel, and this would be worthy of recording if the foundation design is such that substantial ground disturbance is necessary. (01.12.23)

Noting the status of Loch Promenade as a conservation area (first designated in 2002), we have carefully compared the height of the proposed frontages of the northernmost element of Block

==== PAGE 24 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  24  of  43

A on both the Loch Promenade and Regent Street, and wish to record our substantial concern over the scale of this building in relation to its neighbours.

Whilst the more southerly element of Block A ties in reasonably well with the former AXA building (now Lloyds Bank), the more northerly element rises to a maximum of 24.75m above finished ground floor level (as scaled from the online plans). For comparison, the tallest element of the roof of Admiral House - the isolated turret - on the north side of Regent Street is just 19m tall: expressed another way, the new development is 30% taller than Admiral House, which itself is the tallest existing building in the vicinity and sets the existing character tone for much of the surrounding conservation area.

Even allowing for the fact that the tallest part of Block A - the rooftop plant area - is set back from the Regent Street frontage, as is the fifth floor to a lesser degree, the new building reads as fully two storeys higher than its neighbour on Loch Promenade as will be apparent in views along the promenade and from out to sea, and completely dwarfs the rest of the buildings on the south side of Regent Street. We note that the building is slightly more than twice as high as Regent Street is wide. Given its location to the south of Admiral House, there is a danger that it will deprive this existing building of light during the day, as well as placing the streetscape in shadow at street-level.

We therefore cannot agree with the assessment submitted by the Department's Registered Buildings staff that the scheme is 'reasonable', that it 'respects the adjacent buildings', and that it would 'cause no harm to the special character of the Douglas Promenades Conservation Area'. (04.12.23)

6.8 DEFA Biodiversity - The Ecosystem Policy Team can confirm that the Manx Wildlife Trust's (MWT) Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) for Villiers Square dated October 2022, is all in order and that a suitable level of assessment has been undertaken.

The MWT determined that the ecological constraints on site were limited to the following:

Potential for damage to Douglas Bay Marine Nature Reserve during construction - requirement for a Contraction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). Low potential for roosting bats in the building which could be damaged or destroyed by demolition and/or lighting - requirement for a preliminary roost assessment of the buildings and lighting designed to avoid impacts on bats. Potential for nesting birds in the trees and buildings on site - requirement for retention of vegetation or replacement of vegetation and timing of vegetation removal outside of the nesting season. The MWT also identified potential nesting space for cavity nesting species on site, but did not recommend any additional assessment or mitigation. Therefore, one of the following 2 options should be chosen from.

1. An Assessment for nesting birds is undertaken on the buildings in the nesting season and avoidance and mitigation measures put in place based on the findings.
2. An assumption is made that nesting birds are definitely present in the buildings and avoidance and mitigation measures put in place on this basis. If this option is selected then based on the MWT's initial findings, at least 2 replacement nest sites should be provided which are suitable for cavity dwelling species. Potential for spread of non-native invasive Wildlife Act Schedule 8 listed montbretia during construction - requirement for a CEMP which includes responsible avoidance and eradication plans.

Though not referenced within the MWT's PEA, the Ecosystem Policy Team are aware that blackbirds have previously bred on site (this is noted on Page 49 of the Planning Statement). The vegetation on site, previously used by blackbirds, is to be removed and so compensation is required. We recommend that compensation is provided in the form of at least 1 swift nest

==== PAGE 25 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  25  of  43

brick high up on the new building on a north east - north west elevation but not above windows, doors or balconies. A condition for this is requested below.

The Ecosystem Policy Team recommend that the following conditions are secured on approval:

No works to commence unless a Construction Environmental Management Plan has been submitted to Planning and approved in writing. The plan must include measures to be put in place during construction for the protection of Douglas Bay Marine Nature Reserve, such as the use of spill kits, secure storage areas, biodegradable oils, use of oil and silt interceptors, good waste management and litter prevention measures etc., and for the protection of nesting birds and roosting bats, such as the timing of vegetation removal and pre-clearance checks. It must also include a responsible avoidance and eradication plan for Wildlife Act Schedule 8 montbretia. The works must then be undertaken in strict accordance with this agreed plan. No works to commence unless a preliminary bat roost assessment has been undertaken on the buildings by a suitably qualified ecological consultancy and a report detailing the findings has been submitted to Planning and approved in writing. Should the assessments find evidence of roosting bats, then further survey may be required as will details of avoidance and mitigation measures which may include requirements for the timing of building demolition and the provision of new roosting spaces. No works to commence unless a breeding bird mitigation plan has been provided to Planning and approved in writing. The plan should contain the results of a breeding bird assessment on the buildings, or the measures to be put in place on the assumption that breeding birds are present in the buildings. The plan must also contain details of at least 1 swift nest brick to be built into the new buildings.- To note, swifts like to nest communally so we recommend that at least 2 are provided (there is space on the building to provide multiple). No external lighting to be installed unless a sensitive low level lighting plan, following best practise, as detailed in the Bat Conservation Trust and Institute of Lighting Professionals Guidance Note 08/23 - Bats and Artificial Lighting (2023) has been provided to Planning and approved in writing. (15.11.23)

The Ecosystem Policy Team further recommend that a condition is secured for no works to commence unless a detailed landscaping plan, which includes greater levels of detail about the creation of the green roof, and 5 year post-planting management schedule, has been submitted to Planning for written approval. Though we are content with the landscaping details that have been provided thus far, no details have yet been provided regarding the creation and management of the green roof, or other landscaped areas. (19.02.24)

6.9 Department for Enterprise - Business Isle of Man supports this application.

The site, identified as Strand Street character area within the Central Douglas Masterplan, is now incorporated as Mixed Use Proposals Areas within the Area Plan for the East which came into force on the 1st December 2020. The site is also identified as I-JUS 17 on the Unoccupied Urban Sites Register which we understand is 'intended to facilitate the re-development of previously developed sites within existing settlement boundaries of key service centres that are currently vacant and underused, by providing an easily accessible data source that clearly identifies and maps unoccupied urban sites on the Island'. This site is one of the largest of Douglas' key brownfield sites, so its redevelopment would deliver on Our Island Plan's 'National Outcomes & Indicators' which identifies the redevelopment of two key Brownfield sites using substantial private sector leverage as a key performance indicator.

The site is also the subject of a Comprehensive Treatment Area as designated within the Area Plan for the East. CTA Proposal 1 - The Villiers (Treatment Plan) sets out that;

"Development of this area shall include office, leisure, retail, hotel, residential, entertainment venues, food and drink uses and public open space or a combination thereof; or the laying out of the site as public open space/town square in its entirety. Should built development not be

==== PAGE 26 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  26  of  43

brought forward independently of Government intervention, then consideration will be given to compulsory purchase of the site for either of the options described above"

With the exception of the provision of residential, the scheme appears to deliver on the basis of the Comprehensive Treatment Area - Proposal 1.

