Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
23/01200/B Page 1 of 16
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Application No. : 23/01200/B Applicant : Living Hope Community Church Limited Proposal : Conversion of building from retail (class 1.1) to a community facility (class 4.3) Site Address : Removal House 39 Finch Road Douglas IM1 2PW
Planning Officer: Peiran Shen Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 01.07.2024 __
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 approved use is community facilities within Class 4.3 of the Use Class Order 2019 (and any legislation that may precede or replace this order).
Reason: a) to the avoidance of doubt and b) the assessment of the application is for an assembly for religious worship, which has the most impact within the use class so all other uses within the class is also considered acceptable.
C 3. Prior to the occupation or operation of the community facility hereby approved, the off-site highway works on the west side of Finch Road that are also south of St Barnabas Hill, including the drop-off/pick up bay fronting the site, one dropped curb and all other highway works within red line of application, as detailed in the approved plan (drawing no. P-03, which was received on 10th May 2024) must be completed and retained thereafter.
Reason: to safeguard the safety and accessibility for all users of the highway from the reasonable impact of the application.
C 4. Prior to the occupation or operation of the community facility hereby approved, the cycle storage facilities, bin storage area and their accesses shown in the approved plan (drawing no. P-01 Rev E, which has been received on 10th May) must be completed and retained thereafter.
==== PAGE 2 ====
23/01200/B Page 2 of 16
Reason: to reduce car trip generated, promote sustainable travel method and safeguard traffic efficiency from refuse collection process.
C 5. The materials and finishes used in the renovation must match those specified in the approved plans.
Reason: To preserve the character and appearance of the Windsor Road Conservation Area.
C 6. Prior to the removal of the fountain on the east boundary, as shown in drawing no. P-02 Rev D, which was received on 10th May 2024, details of the existing fountain shall be documented submitted to the Department.
Reason: Fountain is a positive feature unique to the existing site and should be retained to maintain the visual appeal of the site and contribute positively to the streetscene and the character of the Conservation Area.
C 7. No development shall take place until full details of hard landscaping works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department and these works shall be carried out as approved. The hard landscaping should include details of the surface finishes of the front paving and footpaths as well as any new walls to all boundaries of the site, including details of the repositioned fountain/font. The hard landscaping works, including the repositioned fountain/font shall be completed in full accordance with the approved details prior to the first use of the occupation or operation of the community facility hereby approved.
Reason: To safeguard existing positive features of the site.
C 8. Prior to the occupation or operation of the community facility hereby approved, disability access ramps, as shown in drawing no. P-02 Rev D, which was received on 10th May 2024, shall be installed and retained thereafter.
Reason: ensure the building is accessible to all users, promoting inclusivity and compliance with the Equality Act 2017.
N 1. The proposed signage for the church on the east elevation requires advertisement consent.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposal is considered to: o renovate an underused building to provide a community facility required by residents. o improve the design of the existing building and the streetscene. o enhance the appearance of the Conservation Area and preserve its character. o although it lacks off-road parking provision, even after relaxed parking standard due to its town centre location, it is still supplemented by sufficient spaces in the Chester Street public car park. o have no negative impact on the amenities of the adjacent area.
Therefore, the application is considered to comply with: o Mixed Use Proposal 4 of the Area Plan for the East, o Strategic Policy 1(a), 4(a), General Policy 2, Environment Policy 35, 42, 43, Community Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan o Planning Policy Statement 1/01 and is recommended for an approval, subject to the conditions discussed within this section.
==== PAGE 3 ====
23/01200/B Page 3 of 16
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This approval relates to the documents, Location Plan, Site Plan, Cycle Shelter Detail and drawing no. 1000P01, 1001P01, 1002P01 which have been received on 1st November 2023; Planning Statement as having been received on 12th March 2024; and Travel Plan Strategy and drawing no. P-01 Rev E, P-02 Rev D, P-03, P-04 which was received on 10th May 2024. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties 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):
Hawarden Avenue, Douglas Flat 6 Tynwald House Apartment, Tynwald Street, Douglas
as they are not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy. __
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS IT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BUT MAY CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
1.0 THE SITE The Site and Its Existing Building 1.1 The application site is part of a land envelope created by Finch Road, Christian Road, Kingswood Grove, and St Barnabas Hill. This land envelope splits into higher-level west and lower-level east pieces. The application site is the lower-level piece of land. The site is demarcated by short boundary walls on the east (Finch Road) and concrete walls on the south and north. There is a fountain on the boundary wall.
