Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
20/01251/B Page 1 of 11
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 20/01251/B Applicant : Mrs Linzi Michelle Brown Proposal : Side extension to provide additional dance area space Site Address : The Studio Former Christian Bretheren Church Switzerland Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 4NG
Principal Planner: Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken : 01.12.2020 Site Visit : 01.12.2020 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 08.03.2021 __
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. Prior to the construction of the extension, a scheme for the introduction of sound insulation of the new accommodation hereby approved must be approved in writing by the Department and the development undertaken in accordance with the approved details. The scheme must address the potential for noise nuisance in Highgrove Mansions and include means of reducing this potential issue.
Reason: to ensure that the development accords with Environment Policy 22 and General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan.
C 3. No customer shall remain in the building outside of the hours of 08:30 hrs to 21:00 hrs on any day.
Reason: In order to protect local residents' amenities in terms of noise or any other disturbance that may arise from additional classes. This condition does not restrict the building being accessed by staff and is not intended to restrict the carrying out of related activities (such as cleaning) at other times
C 4. Prior to the use of the approved extension there must be approved by the Department and implemented in full a scheme showing the omission of space nine and details of the provision of a bicycle parking stand. The development must be undertaken in accordance with these details and the parking and bicycle stand must be retained as such thereafter.
==== PAGE 2 ====
20/01251/B Page 2 of 11
Reason: to ensure that the development has sufficient car parking and supports sustainable travel.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The development is considered to accord with General Policy 2, Environment Policy 22 and Transport Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to the location plan, drawings SM20/513/2, SM20/513/3, EX01, all received on 26th October, 2020 and P3 dated 18th January, 2021. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties 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 and are not mentioned in Article 4(2):
1, 4 and 8, Highgrove Mansions as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status.
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:
Department of Home Affairs Chief Fire Officer and Architectural Liaison Officer __
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO THE NUMBER OF OBJECTIONS FROM PERSONS WHO ARE RECOMMENDED TO BE AFFORDED INTERESTED PERSON STATUS
THE SITE 1.1 The application site is a former place of worship known as the Gospel Hall/Christian Bretheren Church on Switzerland Road in Douglas. The property has been used as a dance studio for the past 2 years. Included within the site are both the building and also the land around it, which is set out as hardstanding. The site is on the inside of a hairpin bend at the end of Switzerland Road, the access to which is also on that hairpin. The highway very quickly degenerates into a track after the application site, which goes on to provide pedestrian access to the office uses off Victoria Road above.
1.2 The other active uses in the area are residential, but there is also the old chair lift which runs alongside the site while on the Promenade is a row of shop units. Highgrove Mansions - an apartment building - is adjacent the site to the south west while the other residential dwellings in the area are fairly well removed from the site. Highgrove Mansions sits higher and is a taller building than the application site and building the access to which is just around the corner from the access to the application site.
1.3 Switzerland Road is wide enough to accommodate two way traffic although there are double yellow lines on the application site side of the road, allowing parking on the seaward side which reduces the width of the road in places to only sufficient for one vehicle at a time to pass a parked vehicle.
1.4 The existing building has an internal floor area of 54 sq m of uninterrupted space which is used as the dance studio with a further 21 sq m which accommodates the entrance lobby, kitchen, office and toilets.
==== PAGE 3 ====
20/01251/B Page 3 of 11
1.5 The site was visited the site on 01.01.12 to see and hear how the use is functioning. Three cars intended for the site drove past the entrance, turned then parked outside the site. Two vehicles turned in the lane opposite, one of which parked there and the other parked on the road to the south. Four vehicles drove straight into the site and parked, one coming straight back out when the passenger had alighted. One vehicle turned in the lane then parked in the middle of the road whilst the passengers alighted. There were approximately six free parking spaces at the time on Switzerland Road, one of which was used by a patron during the time.
1.6 At the time of the visit, there were two trade vans parked near the entrance to Highgrove Mansions and two vehicles parked on the road alongside with a further vehicle parked uphill of the entrance next to a skip. There were two staff vehicles parked on the application site in the car park during the time.
1.7 A number of people coming in and the music playing within the building was audible from outside the building although this was not particularly noisy and there was vehicular traffic unassociated with the site moving around more noisily. The sounds from within the building (music and voices) were more prominent when the front door was open when people were coming in and out.
