Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
15/00773/B
Page 1 of 6
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 15/00773/B Applicant : Manndraggon Ltd Proposal : Alterations including new shop frontage, doorway, installation of Juliet balconies and dormers, erection of extension to provide cold store, conversion of Nos. 15 basement from living accommodation to provide wine cellar and staff room, and ground floor from retail to extend existing restaurant and creation of a hall and reception to service existing upper floor apartments Site Address : 14 & 15 North Quay Douglas Isle Of Man IM1 4LE
Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken : 16.09.2015 Site Visit : 16.09.2015 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE
1.1 The application site is 14 and 15 North Quay, Douglas, along with their associated rear yard areas, as well as a short expanse of highway to the front that is within ownership of the Department of Infrastructure.
1.2 Number 14 is currently operated as a restaurant, "14North". An outdoor seating area is situated to the front of both units, associated with the restaurant. Number 15, meanwhile, is vacant, but was previously a shop.
1.3 There are one-bed apartments on each of the three floors above the shop unit at no.15, and what appears to be a further unit in the basement below. Above no.14, there is an extension of the restaurant on the first floor and what appears to be unused space on the second and third floors - although a kitchen and bathroom are shown on the second floor these are not labelled in any way. In its basement there are a pair of bathrooms and what appear to be further storage areas.
1.4 The two properties sit within group of buildings, two of which to the west are of very similar design. The building including nos.12-15 North Quay inclusive has similarity in form, height and design - no.12 has a pitched dormer window while the remaining three all have smaller, flat-roofed examples. Looking more closely, the shallow reveal of the windows in no.12, along with its larger mass to the rear in addition to the aforementioned dormer, demonstrate that no.12 is a later addition to the whole, and indeed was only granted approval in 2009. However, it does 'read' as being part of this fairly well-defined frontage provided of this short terrace.
1.5 The site is fully within the Douglas (North Quay) Conservation Area.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL
2.1 Full planning approval is sought for a number of alterations to the internal arrangement of the building, along with some further changes to the exterior at ground floor and roof level. The internal alterations do not require planning approval, and it is noted that the main outcome will be
==== PAGE 2 ====
15/00773/B
Page 2 of 6
the expansion sideways of the existing restaurant at ground level from no.14 to no.15 North Quay. There will also be a rearrangement of the existing residential accommodation in both buildings, but this will not alter the number of residential units in the buildings overall.
2.2 The external alterations proposed would result in the removal of the existing, flat-roofed dormer windows and their replacement with pitched roof versions (more or less identical to that on no.12 North Quay) that would cut into the eaves slightly. The dormer windows would have slate roofs.
2.3 On the two floors below, replacement windows of hardwood timber sliding sash, without glazing bars, would be installed. These would match the opening style of the lights proposed for the dormer window.
2.4 At the ground floor, the existing shopfront to no.15 North Quay would be removed and replaced with doors and windows not dissimilar in form and detailing to those found in no.14; one door would provide access to the restaurant, while the other would provide a new access to the apartments above. The existing frontage to no.14 would be replaced in its entirety albeit that there would be a limited change in form overall: the existing door would be replaced with a fourth window and frame below. The signage would be stretched across the full frontage, with a slight break for a new sign above the residential apartments' access door, while the existing awning would also be replaced, again to run the full length of the frontage.
2.5 The whole building would be painted a teal colour, although this would not in itself require planning approval.
2.6 In addition, a change is proposed to the arrangement of the seating area already approved. This would see the position of the tables moved from their current set-up of two sets of four tables to one set of six tables and another set of two tables.
2.7 The application has been the subject of discussions between the Department and agent, and amended drawings as well as a Design Statement have been received and circulated to all parties.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY
3.1 The application site and it surroundings have been the subject of a number of planning applications, but only one of these is considered specifically material to the determination of the current proposal: PA 14/00306/C sought and gained approval for the outdoor seating area. This was determined by the Council of Ministers as the Planning & Building Control team was within the Department of Infrastructure, the owner of the land, at the time that application was submitted.
3.2 It is worth noting that the apartments created at no.15 North Quay were done so under PA 06/00369/B, which created three apartments, made alterations to the existing shop and shop front to include the basement as retail, an erection of a rear lobby extension and also the installation of a rear roof dormer. The building built at no.12 North Quay was approved at appeal under PA 09/00945/B.
4.0 PLANNING POLICY
4.1 The site is within a wider area zoned for Town Centre uses on Map No.1 (Central Area) of the Douglas Local Plan Order (1998); no Written Statement accompanies the Douglas Local Plan. As the site is also within the Douglas (North Quay) Conservation Area, there are two policies of specific relevance within the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2007): General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 35.
==== PAGE 3 ====
15/00773/B
Page 3 of 6
4.2 General Policy 2 states, in part: "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:
(b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways."
4.3 Environment Policy 35 states: "Within Conservation Areas, the Department will permit only development which would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Area, and will ensure that the special features contributing to the character and quality are protected against inappropriate development".
4.4 Transport Policy 7, in conjunction with Appendix 7 of the Strategic Plan, outline the parking requirements for commercial premises - restaurants are not specifically mentioned. As a guide, town centre shops require parking for service vehicle use only.
4.5 In addition, Planning Circular 1/98: The Alteration and Replacement of Windows sets down the policies in respect of the alteration or replacement of windows in Conservation Areas. Part 6, Category b) Buildings in Conservation Areas states:
"If the original windows are in place they should preferably be repaired. If repair is impracticable, replacement windows which would be readily visible from a public thoroughfare MUST HAVE THE SAME method of opening as the originals. Whatever the material used in their construction, the windows MUST HAVE THE SAME pattern and section of glazing bars and the same frame sections as the original windows.