1.2 Within the site is a red brick building fronting Finch Road. The building takes up most of the site except for some setbacks from Finch Road (which provides off-road parking) and a pocket at the northwest corner.
1.3 The building consists of three blocks: o a single-storey multi-gable block at the north, o a two-storey flat-roof office block at the southeast corner, and o a single-storey flat-roof block between the other two blocks and surrounds the back of the office building.
1.4 The multi-gable block has a white sheeting roof and shopfront window on the east and south elevations. The two-story flat-roof block has uPVC windows with glazing bars (30/70 split), a double timber door on the ground floor, and a double door on the first floor (access from Christian Road). The single-storey flat-roof block has a shopfront window on the east elevation and protrudes beyond the frontage of the other two blocks.
1.5 The office block is in use, and the other parts of the building are vacant. There is approx. 170 square metres of office space and 650 square metres of retail space.
Surroundings and the Wider Area
==== PAGE 4 ====
23/01200/B Page 4 of 16
1.6 A modern multi-storey car park stretching north-south is east of the site, just across Finch Road. A three-storey red-brick office building is north of the site. Around the site, there are Victorian-style houses. The ones to the site's north, east, and southeast are primarily residential terraces (mostly dwellinghouses but also some flats), and the ones to the south are semi-detached and terraced offices (many are registered buildings).
1.7 Widening the scope, the site is on the transition slop from the flat low-level coast plain to higher-level inland areas. The site is around several areas with different characters: o Split-level low-occupancy area on the east of the site o Seaside commercial-intensive majorly-terrace Promenade to the east of the site o On-slope Mixed-used terraced houses Area on the north of the site o On-hill relatively-flat-level residential terraced houses to the northwest of the site o On-hill relatively-flat-level mix-of-offices-and-residential terraces on the south of the site o Mixed-size mostly-office-and-civic-use buildings to the southwest of the site
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The proposed is conversion of the site from shops (Use Class 1.1) and an office (Use Class 2.1) to a church (Class 4.3), which includes land use changes, elevation renovations and access improvements.
Land Use Change 2.2 The size of the converted building is mostly unchanged. The church has a sunken assembly hall, multifunction rooms, offices, and meeting rooms. There are also some service areas, such as lobbies, toilets, a kitchenette, and storage.
2.3 The assembly hall is approx. 300 square meters, and other function rooms are approx. 210 square meters. The assembly hall proposed to have 300 seats. In theory (building regulation), the other function rooms can be occupied by approx. 210 people at the same time (1 person per square meter).
2.4 Based on 2.3, the maximum number of users of the whole building is approx. 400-500 people. No strict opening hours are proposed, meaning the site can open 24/7, including weekends and public holidays, although this is unlikely given the typical operation of a church.
2.5 The church is for Living Hope, a local Christian church with around 250 regular attendees. According to the planning statement, the main service occurs on Sunday around noon (usually 10:00-13:00). Youth meetings on weekdays usually finish at 20:00. The building is also used around Christian holidays, which fall on Bank Holidays. The statement expects a maximum of around 300 attendees at any given event.
Elevation Renovations 2.6 The mass of the building stays the same. The main changes are to the east (front) elevation and adjoining parts of the south and north elevation. The front elevation of the church has smooth render and vertical timber cladding, 50/50 split slim windows and glass double-door entrances.
2.7 The main entrance is at the side of the building. The main entrance is four glass double doors. One pair is in the middle of the east elevation of the single-storey flat-roof block with glass panels on top. The other pair is on the south elevation of the multi-gable block.
2.8 The multi-gable block finishes in a coloured render on the south and east elevations and the first gable of the north elevation. It also has two vertical windows on the east elevation with vertical timber cladding between the windows and a new door on the north elevation.
==== PAGE 5 ====
23/01200/B Page 5 of 16
2.7 The single-storey flat-roof block is finished in vertical timber cladding. It has two vertical glazed panels to the south of the entrance door. They have the same height as the entrance doors.
2.8 The two-storey flat-roof block finishes in coloured render on its east, south and north elevations, with a section of vertical timber cladding around its glass double door on the east elevation. The cladding extends beyond the height of the existing roof to form a higher parapet than the existing ones on the roof.
2.9 The timber cladding divides the east elevation of the two-storey block into the south section and the north section. On the north section, three vertical 50/50 windows are on both the ground and first floor. On the south section, on top of the entrance door, are two of the same windows as the ones on the north section. The double door on the first floor is replaced with a glass double door (still accessed from Christian Road).