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the extension of the premises. The extension will provide an additional dance studio area of 8.3m by 6m, two stores 3.7m by 1.3m and 2.6m by 2.7m, stairs and a toilet. The dance studio will be provided on the first floor above a mostly open ground floor area of 7m by 5,8m with a vehicular opening of 4.7m. The proposed site plan shows three parking spaces within and in front of the proposed extension and six further spaces to the side of the existing building. Each space is 5.5m by 2.5m.
2.2 The proposed extension will take the form of a pitched roofed, two storey building which is attached to the existing building which has a roof pitched at 40 degrees whereas the proposed building roof is pitched at 36 degrees. The ground floor will be finished in what looked like brickwork (there is no annotation on the drawing) and the first floor render with no windows in the side at first floor level but a large window in the front shaped to match the shape of this gable. At the rear there is to be a window in the store at ground floor level although there are no rear or seaward side elevations as proposed.
2.3 The applicant provides supporting information explaining that Highgrove Mansions overlook the application property and they do not consider that their proposal will overlook Highgrove Mansions or have an overbearing impact. They provide photographs of the car park during times when the studio is operational and state that using the Strategic Plan parking standards of 1 space per 15 sq m gross floor space excluding the ground floor hall, toilet and store, the proposal complies with the requirement for 9 spaces. They advise that the Department and DoI do not let business operators or households utilise the public highway as dedicated car parking spaces however as Switzerland Road is a cul de sac and has no passing traffic there is sufficient space to accommodate parked vehicles for a limited amount of time. They suggest that if DoI were so inclined they could create a disc parking zone along this section of Switzerland Road to discourage long term parking although this does not seem to happen at the lower end of the road and there are few cars parked on the road on a daily basis and those that are appear to be from people using the surrounding roads for exercise. If a vehicle is taxed and insured it should be able to be parked here for a limited time as with other parts of Douglas.
2.4 In terms of impact on Highgrove Mansions, the proposed extension will obscure eight existing windows which currently face towards this adjacent building which will help reduce possible noise impact and sound deadening measures could be introduced to the structure should the extension be acceptable. They advise that they have had a new, fully insulated back door fitted on the building to help reduce noise and have had no complaints. They advise that they operate with the approved hours and encourage drop off and pick up for children of age to be left and have
==== PAGE 4 ====
20/01251/B Page 4 of 11
introduced breaks in the schedule to give 15 minutes in between lessons for the current clients to leave before the new ones arrive. They suggest that over 80% of the students are dropped off and collected later with only students that are not of age to be left have parents accompanying them. What happens in practice is that those parents who stay are happy for their vehicles to be blocked in so they can fit more vehicles in that the 7 spaces which were required in the original application and the 9 which are required by the proposed extension.
2.5 They suggest that the approved hours will remain in place - 0830 - 2100hrs on any day, the staffing levels remain the same (3) who all drive and arrive and leave at the same time. They state that they currently have air conditioning units and further units "would be installed upon permission being granted".
2.6 Further information has been sought (02.12.20) to obtain rear and side elevations and an indication of the position of Highgrove Mansions so that the impact on the windows in the side gable of this property may be established. This information was received on 18th January, 2021 with the accompanying explanation of what the plans depict, having been received on 29.01.21 and this information was circulated for comments until 5th March, 2021. This information includes the side elevation (south west) and the north eastern elevation with Highgrove Mansions imposed upon it (drawing P3).
PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The hall was purpose-built following the grant of planning approval in 1986 under PA 86/01298/B.
15/00365/C 3.2 In 2015 approval was given for the change of use of the building to a 'male grooming salon' under PA 15/00365/C. The application was approved subject to a condition limiting the use to that use specifically. No physical changes were proposed to the building. The business that submitted that application subsequently found premises within Douglas town centre and so the approval, while extant, remains unimplemented.
17/00851/C 3.3 In 2017 approval was given for Change of Use to a dance studio (17/00851/C). The description of that development (as set out in the Case Officer's Report) is quoted below for ease of reference.