"Windows not readily visible from a public thoroughfare must have the same or similar pattern of glazing bars as the originals, but not necessarily the original method of opening, whatever the material used in the construction."
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS
5.1 Highway Services within the Department of Infrastructure offered no objection to the proposal on 30.10.2015, subject to the imposition of the following condition:
"The outdoor seating area must comply with the conditions imposed for the outside seating area of 14 North Quay and allow pedestrians 2m of width between the edge of the seating area and the highway."
6.0 ASSESSMENT
6.1 The primary issues to take account of are the extent to which the proposal would (a) preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area, and (b) impact on highways safety in view of the change to the outdoor seating area proposed.
The impact on the Conservation Area
6.2 Although perhaps not envisaged when the Douglas (North Quay) Conservation Area was designated in 1990, this part of North Quay is characterised as offering a vibrant, almost cosmopolitan, feel by virtue of the strong night-time economy provided in the area. A number of
==== PAGE 4 ====
15/00773/B
Page 4 of 6
restaurants and public houses are found here, and a number of these have outdoor seating areas. It is therefore considered that the proposed expansion of the restaurant into the adjoining property reflects this burgeoning vitality and is to be encouraged, subject to being acceptable in all other relevant considerations.
6.3 In terms of the physical alterations proposed, a number of these are considered acceptable in both principle and detail. The proposed replacement windows meet the requirements of the relevant Circular and the use of timber frames is particularly welcomed. To the ground floor, the rearrangement of the premises' frontages would bring a sense of uniformity to the two units in a manner that would enhance the existing visual impression, especially given the somewhat tired appearance of the ground floor at no.15.
6.4 The two properties sit within a short terrace and so there could be an argument that bringing two of the units together (as opposed to retaining the existing separation in both visual and usage terms) might have a negative effect on the character and appearance of the terrace as a whole. This concern is further highlighted through the proposed position of the dormers, which would sit in a different position to those of the dormer units found currently on the terrace - within the roofspace, rather than within the eaves. The agent has made the argument that this, along with a uniform colour, window spacing and the chimney arrangement on the terrace, would result in nos.14 and 15 being a "harmonious whole which reads as a single building". While the argument is understood, it is arguable as to whether or not this represents a 'preservation' or 'enhancement' of the Conservation Area's special character or appearance.
6.5 It is not considered that the proposal could be judged a 'preservation'. Too many changes are proposed such that the two properties would sit quite clearly apart from it, to an extent that the changes overall would result in a clearer separation between 14 and 15 North Quay from 12 and 13 North Quay than is currently the case. In this, the argument of the agent in support / explanation of the proposal is understood. While the proposal would result in a more defined separation of the terrace than is currently the case, this separation does exist to a degree at present and the slight extension of this separation must be considered against the context of the acceptability of the collective nature of the individual changes proposed.
6.6 The loss of the existing dormers is not in itself lamented, The dormer windows proposed replicate the design features and form of the successfully modest dormer window at 12 North Quay, and their different position within the front elevation is not considered to be sufficient reason to object to the application overall.
6.7 Additionally, the proposed ground floor arrangement proposed is considered to bring a welcome 'cleanness' in design to the front elevation while retaining some key and traditional details in terms of the decorative beading and timber material.
6.8 Moreover, it is noted that the existing flats in 15 North Quay are not built to adequate Building Regulations standards, and the proposal would provide the only cost-effective method for achieving the appropriate compliance. This is considered to be a material consideration in favour of the application, which reflects a general intention on behalf of the applicant to invest in the property (and their business) overall.
6.9 The proposal overall would retain the simplistic form and mass of the building, which identify it as likely being merchants' housing when originally built. The initial design for the building sought to super-impose a warehouse aesthetic over this form, would have resulted in a discordant and somewhat schizophrenic outcome that would have very likely resulted in harm to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The more subtle approach now proposed better recognises the importance of the nature of the site and what kind of development is most appropriate for its evolution now. The physical works proposed would, overall and on balance, marginally enhance the appearance of the Conservation Area and are therefore considered to comply with Environment Policy 35.
==== PAGE 5 ====
15/00773/B
Page 5 of 6
Highway safety
6.10 Turning to highway safety matters, it is noted that Highway Services have not objected subject to a condition. Their recommended wording is inappropriate for a condition, and in any case does not reflect a specific condition attached previously here. A condition preventing the seating area from expanding further beyond that shown on the submitted plans would be appropriate to apply for reasons of completeness and clarity.
Other matters
6.11 Another matter that was raised with the agent early on was the possibly uncomfortable relationship between the restaurant and residential uses. A similar concern was raised with respect to a wine bar opened further along the Quay, but the agent felt that this was a matter for Building Regulations rather than Planning.
7.0 RECOMMENDATION
7.1 It is recommended that the application be approved, subject to conditions limiting the time by which the works have to commence and also restricting the outdoor seating area.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS
8.1 7.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested; (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material, in this case, Department of Infrastructure Highway Services and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
With effect from 1 June 2015, the Transfer of Planning & Building Control Functions Order 2015 amends the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 to give effect to the meaning of the word 'Department' to be the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture unless otherwise directed by that Order.
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 09.11.2015
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.
==== PAGE 6 ====
15/00773/B
Page 6 of 6
Reason: To comply with article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 2. The external seating area shall only be laid out as shown on approved plan P/10-02 Rev B, and at all times shall be more than 2 metres from the vehicular carriageway.
Reason: In the interest of highway safety.
The development hereby approved relates to the plans carrying the reference numbers P/10-100 and P/10-01, date-stamped as having been received 13th July 2015, and P/10-02 Rev B, date- stamped as having been received 22nd October 2015.
I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Senior Planning Officer in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.
Decision Made : Permitted
Date: 10.11.2015
Determining officer
Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett
Senior Planning Officer
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