Access Improvement 2.10 The proposal includes alterations to boundary walls and the existing setback area from Finch Road to improve access. The gap between the two pillars on Finch Road is widened to help create a pick-up/drop/off area. A new opening on the north boundary wall provides access to the new door on the north elevation of the multi-gable building. A stone-paved terrace replaces the existing off-road parking spaces. New ramps are created next to the southeast boundary to provide disability access to the assembly hall and the two-storey element.
2.11 The proposal also includes the installation of a bike storage facility and some plant space at the site's northwest corner. There is also bin storage space next to the north elevation entrance.
2.12 The proposal also includes off-site highway work, including the creation of new tactile drop curbs and altering the pavement to create a pick-up/drop-off parking space.
Advertisement 2.13 The proposal includes the installation of a signage for the church, which is subject to an advertisement consent and is not assessed as part of this application.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 Demolition of all existing buildings and boundary walls and construction of an office building with basement parking was APPROVED under PA 14/00799/B. It is a five-storey, modern office building that looks like the office north of the site, with about 2000 square metres of office space.
4.0 PLANNING POLICY Site Specific 4.1 The site is within an area designated as Mixed Use (St George's) in the Area Plan for the East. The written statement of the Area Plan states: "Within the area, but outside of Athol Street, offices, financial and professional services, food and drink and some residential uses will also be acceptable. Uses which conflict with these will generally not be supported."
4.2 The site is within the Windsor Road Conservation Area (WRCA), which means there is a legal test for the proposal's impact on conservation areas (CA) (details in 5.1 and 7.1). WRCA also has a character appraisal (details in 4.16).
Strategic Policy 4.3 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 (IOMSP) holds the following policies that are considered materially relevant to the assessment of this current planning application: o Strategic Policy 1 (a) o Strategic Policy 3 (b), 4 (a), 5
==== PAGE 6 ====
23/01200/B Page 6 of 16
o Strategic Policy 10 o General Policy 2 (b) (c) (g) (h) (i) (k) (m) o Environment Policy 35, 42, 43 o Paragraph 10.5.2 o Community Policy 2 o Transport Policy 7 o Appendix 7.6
4.4 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan has no assumption in favour of new development. In decision-making, this means that where a planning application conflicts with the Plan, approval should usually not be granted.
The following is a highlight of policies listed in 4.3. The subtitles will also be the general order of the assessment in section 7.
IOMSP - Community Facility 4.5 Paragraph 10.5.2 states: "It is not for the Strategic Plan to address or determine the needs for community facilities, but to address the land use issues arising from such proposals ... Proposals for such uses will therefore be assessed against general criteria based policies."
In decision making, Paragraph 10.5.2 means an application for a community facility does not need to justify its location choice based on need because an application itself is evidence of a need for new community facilities.
IOMSP - Urban Regeneration 4.6 Strategic Policy 1(a) and Environment Policy 43 consider optimising redundant and under-used buildings as "making the best use of resources".
4.7 Community Policy 2 encourages new community facilities to reuse vacant or underused buildings "where possible".
IOMSP - Design and Conservation 4.8 Strategic Policy 3(b), 4 (a), 5 and Subsections (b), (c), (g) of General Policy 2, as well as Environment Policy 42, set out design requirements for development to respect the character of the site itself and its immediate and broader surroundings.
4.9 Strategic Policy 4(a) and Environment Policy 35 state that design for development in a Conservation Area must either preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the area. EP35 emphasises this by stating that the positive features of such areas must be protected against inappropriate development.
In decision making, EP35 means development that does not preserve or enhance such area or negatively affects the area's character would be refused.
IOMSP - Transport and Parking 4.10 Strategic Policy 10, Subsections (h), (i) of General Policy 2 set out that proposals should satisfy the safety, efficiency, and accessibility requirements (including parking provision) of all highway users (particularly pedestrians) whether possible.
4.11 Community Policy 2 states that new community facilities should "be accessible to non- car users".
4.12 Transport Policy 7 sets out parking standards for development, details of which are in Appendix 7.6. It requires: o Offices
==== PAGE 7 ====
23/01200/B Page 7 of 16
o Town Centre shops
4.13 Appendix 7.6 also sets out situations where parking standards can be relaxed. These include: "(c) is otherwise of benefit to the character of a Conservation Area. (d) is within a reasonable distance of an existing or proposed bus route and it can be demonstrated a reduced level of parking will not result in unacceptable on street parking in the locality."