"3.1 A change of use is now sought to enable the building to be used as a dance studio. The applicant has been in pre-application discussions with officers with regards finding a premises for this use, and has been guided away from industrial estates owing to the potential highway safety issues arising from the relationship between potentially large numbers of children and commercial vehicle movements.
3.2 The applicant notes that there are 25 parking spaces within the site, which means there will be no congestion in terms of footfall or vehicles. The estate agent acting on behalf of the applicant has stated that the present church has dwindling numbers and it being retained for this use is unlikely to be feasible. Roughly 30 students are expected to attend over the course of an evening, which would run to roughly three and a half hours. Most students would be dropped off and collected. Classes are proposed to be run on the following days / times:
o Tuesdays (4pm to 7:30pm) o Wednesdays (4pm to 8pm) o Thursdays (4pm to 8pm), and o Saturdays (9am to 10am).
Exams for progression are also held, but this would be on a bi-annual basis. There are currently three members of staff that work on different evenings. There is the possibility of placing a traffic mirror to assist visibility for drivers, while the applicant also intends to paint white lines for car
==== PAGE 5 ====
20/01251/B Page 5 of 11
parking spaces. The applicant notes that from her own tests, the music she would use cannot be heard outside of the building but that further sound-proofing would be carried out if necessary.
3.3 The applicant wishes to emphasise that the dance school is small, and offers fun classes aimed at improving fitness and learning for small children. It is a club that is involved in community events and charity fundraisers and having a place for people to come that engages in this way is great for the community".
3.4 Planning approval was granted subject to two conditions (in addition to the standard 4 year commencement condition). One condition was that the use was limited to a dance studio (for avoidance of doubt) and the other was as set out below.
"Unless otherwise agreed in advance in writing with the Department, no customers shall remain in the building outside the following days and hours: o Tuesdays - 3:30pm to 8:00pm; o Wednesdays - 3:30pm to 8:30pm; o Thursdays - 3:30pm to 8:30pm, and o Saturdays - 8:30am to 10:30am.
Reason: In the interest of protecting local residents' amenity in terms of any noise or other disturbance that may arise from additional classes being held on other days or at different times"
3.5 The Case Officer Report noted:
"This is also a facility that is likely to have clear benefits to children and the wider community. It is a safe and relatively quiet area in which to locate such a business and one that is far better than the other alternatives that the applicant has found available previously. It is not considered that many better such sites as this would exist and, in view of the continued availability of the property, it is also not judged appropriate to protect this use from loss as per the requirements of Community Policy 3".
18/00628/B 3.6 This application proposed to remove condition 3 of the previous approval and was approved on appeal.
3.7 The inspector considering the appeal made the following comments which are considered relevant to the consideration of the current application:
"34. As indicated by PBCD, the principle of the use of the site as a 'dance studio' has been established by the previous approval which has been implemented. Also, although this is predominantly a residential area the building was initially built as a place of worship and prior to the 'dance studio' use it was granted approval as a hairdressing salon. Thus, subject to compliance with Policy GP2, the use of the building as a 'dance studio' (without complying with condition 3 of the original approval), is acceptable in principle.
Clearly the 'dance studio' use has resulted in what the Appellant and other residents of Highgrove Mansions consider to be unacceptable levels of noise and disturbance. Unfortunately no sound level tests have been carried out by the Applicant, the Appellant or DEFA (Environmental Health). If there had been such tests carried out by noise experts it would have assisted in reaching an objective view on the noise levels generated by the use.
It is also clear from the evidence that the noise generated appeared to be sufficient for both DEFA EH and the IOMC to recommend some noise suppression measures to be carried out. In particular DEFA had given advice to the applicant to keep all activity within the hall; to keep the windows and fire exit closed during classes; to provide sound deadening material within the window reveals (single glazed windows) or to fit double/triple sound proofing windows; to acquire air conditioning units to avoid the need to open the windows or doors and to consider installing
==== PAGE 6 ====
20/01251/B Page 6 of 11
noise attenuating/sound deadening drapes panels and other sound absorbing materials within the hall.
Having visited the premises and having stood on two of the nearest balconies of Highgrove Mansions, I consider that the measures carried out in terms of soundproofing are not sufficient to ensure a reasonable aural environment for the nearest residents. The single glazed windows to the east elevation were not boarded or insulated; the fans will have no effect in terms of air conditioning (they simply move air around) and there were no other noise attenuating/sound deadening drapes, panels, or other sound absorbing materials to the walls or ceiling of the main studio space.