The provision of office space within the development corresponds with the basis of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016's Business Policy 7 which seeks to ensure that new office floor space should be located within town and village centres. The Business Agency carried out a 'pulse check' of the Island's Office, Retail and Industrial provision with the Island's commercial agents over the Summer 2023 period and noted some interesting outputs. In terms of office space, a number of the agents remarked that office enquiries have picked up this year, but it remains a struggling sector which the Commercial Agents consider is due in part, to the scale and quality of the existing office space market. Their feedback is that smaller suites around 500-1,000sqft are sought-after with the greatest demand being for open plan offices under 5,000sqft and whilst there is an abundance of office space of this size, the provision tends to be of the older, more cellular floor plan type, which are more difficult to alter to meet modern office requirements and could not could be considered to be of grade A standard.

The survey also noted that the market for office space in excess of 10,000sqft was not well served and with the Department's Agencies continuing to engage with Digital-based businesses interested in re-locating to the Island, with the highest number of e-gaming licenses to date, a target of 90 for the year and 84 licenses approved to date, consideration is that there are businesses looking for such opportunities. This provision therefore, would correspond with the actions and goals set out in the Economic Strategy 2022-2032 which state that we will create a modern, business-friendly environment and in so doing, assist in creating and filling 5,000 new jobs across new, enabling and existing key sectors, by 2032, reaching an overall GDP of £10bn.

In respect of retail, the Summer 2023 industry 'pulse check' indicated that the marketplace is strong with relatively low vacancy levels in comparison to the UK, born out in the CACI report commissioned by the Business Agency which is currently being updated. The agents suggest that the high street has recovered better here than in the UK, with Strand Street strong and a number of the agents suggesting the strength of high street relates to the Strategic Plan's Strategic Policy 9, Business Policies 9 and 10 driving retail into the town centres and the resultant lack of out-of-town retail.

A street survey of some 628 people was carried out during the Summer of 2023, that strongly indicated that those surveyed wished to see more High Street multiples from the UK locate here which would result in units the size of units that would normally be found out of town. The provision of retail unit opportunities within this scheme would support that aspiration.

The Business Agency considers that the proposals deliver on a key metric in the Island Plan to key Brownfield sites using substantial private sector leverage, and represents substantial investment in the Island's economy which would also play an important part in supporting the development of a strong and diverse economy, which is sustainable, ambitious and built on firm foundations to provide economic success, rewarding career opportunities and prosperity which positively impacts all residents on the Isle of Man and in so doing, aligns with the drivers of the Economic Strategy. (21.11.23)

6.10 Visit Isle of Man - The Our Island Our Future Visitor Economy Strategy 2022-2032, endorsed by Tynwald in May 2022, includes a Visitor Accommodation Transformation Action Programme that seeks to develop 500 new and transformed hotel and serviced accommodation bedrooms and 500 new units of distinctive, contemporary, eco-friendly non-serviced accommodation to support visitor number growth over the next 10 years.

==== PAGE 27 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  27  of  43

Programme 3 (Visitor Accommodation Transformation) of the strategy highlights that our visitor accommodation studies have shown that we are lagging behind our competitor island, coastal and rural destinations in terms of the quality and choice of visitor accommodation that we offer. Investment needs to be secured in distinctive, contemporary and ecofriendly visitor accommodation that will attract new visitor markets to the Island, help to boost off-peak demand, and enable the Island to get ahead of the competition.

The development would see the creation of an 80 bedroomed hotel with facilities including ground floor restaurant and bar.

The Our Island Our Future Visitor Economy Strategy states that our priority to 2032 will be to triple our holiday and short break demand with over 70% of our additional visitors staying for such purposes. The strategy has four target markets to grow and attract including 'Traditional Traveller', 'Curious Explorers', 'Experience Seekers' and 'Family Adventurers'. Development of new hotel accommodation will add to the growth of these markets, specifically the 'Family Adventurers' who look for family-orientated accommodation. Document '2301223B Design and Access Statement 9 of 9' on the planning application states there will be a total of 55 family bedrooms which would satisfy the family market. There is also 5 accessible bedrooms which will add to the Island's accessible bed stock, which shows alignment with the Equality Act 2017. At present, the Isle of Man has a limited number of accessible bedrooms within the serviced sector.

It is anticipated that this development will create a number of jobs in the tourism and hospitality sector. The creation of jobs supports Visit Isle of Man to achieve its targets under Programme 7 (Talent Development) of the Our Island Our Future Visitor Economy Strategy.

The need for new hotel developments is further supported by the Department's commitment within the Enterprise Act 2008 highlighting 'new hotel accommodation 3* and above (whole business, sole business)' as eligible for financial support and encouraged. The justification is as follows:

o There has been a loss hotel accommodation over the last ten years o The Island needs quality hotel accommodation o Support business sector as well as tourist visitor sector

From an Area Plan perspective, we note that the site is located within the Strand Street Mixed Use Area designated in the Area Plan for the East approved by Tynwald on the 18th November 2020, and the redevelopment of the site for visitor accommodation is entirely in keeping with that designation. We also note that the site proposals are to redevelop an unoccupied urban site, which is not included on the formal Unoccupied Urban Sites Register, does deliver on the Island Plan's strategy to redevelop our brownfield sites.

The site is also subject of a Comprehensive Treatment Area proposal with the Area Plan for the East. That proposal is as follows:

CTA Proposal 1 - The Villiers (Treatment Plan) Development of this area shall include office, leisure, retail, hotel, residential, entertainment venues, food and drink uses and public open space or a combination thereof; or the laying out of the site as public open space/town square in its entirety. Should built development not be brought forward independently of Government intervention, then consideration will be given to compulsory purchase of the site for either of the options described above.

It is anticipated that the development would achieve a high quality finish satisfying a number of elements highlighted as growth potential within strategic documentation which will be in sympathy with the Departments policy to encourage a quality visitor experience to ensure the Island remains a competitive as a destination.

==== PAGE 28 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  28  of  43

The Department for Enterprise has already supported this development through the Island Infrastructure Scheme to support the development of brownfield sites across the Island.

For the reasons set out above, Visit Agency Officers are thus fully supportive of this application. (07.11.23)

6.11 Isle of Man Fire Service - Our primary planning concern was around high reach appliance access to the proposed hotel, this has been confirmed as in accordance with ADB. We will now continue to engage with the developer in regards to internal matters which do not relate to planning. (13.03.24)

6.12 Isle of Man Constabulary - we would primarily be looking for the safety and security of all those using and residing within the facility as well as crime prevention in that the public feel safe when using or travelling through the facility.

Before all that comes the physical build and developers should be mindful of having robust perimeter fencing on site, an alarm system in place and any site cabins to be suitably fitted and secured, especially in respect of any fuel or the storage of materials and equipment. Contact details of the developer should be displayed in case of an emergency in case of such or any suspicious behaviour reported by staff or members of the public. Mobile or part time CCTV can be effective in preventing thefts and aid the security of the site.