IOMSP - Amenities 4.14 Subsections (g) and (h) of General Policy 2 set out that amenities enjoyed by the site and the site around it should be protected or preserved.
Planning Policy Statement and National Policy Directive 4.15 Planning Policy Statement 1/01 - Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man is the only adopted PPS. It provides supplementary policy on developments within any conservation area.
4.16 Policy CA/2 states: "When considering proposals for the possible development of any land or buildings which fall within the conservation area, the impact of such proposals upon the special character of the area, will be a material consideration when assessing the application."
4.17 Windsor Road Conservation Area Character Appraisal justifies the conservation designation of the area, highlights quality designs and notes detractive features within the Area. The Appraisal summarises the general character of the area as follows: "Offers a comprehensive collection of town houses from the early Victorian period, giving good quality examples of the development of architectural and approaches to planning and layout. Many buildings still retain a high level of original features which are fortunately in many cases being conserved and enhanced."
4.18 Planning Circular 1/98 - The Alteration and Replacement of Windows Set highlights the importance of window design on the character of an area and sets specific requirements for changes to windows in the Conservation Area.
4.19 Section 6 of PC 1/98 states that windows readily visible from a public thoroughfare "must have the same" method of opening, pattern and section of glazing bars and frame section as the original windows regardless of its material.
5.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS Legislation 5.1 Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (TCPA) (1999) states, "(4) Where any area is for the time being a conservation area, special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing its character or appearance in the exercise, with respect to any buildings or other land in the area, of any powers under this Act".
Section 18(4) of the TCPA sets out the approach in determining planning applications, which includes giving great weight to the asset's conservation when considering the impact of a proposed development on the asset.
The above requirements apply to this application because the site is within a Conservation Area. Section 7 of this report will give it appropriate consideration.
5.2 Section 143 of the Equality Act 2017 places a duty on public bodies to promote equality, eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations.
==== PAGE 8 ====
23/01200/B Page 8 of 16
The above requirements apply to this application because the existing building has limited disability access. Section 7 of this report will give it appropriate consideration.
5.3 Schedule 1 Part 1 Article 9 Section 2 of the Human Rights Act 2001 states: "Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.".
5.4 Schedule 1 Part 1 Article 14 of the Human Rights Act 2001 states: "The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status."
Because public comments have raised concerns about the proposal's lack of inclusivity (details in Section 6) and given that the proposal involves a place of worship, section 7 of this report will briefly inspect the proposal against these two Articles in the Human Rights Act 2001.
Strategy and Guidance 5.5 Manual for Manx Roads provides best practices and technical details for ensuring highways are accessible, safe, inclusive, and serviceable. These details include minimum spatial requirements for manoeuvre and parking and bicycle parking standards.
5.6 Active Travel Strategy 2018-2021 states that an action plan will be set out to encourage people to choose walking and cycling to make their everyday journeys. This strategy was in response to the Programme of the Government, a document which sets out the operating principles of the government agreed upon by Tynwald.
Appeal Decision These appeal decisions are from the UK. These selections are not precedents within the Isle of Man planning system. However, they offer additional guidance when assessing applications because there are close similarities between the Island's and the UK's planning system.
5.7 Greenwich 20/9/2012 - In upholding an enforcement notice requiring an industrial building to stop being used as a place of worship, the Inspector states that the freedom of thought, conscience and religion is a qualified right rather than an absolute right in the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). A qualified right means interference with this right is justified and necessary when striking a balance between the rights of an individual and the wider public interest. The Inspector considers there are sufficient material planning considerations against the proposal.
5.8 Mendip 06/11/2000 - In approving one of two schemes involving the provision of low impact dwellings in the countryside to be used as part of a religious collective, the Secretary of State states that the desire of a community to live in a particular manner does not fall within the protection of Article 9. Still, the case was sufficiently unusual as not to create a precedent.
5.9 Blackburn and Darwen 31/08/2005 - In upholding a refusal on the removal of a condition to allow the use of a loudspeaker system to amplify the call to prayer of a mosque, the Inspector states that the ability to practice religion, albeit being a fundamental human right, still has to be balanced against the need to protect the rights and freedoms of others.
The Inspector states that such a proposal would set an undesirable precedent. With the increasing number of similar proposals, there is a potential to create a declamatory and proselytising environment in the vicinity of mosques to the exclusion and discomfort of those who might wish to follow a different religion or pursue a non-religious way of life. Such a situation would serve to erode the fundamental freedoms of others.