Having noted the basic construction of the building, I consider that the sound attenuating measures in place do not go far enough to ensure a reasonable aural environment externally and particularly with regard to the nearest apartments. At present, therefore, and despite some mitigation works having been carried out, in terms of the effect on residential amenity I consider that the extended hours of operation (that is, without condition No 3) is likely to result in an increase in noise over and above the present authorised situation.
However, having reached that conclusion on this issue, I consider that the imposition of appropriate conditions would be sufficient to overcome the harm identified. The appellant's latest comments following my request for further information (21 November 2018) reinforces my view that the conditions are appropriate and necessary and particularly those relating to air-conditioning and additional sound-proofing. See below under 'Conditions'.
As far as highway safety and congestion is concerned, I have seen the appellant's submitted photographs. However, I do not do not consider that the removal of condition 3 will have any significant material effect over and above the current situation. Although removal of the condition would increase the hours of operation, having been driven (and walked) up and down the road several times, any increase in congestion would, in my view, be minimal. It would appear that most pupils are dropped off and picked up and although these activities obviously overlap the situation could well have been worse when many worshippers had arrived and left at roughly the same time.
Again PBCD and DIHS do not raise any specific concerns regarding highway safety or congestion and I agree with PBCD that the advice of consultees should be relied upon. I also agree with the views that the applicant can only be expected to make it as easy as possible for people to choose to park in the car park; that it is not realistic to expect customers being prevented from legally parking their cars on the highway and that such a condition is likely to be unenforceable'.
I agree with the ALO that this is a good location for the business and that by having a capable guardian and frequent users, any anti-social behaviour problems in the area should be minimised and that this should reduce fear of crime for all living in this community.
The following conditions were recommended and applied to the approval granted on appeal:
Reason: Any materially different uses may have different impacts that will require fresh assessment as to their impact on the living conditions of neighbours.
==== PAGE 7 ====
20/01251/B Page 7 of 11
Reason: To maximise the use of the car park and to discourage additional on-street parking to benefit other users of the public highway, albeit with spaces which may be below the current standards as set out in the Manual for Manx Roads.
Reason: To enable the building to be ventilated without the need to open doors or windows and so to reduce the potential noise impact of the use of the building on nearby residential properties.
Reason: To minimise the potential noise impact of the use of the building on nearby residential properties.
Reason: In order to protect local residents' amenities in terms of noise or any other disturbance that may arise from additional classes. This condition does not restrict the building being accessed by staff and is not intended to restrict the carrying out of related activities (such as cleaning) at other times."
3.8 The applicant has undertaken some noise insulation work including a new rear door in March 2020, an air conditioning unit installed and new pvc double glazed windows installed to all 16 windows between February and March 2019 and further sound proofing installation in the 6 windows facing Highgrove Mansions. They advise that the car park is marked out, however needs re-painting every few months as the lines come off with the gravel and this was due to be done this month.
4.0 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 4.1 In broad terms, the Strategic Plan (2016) directs development in accordance with a settlement hierarchy which puts most emphasis on Douglas for employment and services (Spatial Policies 1 - 7).
4.2 The site and adjacent housing is designated on the Area Plan for the East (2020) as Mixed Use.
4.3 General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan (2016) sets out general standards of development including considering issues such as not adversely affecting the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality (part g), there being adequate parking (part h), not having an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flow (part i) and taking account of community safety and security (part m).
4.4 Environment Policy 22 also applies, which indicates that development will not be permitted which would unacceptably harm the amenity of nearby properties in terms of noise pollution.
4.5 Transport Policy 4 requires that the highways serving a proposed development are capable of satisfactorily accommodating the traffic from the proposed works.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS
==== PAGE 8 ====
20/01251/B Page 8 of 11
A summary of the representations is set out below. The full response can be viewed on the website.