A concern would be with the public open spaces and that the environmental design of this space does not attract anti-social behaviour or give opportunist criminals the space to hide or indeed commit crime. Good use of the space where a criminal would feel vulnerable would prevent crime, which includes lighting, surveillance (natural and by CCTV). Street furniture and planting of trees or shrubbery to be considered as part of this, and the lighting should be so that it doesn't impact those residing in the dwellings.

The retail space will have passing surveillance, as well as CCTV and specifics such as doors, locks, windows and glass to meet British Standards for commercial premises. Any access control to these spaces should again meet the required British Standard and this goes for the hotel, entertainment space as well as the food/drink outlets. They all have their vulnerabilities and the police would seek that measures are in place for the prevention and detection of crime.

The Isle of Man Constabulary support the application and welcome the development in changing the face of Douglas Promenade and it's City Centre. (05.02.24)

6.13 Environmental Health - No response received at the time of writing.

6.14 Manx Utilities Authority (Electricity) - We have had prior engagement with the developers electrical consultants. The proposals include a new substation building which is located to the West of the Hotel block B, however the planning drawings only show a rectangular outline with no text or detail to identify it as the substation building. We assume the substation would be orientated with doors opening towards the vehicle lay by area and should have lowered kerbs to assist heavy equipment installation. (09.01.24)

6.15 Planning Policy - The relevant statutory development plan is the Area Plan for the East (2020). The site is inside the town centre boundary and within a Mixed Use Proposal Area described as 'Strand Street'. The relevant policy wording is set out in Town Centre - Mixed Use Proposal 3: Town Centre - Mixed Use Proposal 3 states:

There will be a presumption in favour of retail and ancillary town centre uses such as food and drink and health and beauty uses along the primary shopping frontage. Outside of the primary shopping frontage a wider variety of town centre uses including financial and professional services open to visiting members of the public will also be acceptable. Entertainment venues,

==== PAGE 29 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  29  of  43

Offices and residential use will be acceptable at first floor level and above, but not at ground floor level where an active frontage should be maintained and enhanced. These active frontages are essential to sustain an attractive town centre.

The site falls within a larger area identified as a 'CTA' or Comprehensive Development Area. Feasibility Studies have been prepared for all five highlighted CTAs in line with CTA Proposal 6 (General) on the approved Area Plan. CTA 1 covers the site which includes the Villiers (please see Annexe 1). I draw your attention in particular to the Recommendations section on page 22. Please note the document was published in 2021. The Department has not taken any steps to compulsory purchase any land in CTA 1 or any other CTA area.

The Area Plan identifies the application site as DM003g on Map 5 and an indicative number of residential units is set out as 17 (see Table 19). There is no specific development brief.

As part of your deliberations, I would like to draw your attention to the 'Objectives' and 'Desired Outcomes' for the East's town and village centres set out in Chapter 9 'Town Centres'. (04.12.23)

6.13 Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society - Note that there is no specific archaeological assessment undertaken as part of this proposal. Adjacent properties on its western side i.e. those fronting Duke Street are known to contain cellars and evidence of domestic houses and cobbles at basement / cellar level. The Society would therefore consider that the opportunity should be taken to have an archaeological assessment undertaken of the site as part of the application and a condition requiring at minimum a watching brief on archaeology by Manx National Heritage attached to any consent. Request an archaeological assessment be undertaken before the proposal is progressed. (28.11.23)

6.14 A total of 3 private letters of private representation have been received. These have been received from the owners of nos. 42-50 Dukes Street, from CBRE on behalf of Lloyds Bank Plc, and from the owner of the ground-floor shop at no. 7 Regent Street. The following providing a brief summary of their content only. Full details can be found on the online planning file.

Concern over removal of support to flank wall of no. 7 Regent Street with no replacement and potential structural stability to this property. Request condition be attached requiring works be undertaken to ensure structural stability and weatherproofing of this property both during and after construction.

Proposals do not include sufficient detail over construction processes and how matters relating to noise, vibration, dust, servicing and visibility would be managed. Request submission of construction environmental management plan prior to determination ideally or at least as a pre-commencement condition.

Proposals could pose a detrimental impact upon living conditions of future residents of nos. 42-50 Duke Street with respect to privacy, outlook and loss of light;

Proposals have the potential to represent an overdevelopment of the site and contradict the principle of the Central Douglas Masterplan for the site.

7.0 ASSESSMENT 7.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are as follows:

• Principle of development (STP1,2,4-6, 9,10, SP1, BP1,7-11, EP43)
• Design, layout and impact on the Conservation Area (STP5, GP2, EP35,42)
• Residential amenity (GP2,EP22)
• Ecology, biodiversity and arboriculture (EP4,5)
• Highways impacts and parking (STP10, TP1-8)
• Drainage and flooding (EP10, IP1,5)

==== PAGE 30 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  30  of  43

7.2 PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT 7.2.1 The application site falls within the urban area of Douglas which is noted to remain the main employment and services centre for the Island in accordance with Spatial Policy 1. The site is also located within the Strand Street Mixed Use Area as noted in Map 5 - Douglas Central, in the Area Plan for the East. Outside of the primary shopping frontage, a wider variety of town centre uses, such as retail, food and drink, financial and professional services, entertainment and offices will be acceptable in principle, together with residential uses above ground floor level.

7.2.2 Moreover, the site has been designated as a Comprehensive Treatment Area, the redevelopment of which is required to include office, leisure, retail, hotel, residential, entertainment venues, food and drink uses and public open space or a combination thereof; or the laying out of the site as public open space/town square in its entirety.

7.2.3 The proposals seek the site's redevelopment to provide a variety of commercial uses, including primarily office space and a standalone hotel together with elements of leisure, food and drink retail, but notably not including any residential related development. On this subject it is recognised that the site, under the allocated number DM003g within the Area Plan for the East, has been noted as having the potential to provide a notional number of 17 dwellings. However, such a figure is indicative only and, in the absence of a site specific development brief, it is considered that Treatment Plan for the site forming part of CTA Proposal 1 takes primacy in directing however redevelopment of the site should move forward.

7.2.4 The wording of CTA Proposal 1 is considered to allow for a significant degree of flexibility in terms of the range of uses which may be appropriate as part of the site's redevelopment and does not specifically state that a residential element must be included as part of any forthcoming scheme. Rather, 'residential' is listed as one of many uses which could be included, with the policy allowing for a 'combination' of such listed uses. Therefore, the absence of a residential element within the scheme is not objected to, rendering the principle of development to be appropriate and in accordance with the relevant policies, aims and objectives of both the Strategic Plan 2016 and the Area Plan for the East 2020.

7.3 DESIGN, LAYOUT AND IMPACT ON THE CONSERVATION AREA 7.3.1 The application site is presently largely devoid of built development a represents a prominent gap site in the heart of Douglas and a key location within The Promenade. The lack of built development on site further exposes existing development within Duke Street in the content of key views with The Promenade, and in particularly the commenced but incomplete development at 42-50 Duke Street. As noted by the Registered Buildings Officer, the present situation poses a significant degree of harm to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, which is characterised by a sweep development along the length of The Promenade frontage.