==== PAGE 9 ====
23/01200/B Page 9 of 16
6.0 REPRESENTATIONS This section is a summary. The original texts of the consultations and comments received are available on the Planning Application Search on the government website. 6.1 Douglas Borough Council has no objection to this application. (21.12.2023).
6.2 DoI Highway Services does not oppose this application after negotiating to include some off-site highway work. The comment recommends three conditions to ensure highway safety and improved accessibility for the increased users of the road: o off-site highway works to be implemented before first occupation of the proposals, o cycle and bin storage as per approved plans to be implemented before first occupation of the proposals, o details within the Travel Plan Strategy to be implemented before first occupation and retained thereafter.
6.3 One neighbouring property was notified. Two responses have been received from the public (31.10.2023 - 09.11.2023). Both comments object to the application. The comments are from the Owners and Occupiers of: o X Hawarden Avenue (number removed due to content of the comment) o Flat 6 Tynwald House Apartment, Tynwald Street
6.4 The material planning considerations raised by the comments are: o Land use designation and compatibility with the surrounding area o Parking Availability o Design and visual impact o Social Inclusivity from land use and building design
6.5 The non-material planning considerations raised by the comments and during the advertising period are: o principles of Christianity and religions in general o sociological impacts of Christianity and religions in general o popularity of Christianity and religions in general Planning can only assess the impact of development resulting from reasonable activities commonly associated with its land use, not particular thoughts and actions of individuals.
7.0 ASSESSMENT Conservation Areas Statutory Test 7.1 Before assessing elements of the proposal, as it is within a Conservation Area, a test should be applied to this proposal, as mentioned in 5.1, to determine whether the proposal would preserve or enhance the character of the Conservation Area. Failing the test would impose a significant weight against the proposal unless there is overwhelming public interest.
7.2 The character of an area or a site can be broken down into four parts: urban form, routes and space type, building type and details and materials of the buildings. In this test, "area" refers to the Windsor Road Conservation Area (WRCA).
Character Analysis of the Windsor Road Conservation Area 7.3 As mentioned in paragraphs 1.5 and 4.16, the general character of WRCA can be summarised as follows: Area Character - Urban Form o Setting and topography - mostly flat area o Morphological features - square pattern or linear road o Plot size and ratio - small plots with a narrow width but a deep projection, buildings occupy 50%-90% of plots
Area Character - Route and Space Types
==== PAGE 10 ====
23/01200/B Page 10 of 16
o Bound by access road, except on the southeast, which is bound by a local road o The local road connects two district roads and a primary road o Traffic volume: primary>district>local>access o Green spaces are mostly private gardens. There is, however, a large public square
Area Character - Building Types o Scale and mass - typically three-to-five-storey tall terraced houses o Use of buildings - majorly dwellinghouse and some offices at the south o Age of buildings - majorly Victorian Age, but most are renovated internally
Area Character - Details and materials o Dominant materials - smooth pale-colour render and tiled roof o Building detailing- pitched roof and 50/50 split sliding sash windows with glazing bars o External landscape details - short front boundary wall with cast iron fence, front gardens but rarely off-road parking space. There is a water fountain on the front boundary wall.
7.3 Several buildings within the area do not conform to these typical characters in 7.2. These buildings were built much later than the terraces and have different uses than dwellinghouses or offices, such as residential homes and museums. The application site has one of these buildings.
Character Analysis of the Application Site and the Existing Building 7.4 Looking at the building on the application site, its characters are: Site Character - Urban Form o Setting and topography - transition from slop to flat. The site cuts into the slop. o Morphological features - the plot is square rather than slim o Plot size and ratio - three to four times as wide as a terraced house, the building occupies over 70% of the plot
Site Character - Route and Space Types o Sits on a local road. o No green or public space provision.
Site Character - Building Types o Scale and mass- appear a mix of single-storey and two-storey, wide but short. o Use of buildings - shop (vacant) and office o Age of buildings - post-war to 1970s
Site Character - Details and materials o Dominant materials - red brick, pale-white sheeting, and plastic o Building detailing - flat roof, 25/75 split casement windows with glazing bars, and shop front windows o External landscape details - stone boundary wall, off-road parking spaces at the front
Comparing Existing Characters 7.5 Comparing 7.2 and 7.4, along with observation from site visits, the current building is unique in WRCA. Due to its different form, finishes, and land use from those of the terraces within the CA, the current building is not considered to be one of the positive features of the CA. The existing building also neither complements the main positive features of the CA nor stands as a positive feature of the CA by itself. Therefore, the existing building is arguably out of place within the conservation area.