5.1 Douglas Borough Council have no objection (17.11.20).
5.2 Highway Services note the location of the site and where the majority of the movements of traffic are drop off and pick up with little customer/ parent parking onl site. They consider that there will be adequate public road width available for any turning movements to allow traffic to move back down the hill. They note that the proposal is likely to result in additional traffic ad note that when classes are back to back there may be congestion along the lower length of Switzerland Road due to its narrowness and on-street parking although they consider this to be relatively short lived and causing little disturbance or inconvenience. They consider that there is little vehicle and pedestrian conflict movement and where it does occur is unlikely to cause significant road safety concerns. The additional floor area will create additional traffic which could potentially impact on network efficiency from further congestion at the lower end of Switzerland Road could raise residential amenity issues such as increased noise from more vehicles and associated manoeuvres. They note that the proposal includes nine parking spaes which accords with the minimum Strategic Plan requirement of one space per 15 sq m gross floor space although one of the spaces is impractical and unacceptable as it wouldrestrict access to the new covered spaces. However, the loss of this one space is considered acceptable given that most traffic is drop off and pick up. They recommend the provision of bicycle parking at a ratio of one space per 50 sq m for visitors and one per five employees and they should be positioned near the the entrance and overlooked and the provision of electric vehicle charging point at 10% of total parking spaces which would both help achieve sustainable travel and low emission goals. They raise no objection subject to conditions relating to the drawings, the omission of space nine and details of the provision of a bicycle parking stand (07.12.20).
5.3 Architectural Liaison Officer of Department of Home Affairs advises that other than a complaint in 2018 that a vehicle was parked such that it blocked the entrance to Highgrove Mansions, there have been no complaints about noise, nuisance and parking on Switzerland Road to the police (03.12.20).
5.4 Isle of Man Fire and Rescue, part of Department of Home Affairs, confirm that even though there were parked cars all the way up Switzerland Road, they managed to get an applicant up and back down and as long as parking provisions are maintained, they would have no objection to this application (04.12.20).
5.5 8, Highgrove Mansions 5.5.1 The occupants of 8, Highgrove Mansions object as there has not been any yellow notice displayed outside the property and no plans have been included in the application so they cannot comment. None of the pictures have any date stamps so they cannot be sure when they were taken and no mention is made of any additional provision for car parking, only that none will be lost. They consider that the additional traffic will place an extra strain on the road and increase congestion having an adverse effect on residents and possible access by emergency services. They do not believe that the application has followed the correct procedure and hope that this is not done as the applicant is a friend of an MHK (19.11.20).
5.5.2 They comment further on 30.11.20 that they have now seen the plans and feel that the proposal is unsightly and will cause extra congestion on the narrow road with limited turning space. They advise that on a number of occasions they have had to wait to drive into their property as parents park in front of their property waiting for classes to finish. They reiterate the concern about access for emergency vehicles.
5.6 4, Highgrove Mansions 5.6.1 The occupants of 4, Highgrove Mansions note that there are no drawings of the proposed construction and nothing that indicates the heights or relativity to the adjacent building. They state that for the second time this year they have written to the Department concerning parking around
==== PAGE 9 ====
20/01251/B Page 9 of 11
the area surrounding the site as they have had to deal with overspill onto the public highway and that the apartment building accommodates 8 apartments but has only 5 surface level parking spaces. When they moved into the property on 01.10.19 they experienced congestion around the entrance to their apartment block and often had nowhere to park. They are now seeing all day parking including overnight, of commercial vehicles along the right hand side of Switzerland Road and the entrance to the apartments is often used as a turning bay. They object to the application on road safety grounds as Switzerland Road is no longer being used for residents' parking only and they have experienced a number of local delivery companies that refuse to deliver to their property due to the restrictions caused by parked traffic. They also note that the road is in a poor state of repair which is shown in the submitted photographs and comment that the restrictions on the road also affect emergency vehicle access, noting that previously the Fire Service has previously stated that the large fire tender would not be mobilised in the case of a fire.
5.6.2 They comment further on 02.12.20 having seen the plans, that the size of the bulding will be larger than the existing and will reduce the distance between the property and the flats. They have not complained about noise but the studio is by no means silent and can be heard along with vibration on certain occasions. An increase in noise may be possible as the building will be closer to their apartment. They are concerned at the absence of details on windows facing their property and any future change of use. They comment on the condition of Switzerland Road which can only be attributed to the volume of traffic and they feel that as the first they heard of the application was through a local news article, that the application has not been administered properly and is already in favour of the applicant.