7.3.2 The recommendations for the site noted within the Feasibility Study document for the Comprehensive Treatment Area note that given the location and size of the site within the townscape, and the use of options available, this provides an opportunity for a bold statement of regeneration in the Island's capital.

7.3.3 With respect to Loch Promenade, the Conservation Area Character Appraisal notes that this provides a comprehensive development of well-ordered and closely related Victorian facades, with many of the buildings retaining their original form and important features. Moreover, there is a clear emphasis on verticality with building bays being at regular intervals and generating this repetitive pattern along the whole of the sweep of Loch Promenade.

7.3.4 The site is located between Admiral House, which is a largely original Victorian property, and Villiers House, which is modern and contemporary. To the north of Admiral House there are complete blocks of buildings which are very similar in appearance. This is in stark contrast to

==== PAGE 31 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  31  of  43

the south of Villiers House, where the character is markedly different and formed by individual buildings contrasting with their neighbours in detailing and facing materials. The buildings to the north are almost all painted render with those to the south comprising a combination of glass, aluminium and brick. Regent Street forms a visual break between Admiral House and the buildings to the north, and the site with Villiers House and Victoria Street and Peveril Buildings.

7.3.5 With respect to design and form, the submitted planning statement notes the following in the context of the wider character of the Conservation Area:

"The architectural approach taken in this current application is to create building which responds to and replicates the importance architectural elements identified in the Appraisal - the repetitive rhythm of vertical bays, the horizontal elements defined by the flat roof and different materials in the top floors as well as creating a corner feature as achieved by Admiral House, providing a distinct identity to the location of Regent Street within the promenade, and which is one of the principal entrances to the Island's main shopping area. The section of the Promenade between Regent Street and Victoria Street (incorporating the application site) has a closer association in form and function with the buildings to the south. These buildings are commercial whereas those to the north are largely hotels with a similar and largely Victorian appearance and style. What is proposed will align with the buildings to the south, visually marking the change from hotels to commercial uses.

The building is subdivided into a number of different sections, creating visual interest and distinctiveness in the streetscene without the building appearing out of keeping either in terms of its height, materials or character. The proposal is therefore considered to satisfy Environment Policy 35 and Planning Policy Statement 1/01 - Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man CA/2."

7.3.6 The above analysis is considered to be largely valid in terms of demonstrating how the design of the proposed development directly fronting The Promenade corresponds to its immediate surroundings. In particular, 'The Promenade' building (Block A) provides an appropriate transition from the Villiers Building to the south, whilst the glazed link with 'The Marker' building (Block A) provides a useful visual break to reduce massing whilst providing clear distinction between the two elements.

7.3.7 The step up in scale with the additional floor level for 'The Marker' building is noted, together with concerns raised over this uplift in scale by Manx National Heritage and the relationship it would pose with four storey Admiral House to the immediate north.

7.3.8 Nevertheless, the site occupies a prominent corner plot and therefore lends itself to a statement piece of architecture that is afforded greater flexibility for an uplift in scale and massing. The rhythmic fenestration and materiality of both sections of Block A display a contemporary nod to traditional Victorian architecture which is prevalent along The Promenade, without trying to fully emulate past development by way of a pastiche. The proposals represent a modern and well-designed development which takes note of and is sympathetic to existing development within its immediate vicinity, whilst being bold and striking in its own right.

7.3.9 It is further noteworthy that the Registered Buildings Officer (RBO) accepts that conclusions of the submitted Heritage Impact Assessment insofar as the development would cause no harm to the special character of the Conservation Area and has therefore offered their support. Some criticisms of the scheme by the RBO are noted, particularly the exposed plant atop Block A and the partially blank western elevation of 'The Marker' building viewed from Regent Street. However, the RBO has recognised that the plant would not cause any harm to important views into and out of the Conservation Area. Likewise, the plant would not be readily if at all visible from the public realm.

==== PAGE 32 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  32  of  43

7.3.10 With respect to the largely blank western elevation adjacent to Regent Street, this was noted to be a largely architectural feature and indeed does provide a degree of interest when viewed above the cantilevered section. Upon review of this element of the proposals, officers do not considered this aspect of the design to be harmful and indeed constitute an unusual but not unpleasant design feature which adds interest to the western elevation when viewed in its entirety.

7.3.11 Turning to the hotel development (Block B) in the western portion of the site, such proposals would not be readily visible in the context of The Promenade and key views within the wider Conservation Area following completion of the entirety of the development. Therefore, its impact upon the character and appearance of the same is deemed to be largely negligible, with Block A forming the key visual centrepiece of the site's redevelopment. Nevertheless, the overall design, scale and appearance of the hotel is considered to be reasonably appropriate and such that it would successfully tie in with the remainder of the development.

7.3.12 As highlighted by the RBO however, and when considering the entirety of the built development, the final acceptability of the proposals from a visual standpoint will be crucially dependent upon the final specification of materials to be used, which will need to be of an exceptionally high quality due to the site's prominent location within a Conservation Area. Whilst indicative finishes have been provided as part of the submission, it is considered necessary that full details be provided by way of condition prior to the commencement of above ground works.

7.3.13 Finally, it is noted that the development as a whole includes a well-integrated landscaped courtyard area which would provide an attractive and functional area of public open space with key linkages to The Promenade and Regent Street. This element of the proposals is welcomed by way of improving the public realm, together with largely corresponding with the aims and aspirations of the Comprehensive Treatment Area proposal 1 and the subsequent conclusions of the associated site feasibility study. A final specification of materials and planting would be required for submission by way of condition, should planning permission be forthcoming.

7.3.14 To summarise, the proposals are considered to constitute a very high standard of design whilst providing a bold and striking piece of architecture which would resulting in a significant improvement to the character and appearance of the immediate locality and indeed the wider Conservation Area. The current site represents a brownfield gap site which represents significant harm to the character of the Conservation Area and key public vistas both within the streetscene and the wider seascape offshore, and therefore its comprehensive redevelopment as proposed is strongly welcomed from a visual standpoint. The development is therefore deemed to be acceptable from a design and visual impact perspective, in compliance with Strategic Policies 4 and 5, General Policy 2, and Environment Policies 35 and 42 of the Strategic Plan.

7.4 RESIDENTIAL AMENITY 7.4.1 The principal issue to consider in this respect is the impact of the development upon the amenities of occupants of surrounding buildings, particularly existing residential units, together with potential future residential units to the west of the site at 42-50 Duke Street where a permission exists for the site's redevelopment to provide 20 apartments remains extant. Moreover, concerns have been raised by the development company and owners of 42-50 Duke Street over the impact of the development, particularly the 6-storey hotel in the western portion of the site, would have upon the living conditions of any future occupies of nos. 42-50.