Character Analysis of the Application Site after the Proposed Building 7.6 Looking at changing the use of the building as well as physical alteration, its characters are:
==== PAGE 11 ====
23/01200/B Page 11 of 16
Proposed Character - Urban Form o Setting and topography - unchanged o Morphological features - unchanged o Plot size and ratio - unchanged
Proposed Character - Building Types o Scale and mass - primarily unchanged except for a new section of parapet o Use of buildings - community facilities (Church) o Age of buildings - unchanged but would appear more contemporary
Proposed Character - Details and materials o Dominant materials - vertical timber cladding, smooth render, glass o Building detailing - new parapet, 50/50 split windows and large glass door o Building detailing - cladding and rendering to break up the east elevation into narrow sections with widths closer to the width of a terraced house. o External landscape details - stone boundary wall, raised terraced with accessibility ramp in front of the building
Appearance of the Conservation Area 7.7 Comparing the proposed (paragraph 7.6) to the existing building design (paragraph 7.4), the mass and form of the building do not change, but the material, detailing, and landscape are changed. The age of the building shifts from post-war to more contemporary.
7.8 Comparing the proposed building design (paragraph 7.6) to the existing character of the CA (paragraph 7.2), it is still unique within the CA. On the one hand, the proposed building introduces timber cladding, a new material and texture in the CA that contrasts with the area's traditional smooth renders. On the other hand, there is an attempt to assimilate the character of the CA, especially in terms of the scale and proportion of the front elevation. The proposal would also bring a vacant building into use, which would help maintain the area's appearance compared to its current under maintained appearance.
7.9 Therefore, the newness, combined with a more terraced appearance, is considered to enhance the appearance of the Windsor Road Conservation Area.
Land Use Character Analysis 7.10 The Windsor Road Conservation area currently has mostly dwellinghouses and offices. These two uses share many characters: o consistent number of occupiers (large for offices and small for dwellinghouses) o small number of visitors o extended stay for occupiers (day for office and night for dwellinghouses) o attracting little public traffic besides from occupiers o activities are usually indoor and have no external noise impact (from typical activities) o low tolerance to noise and other nuisance
7.11 The existing use of the application site includes a shop. Its land use characters are: o small consistent number of regular occupiers o irregular number of visitors o short stay for visitors (shoppers) o attracting various amounts of public traffic o activities are usually indoor but may have an external noise impact (depending on the nature of the shop and the number of visitors) o more tolerable to external noise and other nuisance
7.12 The proposed church has the following land use characters: o infrequent but high volume of visitors in some periods o longer stays for typical visitors
==== PAGE 12 ====
23/01200/B Page 12 of 16
o usually only attracting specific groups within the local community o activities are usually indoor and have no external noise impact o low tolerance to noise and other nuisance
7.13 Comparing 7.11 to 7.9 and 7.10, dwellinghouses, offices, and churches all have a low tolerance to nuisance, especially noise. In the meantime, the proposed church use differs from residential and office use in terms of the frequency and volume of visitors and their staying time.
7.14 Given that residential use is a crucial part of the area's character, which has been mentioned in the Character Appraisal of the CA, the question is, would the introduction of a church, given the difference mentioned in 7.13, detract from the peaceful residential character of the area?
7.15 Reviewing the character analysis in 7.2-7.9, it is essential to note that the site is isolated in the CA regarding its location, appearance, and land use and only occupies a tiny area within the CA. Located at the edge of the CA, the traffic generated by the church mostly travels at the edge of the CA rather than through the CA. Therefore, it is considered that the newly introduced assembly use would not harm the residential and office land use character of the Windsor Road Conservation Area.
Conclusion to the Statutory Test 7.16 In conclusion, the proposed church enhances the Conservation Area's appearance and preserves the primary residential land use characters of the WRCA. Therefore, the proposal is considered to pass the principal test.
Elements of Assessment 7.17 The main elements in this assessment are: o Land Use Principle o Impact on the Design of the Building o Impact on the Character and Streetscene of the Area o Impact on the Character and Appearance of the Conservation Area o Impact on Traffic and Parking o Impact on Neighbouring Amenities o Equality and Inclusivity From this point of the report, unless specified, "area" is context-based and no longer refers only to the Windsor Road Conservation Area.