5.6.3 They comment again on 12.02.21 stating that the new plan offers no new information on the proximity of the new building to their apartment building and it is obvious that the extension will bring the new activities closer to their property and they are not persuaded that their concerns about noise have been addressed and there are no details of any mitigation in the application. They note that the fire engine came up Switzerland Road when the street was more or less empty and on the following day they considered calling the police as the parking situation was so bad with a large van parked in the turning area and residents from lower down the street could not turn and were stuck in their entrance.
5.7 1, Highgrove Mansions 5.7.1 The owner of 1, Highgrove Mansions object to the applicant on the basis that the appearance of the extension looks contrived and unsightly and would be better constructed above the existing studio. They consider that there is no increase in on site parking although use will almost double and the additional parking required will take place on the highway turning in front of their property and where children often have to cross the road to get to the application premises. They are concerned about the construction traffic and the lack of forward visibility going down hill involving vehicles mounting the pavement. They note that there is always water coming down from the site onto the footpath which can made the use of the footpath dangerous. (02.12.20).
ASSESSMENT 6.1 As with the previous applications, the key planning issues raised by the proposed development are considered to be:
Provision of parking and highway safety (including access for emergency services) (GP2 and TP4)
6.2 The comments in relation to procedural issues are not considered to be material planning considerations:
==== PAGE 10 ====
20/01251/B Page 10 of 11
6.3 The principle of the use of the site as a Dance Studio has been established by the previous approval which has been implemented.
6.4 The concerns raised by local residents are noted. However, as was noted in the previous applications, the relatively central location within Douglas (close to a variety of uses, including non-residential) the broad approach of the Strategic Plan (and the proposed zoning within the Draft Area Plan for the East) and the previous use of the site as a Church suggest an expectation that the site would be promoted for an active use which could be expected to have some level of impact on nearby properties. Indeed, the level of 'tranquillity' that could reasonably be expected in such a location could be argued to be lower than in other more remote and less built up areas.
6.5 The Architectural Liaison Officer advises of only one complaint about a vehicle parking complaint in 2018. Environmental Health were also contacted to see if there had been any complaints about noise and no response has been received. None of the objectors have confirmed that they have made any formal complaints during the time that the dance studio has been operational. The applicant has advised that they are willing to introduce more sound deadening measures should planning approval be granted. Details of this can be sought and controlled by condition should the application be approved. The extension is likely to reduce any noise travelling towards Highgrove Mansions as the existing windows in the north western elevation will have the new extension between them and the adjacent dwelling and the new building will benefit from more thermally and accoustically constructed walling as it is much newer than the existing building and will have to accord with higher levels of construction through the Building Regulations.
6.6 The concerns in relation to highways and parking are noted. Again, the advice of consultees is relied upon and in particular the comments of Highway Services and the Fire and Rescue Service, neither of whom object to the application. Indeed, observation of traffic movements on site demonstrate that indeed most people who attend the classes are dropped off and picked up rather that being brought to the site and where the cars are parked for the duration of the class (see paragraphs 1.6-1.8 above).
6.7 The building will be closer to Highgrove Mansions than it currently is - between 6 and 8m - extending across part of the ground floor of that building with the roof extending up as high as the top of the windows in the first floor although not directly in front of them and the apartment building is set at a slight angle to the proposed extension and with the windows in the northern half of the closest gable. As such, it is not considered that given the level difference, the position of the windows in the adjacent property and the design and shape of the roof, that there will be any adverse impact on the outlook or other living conditions of those in Highgrove Mansions.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 It is considered that given the previous use as a church and the approvals which have been granted for the uses as a dance studio that the extension as proposed is acceptable and that the concerns regarding traffic and highway safety and noise are either insufficient to warrant refusal of the application or capable of being remediated through a condition requiring details of accoustic mitigation and that the application will comply with General Policy 2, Transport Policy 4 and Environment Policy 22 of the Strategic Plan. As such it is recommended that the planning application be approved subject to conditions.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 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;
==== PAGE 11 ====
20/01251/B Page 11 of 11
(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.
8.2 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: 15.03.2021
Signed : S CORLETT 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