7.4.2 With regard to the development's impact in this respect, the submitted planning statement has provided the following commentary of note:

==== PAGE 33 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  33  of  43

"58 Duke Street has a first floor rear terrace serving a restaurant and a flat above. An appeal into refusal of an application for the creation of the first floor rear terrace (09/01473/B) found that concerns about the impact of the proposed terrace on the living conditions of those in the apartment above were insufficient to justify a refusal and the inspector notes, the appeal property is in a town centre location, where residents would expect a higher level of noise and activity than either in a suburban or countryside locality" and went on to comment on the opening hours of the restaurant (2300hrs). Duke Street is understood to have flats at second floor level.

42-50, Duke Street has permission, which has been commenced but not completed, for a mixed use development with retail use on the ground floor and residential accommodation above with bedrooms, kitchen/dining/lounge areas, a stairwell and lift in the section backing onto the rear service lane.

The proposed development has been designed with regard to its impact on these existing and proposed buildings. The marker building, by virtue of its necessary height and status will inevitably have an impact on the outlook from and light to windows in the southern elevation of Admiral House. However, it is notable that this building is a private hotel whose rooms would not ordinarily be permanently occupied. In addition, the visual contribution of this building to the promenade depends upon the inclusion of a status building on the corner. This may have an impact on adjacent buildings but this is not dissimilar to the impact shared by those other buildings on similar corner plots along the Promenade. The height of the majority of the building is predetermined by that of Villiers House and if the corner element is to step up, this results in a six storey building to the south of Admiral House. The proposal introduces only a single additional floor on the corner marker building which is not considered unreasonable or unacceptable in this case.

The hotel building will have an impact on the buildings which back onto the rear service lane. These existing buildings are largely commercial although it is understood that there are residential premises on the upper floors of 52 Duke Street and permission has been granted, although not yet fully implemented, for the creation of apartments at 42-50, Duke Street. These properties have windows which look towards the proposed hotel although this element of the proposed development has been designed with its windows positioned so that they are generally not looking directly towards living space of any of the existing or approved residences. In the case of the southern section of the proposed hotel, these windows which look towards the living space of the apartments in the southern section of the approved development, are almost 20m away, as recommended in the Residential Design Guide. The RDG also makes a distinction between different types of rooms with primary habitable rooms including living, dining and kitchen/dining rooms but bedrooms constitute secondary habitable rooms.

The city centre location of the proposed development necessitates particular attention to making the best use of sites, as is advocated in Strategic Policy 1 whilst having regard to other critical constraints as set out in General Policy 2 and the other relevant policies applicable to the development. It is clear from the decision taken in respect of 09/01473/B above that the town centre location of that site, which abuts the rear lane adjacent to the application site, is a factor to be taken into consideration when determining development proposals in this area and the reasonable expectations of those living in such a location in terms of activities, noise, disturbance and we would add, the layout and proximity of buildings to each other. This is noted in the Residential Design Guide where it states at 7.5.6 "In dense urban areas, where there is already a level of mutual overlooking, a lesser standard may be acceptable."

It is also notable that the proposed use of the closest building to these existing residences, is as a hotel where the occupants will be seeking as much privacy and lack of disturbance as those who may live alongside, compared with, for example, a self-contained bar or restaurant which would be acceptable in principle on the application site. The proposed hotel is positioned to the

==== PAGE 34 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  34  of  43

east of the existing and approved buildings on Duke Street and as such there is not likely to be a significant impact on sunlight on these properties (the Residential Design Guide identifies concern where new buildings are to be located to the south of existing properties (paragraph 7.3.3) and particularly also given the impact of the main building alongside the promenade (either as proposed or as approved).

Whilst there will be an impact on the outlook of these properties through the presence of a new building to the rear, the nature of the city centre location is such that buildings are typically closer to each other whether this is face to face across narrow pedestrian streets such as Duke Street and Strand Street, or back to back such as between the rear of the promenade hotels and the rear of the commercial buildings on Strand and Castle Streets.

It is considered that, taking into account the design approach and position and orientation of windows in the hotel building, the context of the site and its town centre location, that the impact of the proposed development on the living conditions and amenities of those alongside the site is acceptable and considered to be in accordance with General Policy 2 and the Residential Design Guide. In addition, the residents will have access to new areas of landscaped public open space rather than as at present, an under used and unattractive area and rear lane."

7.4.3 Upon detailed review of the scheme, the Department largely agrees with the assessment provided in the applicant's planning statement in this context. However, it should be qualified that the western elevation of the proposed hotel building ranges in distance from the eastern elevation of the approved apartment building at 42-50 Duke Street at circa. 10- 12m, and not the 'almost 20m' specified in the planning statement.

7.4.4 Nevertheless, the '20m guide' as noted in the Residential Design Guide (RDG) is as specified within the RDG, a guide and 'a useful way to identify where overlooking is likely to be a concern', and therefore not an absolute policy requirement which can be afforded a degree of flexibility when appropriate. Indeed, paragraph 7.5.5 states that 'this distance can be relaxed, where the design or orientation is such that privacy and amenity of a neighbouring property is not compromised'. Likewise, para. 7.5.6 further adds that 'in dense urban areas, where there is already a level of mutual overlooking, a lesser standard may be acceptable'.

7.4.5 It is evident of course that the proposed development, and particularly the new hotel, will pose a material impact upon the living conditions of any potential future occupants of 42-50 Duke Street when compared to the current situation with the site being undeveloped. However, any such impact has to be balanced against the positively of comprehensively redeveloping the site, together with the acknowledgement that the site has been allocated for development in the Area Plan for the East and designated as a Comprehensive Treatment Area. Likewise, substantial weight must also be placed upon the potential benefits of providing an 80-bedroom hotel, particularly in the context of boosting the City's offering of serviced tourist accommodation and the positive impact this would likely bring to the local economy.

7.4.6 On balance therefore, whilst the impacts of the development upon the amenities of future occupants in Duke Street, together with existing uses apartments and other uses within the site's immediate vicinity are duly noted, this has to be balanced against the acknowledgement of the site's city centre location whereby a reduced degree of privacy, outlook, sunlight and protection from noise and disturbance are to be expected. Likewise, the benefits of the scheme in the wider content, both economic and visual, are considered to be substantial, and therefore sufficient enough to outweigh any harm upon existing and potential future occupies immediately surrounding the application site.

7.5 ECOLOGY, BIODIVERSITY AND ARBORICULTURE

==== PAGE 35 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  35  of  43

7.5.1 Within the submitted planning statement, the following overview is provided with respect to ecology and arboriculture impacts which ties in with the content and conclusions of the submitted Preliminary Ecological Assessment (PEA) by Manx Wildlife Trust.