Land Use Principle 7.18 The site is within an area designated for Mixed Use within the Area Plan. Still, the Written Statement of the Area Plan does not specify whether a community facility is of acceptable use within the area. In the meantime, there are comments questioning the location choice of the church. Therefore, a brief inspection of the acceptability of a new church within the area is required here.
Land Use Principle - Area Plan 7.19 Paragraph 7.10-7.15 has established that the new church would not conflict with the immediate residential and office use. In addition, there are residential and office uses close to the site, as well as retail, tourism, and civic services in the wider area. There are also several churches within walking distance of the site. The peaceful existence of these churches is evidence for and not against a new church within the area.
7.20 The Area Plan states that any use within the area should not conflict with "offices, financial and professional services, food and drink and some residential uses". As mentioned in 7.10-7.14, the church shares some land use character with the immediate area. It is different
==== PAGE 13 ====
23/01200/B Page 13 of 16
in generated traffic, which is not a fundamental clash that would cause the church to obstruct or hinder the use of the other use unless the volume is too large (details in 7.30).
Land Use Principle - Alternatives and Loss of Existing Uses 7.21 Continuing with policy interpretation within paragraph 4.5, the comments have pointed out that there is no shortage of community facilities within Douglas City Centre. Therefore, this assessment only needs to consider the material impact of the proposed church at the application site. Other site choices, or the lack of community facilities in other areas, are not material planning considerations for this application.
7.22 The proposal leads to a loss of retail and office space. Given that the shops have been vacant for at least five years (officer's observation), it is considered that there is no demand for retail space this size within the area, so the loss of retail space does not hurt the vitality of Douglas City Centre. The office space is in use, but sufficient office space will still be available within the area (officer's observation) after the proposal. Therefore, it is considered that the loss of this office would not hurt the vitality of the business district.
7.23 In conclusion, the church does not conflict with the uses mentioned in Mixed Use Proposal 4 of the Area Plan for the East, and its land use principle is acceptable.
Design of the Building Itself 7.24 The existing building has some positive design features, such as: o reflecting the topography around the site with its height arrangement o respecting the level difference with nearby buildings by keeping the overall height low. o texture and material of the front boundary wall o fountain on the front boundary wall The site also has some negative features, such as the white plastic band around the flat roof, the deteriorating surface of the parking area and the disuse of the fountain on the front boundary wall.
7.25 The design requirement for reusing a building is usually not to worsen the building's existing design. The proposed design renovates the site, replaces paving with stone-paved decking and restores the fountain on the front boundary wall. In the meantime, the proposal reuses the building with no extensions, so it preserves the mass and size of the existing building as well as the good features mentioned in 7.21. The new front elevation replaces the existing protruding plastic flat roof with parapets, improving the front elevation's consistency.
7.26 In summary, the proposal goes beyond the design requirement for reusing a building and improves the design of the building.
Character and Streetscene of the Area 7.27 As mentioned in the principal test, the proposal is considered to enhance, or at least preserve, the character of the Conservation Area, which covers the north, west and southwest of the site. The design also does not harm the character of the southwest of the site, given that it contains many registered buildings that share a similar character with the Conservation Area.
7.28 The building's proportion is still modern compared to its Victorian terrace surroundings. However, the new front elevation breaks up the long front elevation into shorter vertical sections to fit better with the surrounding terraces. The introduction of timber cladding helps distinguish the age of renovation from the age of the existing building and that of the surrounding buildings.
7.29 The proposal would not harm the character east of the site given its utilitarianism multi- storey car park design. In summary, the proposal is considered to improve the character and streetscene of the area.
==== PAGE 14 ====
23/01200/B Page 14 of 16
Traffic and Parking 7.30 The site is in Douglas City Centre. The travel plan strategy provided by the applicant has demonstrated that the site is well-connected and near bus stops. Therefore, it is considered that the car traffic generated due to the proposal would be minor and would not significantly impact the traffic flow within the area.
7.31 Based on the existing floor space in 1.5, the proposed floor space in 2.3 and the parking requirement in 4.12: o Existing use should provide four off-road parking spaces for the offices. o Proposed use should provide approx. 34-55 off-road parking spaces for the church. This calculation for the proposed use considers the entire building for assembly and leisure use. 34 is calculated from net floor space, and 55 is calculated from the gross floor space.
7.32 Given that the site has no off-road parking provision, there is an increase in demand for 30-55 off-road parking spaces within the immediate area. However, given that the assessment in 7.30 meets the requirement in 4.13, the parking standards can be relaxed.