"Prior to the application being submitted, Ecosystems Policy Team were approached and their advice was that they identified the benefit of improving the public realm and biodiversity in built up areas has positive wellbeing benefits. They acknowledge the very limited current ecological interest due to the significant areas of hard surfacing, albeit that blackbirds were nesting within the site and recommend that any site clearance is undertaken outside of the bird nesting season which the applicant will respect. They suggest that the height of the building is highly suitable for swift and starling nest boxes ideally integrated boxes which would not have an impact on the appearance of the building, high up on northerly elevations in between windows. They suggest that whilst the development is being undertaken, the proximity of the Marine Nature Reserve should be noted and responsible construction practices adopted and suggest that any art installations could have a local marine theme "to highlight the amazing biodiversity that is mostly hidden but so close by". They also suggest introducing plants with acknowledged biodiversity benefits within the landscaping scheme and advise against the introduction of certain species.

Further to this, the applicant commissioned a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal report which is also attached to the application. This found that whilst there are sites of ecological interest within the vicinity, these are not well connected to the application site. It found that there are no records of rare or protected species on or within 500m of the site (which includes the beach, harbour and sea), there are records of two non native invasive species which are on Schedule 8 of the Wildlife Act, 1990, 13 records of fungi none which are Red list species and 11 records of birds although these records may not be complete. There are also 32 records of invertebrates one which are rare or protected, 4 records of bats although with no evidence of roosting.

It refers to several urban trees within the site which are not Registered and which do not contain any features which would result in them being of value to bats or birds.

The PEAR identifies potential risk to wildlife during construction and potential loss of habitat although the report identifies only opportunities for nesting on the flat roofed structures and potential for cavity species such as house sparrow with no roosting opportunities identified for bats and with little opportunity for foraging.

The scheme responds to this advice through the selection of species which offer interest and shelter for wildlife and replace what little vegetation exists on the site with more appropriate and manageable species suitable to this urban environment and include some of the species recommended in the PEAR where these are appropriate to an urban environment of public open space.

The scheme involves the enclosure of bins to prevent nuisance caused by pigeons and gulls gaining access."

7.5.2 Following review of the submitted information, the Ecosystems Policy Team have concurred with the results of the submitted PEA and have subsequently requested the attachment of a number of conditions in relation to measures to safeguard the Douglas Bay Marine Nature Reserve, the submission of a Preliminary Bat Roost Assessment, a breeding bird mitigation plan and the provision of details in relation to a sensitive low level lighting scheme. Likewise, notwithstanding the level of detail submitted to date, it has also been requested that a detailed landscaping scheme be provided further qualifying the level of information with regards to the creation of the proposed green roof and a 5 year post-planting management schedule.

==== PAGE 36 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  36  of  43

7.5.3 With respect to matters relating to arboriculture, the proposals involve the remove of 3 no. unregistered trees which, whilst likely to provide some degree of ecological value, are not so significant that they should comprise a barrier to the site's redevelopment. Compensatory planting will however be required, which should form part of a future detailed landscaping scheme.

7.6 HIGHWAYS IMPACTS AND PARKING 7.6.1 The original application submission was accompanied by a Transport Assessment and Travel Plan prepared by Bryan G Hall, which provides the following summary and conclusions of the scheme with respect to highway safety impact and parking:

"A description of the local highway network in the vicinity of the application site has been provided, including Loch Promenade, Regent Street, Fort Street and Victoria Street. The results of existing weekday morning and evening peak hour survey of Regent Street and Fort Street have been provided, which show that the local highway network is presently operating well within its traffic carrying and environmental capacity and in a safe manner. A review of Personal Injury Collision data has not identified any significant highway safety issues.

It has been shown that the application proposals will improve accessibility in the local area and that site is highly accessible to employment/public amenities in Douglas including the Town Centre and public transport services on the Promenade and Victoria Street. On this basis it is concluded the application site is highly accessible to population areas in Douglas and on the wider Island and public amenities in Douglas by active modes of travel and public transport in accordance with Transport Policies 1 and 2 of the Strategic Plan and the aims and objectives of the Active Travel Strategy and the Net Zero Emissions by 2050 action plan.

To further encourage people to walk, cycle or use public transport, a Travel Plan also accompanies the planning application.

The application site is highly accessible by alternative modes of travel to the private car. On this basis it is concluded the application site is highly accessible by active modes of travel and public transport and therefore the proposed 50 car parking spaces (Net increase of 34 spaces on the site) accord with the policies and parking standards in the Strategic Plan.

The Assessment has shown that in the year 2028, the local highway network can accommodate development generated trips, without detriment to the safety or convenience of users of the local highway network.

It therefore concludes that vehicular and non-vehicular access to the application proposals accord with the policies of both the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, 2016 and the Area Plan for the East, 2020, and hence that the trips which they are likely to generate can be accommodated on the local highway network without detriment to the safety or convenience of its users."

7.6.2 Upon review of the submitted Transport Assessment, DoI Highway Services provided a detailed response which were summarised into 14 outstanding points which were required to be addressed, as highlighted in section 6.2 of this report. Following continued engagement between the applicant and Highway Services, also the content of which is also detailed through section 6.2 of this report, final comments were received from Highway Services which had narrowed the list out issues deemed to be outstanding and have not been fully addressed to the satisfaction of Highway Services. The following provides an overview of these issues and the Department's position in this respect.

7.6.3 Points 1 and 2 (from the original 14 point list provided by Highway Services) are largely interlinked and relate to the outstanding query as to whether the area for the bus stop will subsequently form part of the adopted highway. Highway Services consider that the area should be designated as highway for adoption in order that Bus Vannin have control over the

==== PAGE 37 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  37  of  43

bus stop and its use. If this cannot be agreed now, then a condition regarding the bus stop design, and land designated as highway maintainable at public expense under the bus stop, could be placed on the permission.

7.6.4 Likewise, it is noted that the two design options presented in the Bus Stop Strategy (i.e. bus stop to be integrated with the building versus sited away from the building) have been presented. In the absence of agreement with Bus Vannin over their design preference, there are concerns that this could result in the design of off-site highway works, including the bus shelter, being required to change following the grant of planning permission and therefore necessitating a new application to be submitted.

7.6.5 Following review and consideration of this issue, the Department notes that the plans submitted with the application clearly show that the bus stop would be integrated as part of the building on the eastern elevation of Block A fronting Loch Promenade. The applicant has stated that engagement with Bus Vannin was undertaken in 2023 who were presented within the two options outlined in the Bus Stop Strategy document, with Bus Vannin confirming their preference for option 2 (i.e. integrated bus stop as per the submitted plans). Copies of this correspondence have been provided by the applicant.

7.6.6 Whilst it is appreciated that the situation could hypothetically change and Bus Vannin may change their preference for the final design of the new bus stop, the delivery of a separate bus stop shelter could be delivered under permitted development and therefore not require the submission of a separate planning application. In this instance, it is considered that a condition ensuring the delivery of a bus stop prior to the occupation of the development would be sufficient in ensuring that a replacement bus stop and shelter were providing, without the need to tie the applicant into delivering the bus stop in its current location and form should Bus Vannin change their preference over this matter.

7.6.7 With respect to the adoption of additional areas of the highway, the applicant has provided a series of plans showing existing adopted highway within Fort Street and additional areas which would be offered up for adoption. Whilst it is noted that no clarification has been provided with respect to the adoption of the lay-by and bus stop, such matters would be subject to further consultation and discussion between the applicant and the DoI, and are deemed to fall outwith of the planning process. Therefore, it is not considered to be necessary, reasonable or indeed enforceable to attach a condition to any forthcoming decision notice requiring the submission of a plan highlighting land to be adopted as part of the public highway.

7.6.8 Point 3 of the response from Highway Services notes that assessments on servicing strategies need to be done undertaken during the lifetime of the planning application when the design and off-site highway works are being assessed and agreed. In terms of the swept path tracking, the tracking shows that large vehicles will overrun the kerbs and footway on the small section of Fort Street onto Victoria Street. This issue directly relates to the development and so, in the opinion of Highway Services, it should be resolved by the development through proposals supporting the planning application, regardless if it is public highway. Any off-site highway works can be secured via a S109 highway agreement.

7.6.9 The applicant provided the following commentary within the submitted Technical Note which is considered to remain of significant relevance in addressing this issue:

"It has been observed and Douglas Borough Council have advised the applicant that refuse vehicles currently use Fort Street and travel south between buildings No.14 and 16 on to Victoria Street. The personal injury collision analysis showed no highway safety issues at this point. It is acknowledged that this movement is tight and there is evidence of damage to the existing kerbs in this area. In line with the vehicular trip rates set out within the TA, the proposed development will introduce an average of one additional heavy goods vehicle on Fort

==== PAGE 38 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  38  of  43

Street per day. This will occur at varying times of the day, however the peak periods are likely to be avoided as is typical for servicing movements as evidenced by the existing counts of Fort Street summarised at Appendix BGH5 of the TA.

This is an existing issue for larger sized vehicles and the proposals will not materially increase the number of daily large servicing vehicles using Fort Street during the peak periods. The issue of improvements to this section of Fort Street has been discussed with the DOI previously in the context of wider city centre masterplan improvements planned to come forward. The Applicant has previously discussed the DOI aspiration of improving Fort Street utilising a shared surface approach. It would appear that works to drop the footway and kerbs between No.14 and No.16 Victoria Street could be undertaken as part of that street upgrade.

The servicing strategy will be discussed in the proposed meeting with Bus Vannin and DOI, as this will be impacted upon by any changes to the servicing area and bus stops on Loch Promenade. It should be noted that the inclusion of a layby to the rear of the hotel will improve the servicing of the development. This is in addition to the existing servicing layby on Loch Promenade which facilitates deliveries to Villiers House and other properties in the area and the accesses available to retailer on Strand & Regent Street. Following this meeting, a servicing strategy will be prepared setting out the strategy for the office and hotel uses."

7.6.10 Whilst it is recognised and accepted that the frequency of use of Fort Street by service/refuse vehicles from Victoria Street would increase as a result of the development, this is a pre-existing issue. The Department agrees with the general conclusions made by the applicant insofar as, with respect to large service vehicles, the proposals would not result in a material uplift in use and frequency. On this basis, whilst it is recognised that upgrades to Fort Street and continued dialogue between the applicant and the DoI to facilitate this are welcomed, it is not considered reasonable that the applicant should be solely responsible to facilitate such upgrades given that the present situation and use by other occupants for servicing needs.

7.6.11 As Highway Services rightly point out, off-site highway works can be secured via a S109 highways agreement and the scope of such works would need to be agreed between the DoI and the applicant in due course. Nevertheless, such matters are considered to fall outside of the remit of the planning process. Likewise, the same conclusion applies to a serving strategy, which would need to be developed and agreed between the applicant, and DoI and Douglas City Council in due course but again falls outwith of the planning process.

7.6.12 Point 4 of the response has been resolved through further clarification provided by the applicant over the correct drawing which relates to the layout around the hotel building in relation to access and serving, namely drwg. no. 21/491/ATR/010 RevC.

7.6.13 Points 5 to 7, relating to the provision of motorcycle parking, the absence of a submitted wind assessment, and the content of the car parking assessment, are all deemed to have been resolved and therefore require no further comments.

7.6.14 Point 8 relates to the cumulative modelling assessment of the Central and Lower Douglas Masterplan sites, with Highway Services maintaining their position that the applicant has said they will provide trip information into the lower Douglas model so the development impact can be accommodated within the model completed by others, however this has not confirmed to be the case. The developments trips will have an impact on the local highway network so the information needs to be used in modelling assessments.

7.6.15 On this point, the applicant has already agreed to provide the DoI with the required information via their consultants to facilitate the production of the cumulative modelling assessment that will help inform other developments coming forward within Lower Douglas.

==== PAGE 39 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  39  of  43

The provision of such information falls outwith of the planning process in relation to this application and therefore is not required at this stage.

7.6.16 Point 9 relates to the request for details of wayfinding signs to be included within the Travel Plan, with Highway Services noting that the provision of such information can be secured by condition. Whilst the stance of Highway Services on this matter is noted and appreciate, such provision would need to tie in with as yet unproduced strategy for measures to improve wayfinding in general, which would require consultation with Douglas City Council to tie in with their existing proposals for signage delivery. Consequently, the provision of wayfinding signs within the site, and indeed within a space that is open to the public but not formal 'public open space', is not considered to meet the tests of necessity to be conditioned and enforced.

7.6.17 Point 10 relates to issues surrounding swept path tracking of large vehicle onto Fort Street and is directly linked to points 3 and 4 already reviewed and addressed above.

7.6.18 Point 11 relates to gradients on site being provided which has been undertaken by the applicant previously and has therefore been addressed. Likewise, point 12 relates to issues of flood risk and surface water drainage which have been reviewed by the DoI Flood Risk Management Division and Manx Utilities Authority. Such matters are deemed to be acceptable and are covered in more detail in section x of this report.

7.6.19 Point 13 also relates to the provision of wayfinding signs, which has already been covered above.

7.6.20 Finally, point 14 has been addressed through the previous removal of corduroy paving from the adopted highway on the relevant submitted plan/s, therefore no further comment on this matter is required.

7.6.21 To summarise, the scheme as a whole has been assessed by the Department and deemed to be acceptable with respect to highways matters, particularly in relation to the quantum of parking proposed within a sustainable city centre location, together with its impact upon the safety and convenience of the local highway network. Whilst it is recognised that a few matters are deemed to be outstanding from the DoI's Highway Services perspective, such matters are considered, as assessed above, to either be resolvable through the attachment of appropriately worded planning conditions, or deemed to fall outwith of the planning process directly relating to the determination of this application.

7.7 DRAINAGE AND FLOODING 7.7.1 The application site does not fall within an area identified as being at high risk of tidal and fluvial flooding, however isolated areas in the northern, central and southern extents of the site are shown to have a 'medium likelihood' and 'high likelihood' of surface water flooding. The application submission is duly accompanied by a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) which considers that the flood risk identified on site is associated with rainfall ponding within topographical low points. The flood risk identified will be reduced post-development through introduction of a new drainage system. Given that there are no distinct flow routes in the area which would direct any potential surface water flooding towards the site, the FRA concludes that the risk of surface water flooding is very low.

7.7.2 The FRA further notes that Manx Utilities Authority (MUA) public sewer records show that there is a public surface water sewer immediately east of the site within Loch Promenade. The FRA further considers that any potential flooding arising from the public surface water sewer in Loch Promenade would be directed east away from the site, following the local topography. Likewise, any potential flooding of the public surface water and combined sewers in Victoria Street south of the site would be directed, east away from the site, following the topography of the road.

==== PAGE 40 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  40  of  43

7.7.3 The FRA concludes that the site is identified at risk of tidal flooding when accounting for climate change. A water level of 5.69m AOD is estimated during the 0.5% AEP plus CC1 (year 2100) event, with the associated risk having been used to inform mitigation design measures.

7.7.4 The FRA adds that that the identified flood risk will be mitigated by raising ground floor levels of the proposed hotel and commercial unit to 5.99m AOD which provides a 300mm freeboard above the 0.5% AEP plus CC1 (year 2100) flood level. However due to access requirements, raising ground floor levels in not possible for the proposed substation. As such, it is proposed to install flood doors or barriers to limit flood water entering the proposed substation. A barrier height of 600mm is deemed to be sufficient to prevent flood water ingress during the 0.5% AEP plus CC1 (year 2100) event. Safe access / egress is available via Fort Steet proceeding west along Victoria Street to ground situated above 6m AOD (above the 0.5% AEP plus CC1 (year 2100) flood level). The site does not provide a tidal conveyance or storage function and there is no risk of fluvial flooding. As such, the proposed development will not remove flood storage from the floodplain and will not increase flood risk elsewhere.

7.7.5 Following review of the scheme and the submitted FRA, the DoI Flood Risk Management Division have confirmed they are content with the application as submitted and recommend that all mitigations measures outlined in Section 7 of the submitted FRA be conditioned, should planning permission be forthcoming.

7.7.6 With respect to surface and foul water drainage, a Drainage Report has been produced and submitted in support of the application. With respect to foul drainage, this would be drained by gravity into the combined public sewer system in Regent Street, with a connection to be made to a new manhole constructed in place of an existing lamp pole on the combined public sewer system.

7.7.7 In terms of surface water drainage, a connection would be made to an existing manhole on Loch Promenade with all impermeable areas of the development to be drained to the existing surface water system. Likewise, addition highway drainage to Fort Street is proposed to be drained by gravity to the existing surface water system in Regent Street, requiring the construction of a new manhole.

7.7.8 Manx Utilities Authority have confirmed there is sufficient capacity within the existing surface water and public combined sewer systems to accommodate the proposed development, with the development therefore deemed to be acceptable in this regard.

7.8 OTHER MATTERS 7.8.1 Concerns have been raised in relation to the removal of the streel supports attached to No. 7 Regent Street, the provision of which were required as per a condition attached to a Building Control Demolition Notice dated 2nd August 1994 (ref. DEM 94/22/MN/JC). Such matters as deemed to be of a civil nature and would need to be resolved between the applicant and the landowner in question, in conjunction with Building Control. Therefore, whilst noting the request to attach a condition requiring the developer to undertaken structural works, such matters fall outwith of the planning process and therefore a condition would not be appropriate in this instance.

7.8.2 With respect to archaeological matters, it is recognised that there is the potential for elements of the historic sea wall to be present beneath the site as noted by Manx National Heritage, whilst the Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society note there could be potential for the presence of additional historic structures. On balance, it is considered reasonable that a condition be attached to any forthcoming condition requiring the submission of a watching brief on archaeology with further assessment to be required if evidence of structures of historic significance are found during construction.

8.0 CONCLUSION

==== PAGE 41 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  41  of  43

8.1 The application site is identified for development and the proposal is judged to comply with the site allocation, as further detailed within Comprehensive Treatment Area Proposal 1. The proposals are considered to constitute a high standard of development in a prominent location within the Conservation Area, without resulting in a significantly adverse impact upon the amenities of occupants of surrounding buildings, including the amenities of future residential properties within the site's immediate vicinity. The proposals are deemed to give rise to a positive impact upon the character and appearance of the wider Conservation Area by redeveloping a prominent gap site, whilst further providing increased employment opportunity and additional serviced tourist accommodation, to the benefit of the local economy.

8.2 The proposals would further not result in a detrimental impact upon the safety and convenience of the local highway network, whilst further bringing about improvement to the immediate highway network. The development is therefore deemed to comply with Strategic Policies 1,2,4-6,9,10, Spatial Policy 1, General Policy 2, Environment Policies 4,5,10,22,35,41- 43, Business Policies 1, 7-11, Recreational Policy 3, Transport Policies 1,2,4-8, Infrastructure Policies 1,5 and Community Policies 7,10,11 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, relevant policies of the Area Plan for the East 2020 and the Residential Design Guide 2021. It is recommended that the planning application be approved for the reasons contained within this report, subject to the attachment of conditions listed on any forthcoming decision notice.

9.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 9.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

9.2 The decision maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status

9.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture (DEFA) 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 Interested Person Status. __

I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to the it 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.

Decision Made : Permitted

Committee Meeting Date: 22.04.2024

Signed : T COWELL Presenting Officer

==== PAGE 42 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  42  of  43

Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).

Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See below

Customer note

This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.

==== PAGE 43 ====

                                      23/01223/B                                     Page  43  of  43

PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 22.04.2024

Application No 23/01223/B Applicant Tevir Group Proposal Construction of mixed use commercial building including commercial office (class 1.2 & 2.1), retail (class 1.1) and leisure uses (class 4.4) complete with basement parking, food & drink (class 1.3 and 1.4), and 80 bedroom hotel including restaurant and operational areas (class 3.1) Site Address Villiers Square Fort Street Douglas Isle Of Man IM1 2AX

Planning Officer Toby Cowell Presenting Officer As above Addendum to the Officer Report

During the planning committee meeting of 22nd April 2024, Members agreed that the wording of conditions 2 and 3 be amended to make specific reference to the approved plan numbers. The wording of conditions 2 and 3 have therefore been revised as follows:

C 2. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or operated until the means of vehicular access has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans (namely drwg. no. 21141S-56T-P0-00S-D-A-001 P02), and shall thereafter be retained for access purposes only.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

C 3. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or operated until the parking and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans (namely drwg. nos. 21141S-56T-P0-00S-D-A-001 P02 and 21141A-56T-P4-B1F-D-A-001 P02). Such areas shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking and turning of vehicles associated with the development and shall remain free of obstruction for such use at all times.

Reason: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for off-street parking and turning of vehicles in the interests of highway safety.