7.33 Douglas city centre has significant parking demand. The comments have also suggested there is a parking shortage within the area. In the meantime, the site is across the road from one of the biggest car parks in the city. Based on the parking survey provided by the applicant, there is a minimum provision of around 300 spaces during a regular week (no bank holidays), which is much more than the 55 spaces required. Although there is a parking charge, the church usually holds its service at a time when the parking charge is a minimum or free (at night or on Sundays). Therefore, the impact on the nearby parking provision is considered minor.
Cycling Provision and Condition 7.34 The proposal includes a cycle storage to promote cycling. It is considered necessary to condition the installation of the cycle storage before use to minimise potential car usage and parking demand.
Neighbouring Amenities 7.35 There is no change to the mass of the building, so there is no additional overbearing or overshadowing impact.
7.36 There is a new door on the north boundary. It faces a road and the front gardens of Mona Terrace. Therefore, there is no additional overlooking impact.
7.37 As discussed in 7.10-7.13, the main noise impact of the proposal is from the traffic it generated. Since Finch Road is a local road, the coming and going of around 55 cars before and after services, to and from the Chester Road Car Park, is not considered to create much more noise than that caused by exiting traffic. Therefore, the proposal will unlikely negatively impact the surrounding area's amenities.
Equality and Inclusivity 7.38 The proposal improves disability access to the site and the building, which is considered to improve equality of accessing community facilities.
7.39 Some comments argue that churches exclude people outside their congregations from using their buildings, reducing equality and inclusivity within the community. This argument is wrong. Most community facilities aim to help people with certain characters (such as believing in a religion), interests or needs (such as prayer). Just because a building may not satisfy the needs of every resident within a community does not mean it excludes or discriminates against people who are not interested in or need their services.
==== PAGE 15 ====
23/01200/B Page 15 of 16
7.40 Continuing with 4.5, it is up to the community to propose facilities appropriate to their needs. In this application, even the church serves only one group within the community, it is still a reflection of a need within the community. The provision of such service improves inclusivity, not decreasing it.
7.41 There are also comments arguing that the presence of a new church would infringe on the beliefs of others because there are community members who disagree with certain beliefs within Christianity.
7.42 Firstly, belief and how people act on their beliefs (religious or otherwise) is beyond a proposal's land use and design impact and is usually not a material planning consideration.
7.43 Secondly, a religious building alone only represents the fact that people practice such religion within an area. Although certain religious practices can mount to development, these would be subject to planning regulations, including their impacts on equality and inclusivity of the community, such as the UK planning appeal case in 5.9. However, in this application, no element within the development (including design) would mount such concern.
7.44 Next, establishing places of worship is essential to religious freedom. Even though the need for such places is not part of religious freedom (such as the UK planning appeal case in 5.8), the UK planning appeal in 5.7 has pointed out that the reason for refusing such an application would need to be based on strong material considerations or the decision could still risk violating freedom of religion. As 7.1-7.38 has discussed in this assessment, there is no material reason to recommend such refusal, so the application should be recommended for approval.
7.45 Lastly, inclusivity is a material consideration, the same as the duty to protect freedom of religion and prevent discrimination, as protected by the Human Rights Act. Given both qualified rights and not absolute rights, a balance must be struck between them based on the broader public interest. This proposal shows the presence of religion and, by itself, does not impose the ideology on other people or create a sense of "declamatory and proselytising environment in the vicinity to the exclusion and discomfort of those who might wish to follow a different religion or to pursue a non-religious way of life." Therefore, the proposal expresses freedom of religion and does not promote discrimination by the building itself.
8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 The proposal is considered to: o renovate an underused building to provide a community facility required by residents. o improve the design of the existing building and the streetscene. o enhance the appearance of the Conservation Area and preserve its character. o Although lacking off-road parking, even after relaxing the parking standards due to its town centre location, it is still supplemented by sufficient spaces in the Chester Road public car park. o have no negative impact on the amenities of the adjacent area.
Therefore, the application is considered to comply with: o Mixed Use Proposal 4 of the Area Plan for the East, o Strategic Policy 1(a), 4(a), General Policy 2, Environment Policy 35, 42, 43, Community Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan o Planning Policy Statement 1/01 and is recommended for an approval, subject to the conditions.
9.0 INTEREST 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);
==== PAGE 16 ====
23/01200/B Page 16 of 16
(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 which 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. __
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to that body by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.
Decision Made : ...Permitted... Committee Meeting Date:...08.07.2024
Signed :...P SHEN... Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See below
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal