Loading document...
Application No.: 20/01302/B Applicant: Fancy A Coffee Limited Proposal: Alteration and first floor extension Site Address: Costa Coffee Small Retail Unit Adjacent To Main Retail Unit Crosby Meadows Estate Peel Road Crosby Isle Of Man Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 15.04.2021 _________________________________________________________________
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
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.
Reason: To enable the Department to consider the implications of any subsequent change of use on the amenities of the area.
The application is considered to accord with General Policy 2, Transport Policy 1 and Environment Policy 15 of the Strategic Plan and is supported.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to the Planning Letter and Drawing Nos. 16/2576/105G and 16/2576/105i, all received on 11 November 2020. _______________________________________________________________
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 6(4):
19 Cherry Tree Drive, Crosby
as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy.
It is recommended that the following organisation 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 6(4):
Marown Memorial Playing Fields Ltd,
as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy,
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THERE IS AN OBJECTION FROM THE LOCAL AUTHORITY AND THE APPLICATION IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL
1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The site is part of a retail unit (currently under construction and near completion) which lies to the south west of the junction of the A1 Main Road through Crosby and the north-south intersection of Eyreton Road (A23) and Old Church Road (B35). The site lies southeast of new residential dwellings which were approved with the application building under PA 17/00852/B. - 1.2 Opposite this building and on the other side of the main road, is 1-6, Eyremont Terrace, 1, Crosby Terrace and on the corner of Main Road and Eyreton Road is a pair of semi-detached houses - Crosby House and Eyrebrook. To the south east of the site is a tree-lined watercourse beyond which are public toilets, a children's playground, a bowling club, Marown Millennium Hall, a BMX track and a sports pitch. - 1.3 Planning approval was granted for the retail unit under two applications - 18/00339/REM and 17/00852/B. Both schemes proposed essentially the same building but were handed with the former having the commercial vehicle loading and parking area on the south eastern side of the building and the latter having this between the north western gable of the building and the rear of plots 27 and 28. The development has however been implemented in accordance
with 17/00852/B, although with new elements which are at variance with the approved scheme.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The planning application seeks approval for Alteration and first floor extension to the Small Retail Unit Adjacent to Main Retail Unit (Costa Coffee). This scheme would create an additional floor area on the first floor measuring 91sqm and stairs to provide access to this floor. A WC will also be created by the stairs on this floor. - 2.2 The site plan also shows alterations to the parking area as the turning area on the northern section of the parking area has been removed to enable the creation of five additional parking areas. This is however, outside the red line boundary and as such will not be the subject of the current application, although it has implications for the current scheme. - 2.3 The applicant had provided additional information which indicates that:
2.4 Although the application form indicates that the scheme would involve operational development, the scheme would only involve the extension of the approved use within the ground floor area of the smaller retail unit to the first floor area and would not involve any operational development. The works to erect the stairs and WC are internal alterations which are also not considered to be operational development.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY - 3.1 The site of the proposed retail unit is designated on The Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982 as Proposed Residential. Proposed residential designation can include non-residential development where this is complementary to a residential area, such as shops, churches and amenities which contribute to the sustainability of a settlement. On the Area Plan for the East (Map 10), the site is designated as 'Predominantly Residential', which reestablishes the previous designation of the site on the Development Plan. The site is not within a Conservation area, although part of the site is classed as being within an area with low likelihood of flood risk on the Isle of Man Indicative Flood Maps. As such, the following parts of the Strategic Plan are relevant: - 3.2 General Policy 2 states that "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:
3.3 Transport Policy 7 states, "The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards. Appendix 7 requires neighbourhood shops to have "Spaces for staff, customers, and service vehicles". - 3.4 Transport Policy 1: "New development should, where possible, be located close to existing public transport facilities and routes, including pedestrian, cycle and rail routes." - 3.5 Section 9.4: Retailing
Business Policy 9: The Department will support new retail provision in existing retail areas at a scale appropriate to the existing area and which will not have an adverse effect on adjacent retail areas. Major retail development proposals will require to be supported by a Retail Impact Assessment (1).
Appendix 1: Retail Impact Assessment An assessment undertaken for a planning application for major retail developments (those over 500m sq of floor space measured externally). The assessment examines the impact of development on the vitality and viability of existing shopping centres within the catchment area of the proposed development. The assessment usually includes the likely cumulative effect of recent planning permissions, development under construction and completed development.
3.6 Business Policy 10: Retail development will be permitted only in established town and village centres, with the exceptions of neighbourhood shops in large residential areas and those instances identified in Business Policy 5.
3.7 It is also relevant to consider the status of Crosby within the Strategic Plan: Spatial Policy 4: In the remaining villages development should maintain the existing settlement character and should be of an appropriate scale to meet local needs for housing and limited employment opportunities.
These villages are: Bride, Glen Maye, Sulby, Dalby, Ballaugh, Ballafesson, Glen Mona, Colby, Baldrine, Ballabeg, Crosby, Newtown, Glen Vine, Strang. Area Plans will define the development boundaries of such settlements so as to maintain their existing character.
4.1 The following previous planning applications are considered to be specifically material in the assessment of the current application: - 4.2 PA 21/00175/MCH for Minor changes application to PA 17/00852/B involving alterations to retail unit, car parking, cladding, and retaining walls. Note:
at first floor level, although the Planning Statement dated 27 March 2021 clearly stated that the canopy is to be used for maintenance and repair of the glass façade and that under the CDM Regulations, a guard or protection must be fitted to allow access.
4.3 PA 20/01294/B for Variation of conditions 2 and 3 of PA 20/01024/C, Change of use from retail (class 1.1) to a combined use as food and drink (class 1.3) with related hot food takeaway (class 1.4). Approved. - 4.4 PA 20/01024/C for change of use from retail (class 1.1) to food and drink (class 1.3), Small Retail Unit Adjacent to Main Retail Unit, Crosby Meadow Estate, Peel Road, Crosby approved with the following attached conditions:
"C2. The food and drink (class 1.3) (Small Retail Unit), hereby approved, shall only be open for use by customers between the hours of 0700hrs and 2200hrs, 7 days a week.
Reason: The application proposes the times listed and has been considered on this basis only and in the interests of the amenity of neighbouring occupants in accordance with General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
C3. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that order with or without modification), the use hereby permitted shall not include use for the sale of hot food for consumption off the premises or any activity involving such sales whether ancillary or incidental to the use of the premises.
Reason: To safeguard the amenities of occupiers of adjoining properties."
4.5 The site has also been the subject of a number of applications which includes the detailed application PA 17/00852/B for the erection of 28 residential units and retail unit with associated parking and landscaping. Approved. This is the approval that has been implemented on the site.
Note: The unit which is the subject of the current application was approved as part of this application which has currently been built with works currently underway to complete the landscaping works around the retail building.
C14: The retail building must be erected, laid out and used as shown in drawing 16/2576/105F received on 20th November, 2018. In particular, the two units must be arranged as shown and may not be combined or merged, and there may be no additional floor space introduced either through the introduction of mezzanine flooring or other means.
Reason: The proposal as approved represents less than 500 sq m of retail floor space which would not require a Retail Impact Assessment (RIA) to demonstrate that it would not have an adverse impact on the viability and vitality of the town centres; any increase in floor area would be in excess of this and no RIA has been provided.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 The Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division have made the following comments regarding the application in a letter dated 7 December 2020:
The access is to be retained and 38 car parking spaces are to be laid out with four for mobility impaired use. This represents five more than the 33 spaces consented under 16/01131/REM for retail use with a ratio of one car parking space per 14 sqm being applied; although a previous iteration showed 38 spaces under 15/00775/A.
The Strategic Plan car parking standards are silent on coffee shops. Usually, for such, Highway Services would base the amount of car parking on the amount of floor available to the public which would include part of the outdoor terrace, options for sustainable travel and the opportunity for undertaking l inked trips. Typically, the applied criterium is one space per four or five sqm of the public space. In this instance, the proposed floor plan does not show the fitting out associated with coffee shop of staff room, storage space, and the area to be allocated to serving and food selection. Additionally, there could be a hot food takeaway element on grant of planning approval for 20/01294/B where there could be a greater number of staff and need for spaces to allow a relatively quick turnaround. Some linked trips could arise from customers visiting the Co-Op store and users cycling or walking. No indication is given for measures to support sustainable travel of low emissions, such as bicycle provision.
As the public floor area is unknown, an alternative method is apply a rate of six spaces per 100sqm for the coffee shop to the total indoor floor area of 182sqm plus 21sq, reflecting approximately half of the outdoor terrace, equivalent to 13 spaces then add an allowance for staff at one per four staff of which there are to be eight, equivalent to two car parking spaces and a total requirement for the coffee shop of 15 spaces.
On applying a ratio of one car parking space to 14sqm for the shop at 361sq, equivalent to 26 spaces, there would be a need for a total of 41spaces on adding the requirement for the coffee shop, equivalent to a shortfall of three spaces. Some linked trips are likely to reduce the overall requirement and, on balance, the total amount proposed of 38 spaces appears reasonable. There are an acceptable number of bays for mobility impaired use at four bays.
Notwithstanding, there are adjustments necessary to the layout. The first space at south after the intersection is too close to the junction and there is risk from conflicting vehicle and pedestrian movements as well as overrunning of the adjacent tactile crossing and should be omitted, reducing the amount to 37 spaces. Again, on balance, the remaining amount would be reasonable.
There should a minimum 1.0m overrun area at the end of the aisle at west to facilitate reversing.
Provision is necessary to benefit objectives for sustainable and Active travel and low emission. This covers the installation of bicycle parking and other users. For bicycle parking, the typical requirement is one space per 200sqm plus one space per 60 sqm for staff and similarly for customers, giving a total of six or three stands. These should be positioned in a secure location and ideally covered. Necessary too is a space for motorcycle parking. Typically, an allocation at 1½% of the total number of car parking spaces should apply, equivalent to one space at a dimension of 2.3 x 0.9m. Electric vehicle charging points should be considered at 10% of the allocation equivalent to four spaces, with, at least, one of these being allocated to a bay for mobility impairments.
The turning from and to the loading / unloading bay requires use of the bays opposite. This is not an unusual occurrence, and is a managed activity due to the frequency and times of collection and delivery being known in advance.
The proposal is unlikely to cause significant highway safety or network efficiency issues. Accordingly, Highway Services raise no opposition subject to conditions for minor revisions to the layout to reduce the total car parking requirement to 37 spaces on the omission of the first
bay at entry to the car park and a reversing area at its western end. Details are necessary for the provision of bicycle and motorcycle parking spaces.
Recommendation: DNOC.
Further to the email from Ellis Brown on 4 January 2021 with amended Drawing No. 16/2576/105i, the revisions are acceptable and welcomed to Highway Services for the most part and we continue not oppose this application subject to conditions. There remains a concern over the first car parking bay after the junction. This could be removed under this proposal as it is a separate planning application from PA17/00852/B, and like the other changes that have been agreed, these are all outside of the red line. It would just make the area safer for pedestrians. The swept paths are tight and as drawn under approval PA17/00852/B clip the disabled bay, but it is not an issue should there be a need to cross parking bays as deliveries as known in advance.
5.2 Marown Parish Commissioners objected to the application in a letter dated 17 December 2020 on the following grounds:
A member reported being contacted by a resident whose property is overlooked by the proposed balcony which appears to have been constructed already. There is real concern about this overlooking, and in the event that the application is approved, the Commissioners would require a condition to the effect that the balcony is screened to such a height that the adjacent and nearby dwellings cannot be overlooked.
5.3 The Owners/occupiers of 19 Cherry Tree Drive, Crosby which abuts the north-western boundary of the retail building have made the following comments regarding the application in a letter dated 9 December 2020:
Dear Planners, Our original understanding was this would be entirely a coop or retail. To change both the usage from retail to takeaway and double the size of the seating is not agreeable.
Bearing in mind the Co-op is also based there, the maximum number of parking spaces 38, currently 33, will not be sufficient for its customers and these additional customers of the coffee shop.
This will lead to parking on the street, leading to access issues for residents the majority of which have young children using the street.
Even for the other application, 20/01294/B with 30 seats could lead to congestion.
5.4 The Marown Memorial Playing Fields Ltd, Old Church Road, Crosby have made the following Comments regarding the application in a letter dated 22 December 2020:
Following a recent meeting held by Marown Memorial Playing Fields Ltd the committee discussed the above. The majority vote decision was in favour of the proposed application.
We are however aware of a breach of planning regulation relating to the creation of the door on the upper level outdoor balcony and we are disappointed that planning enforcement officers did not notice this addition.
Also, any planning approval for a second floor would take the development over the 500m2 area and would require a "Retail Sales Impact Assessment" to be carried out. Whilst we cannot condone the methods employed, we appreciate that the coffee-shop business needs to be viable and that is why we are giving our support for the planning application.
6.1 In assessing the current application, it would first be vital to ascertain the works to be assessed within the current scheme. The red line boundary clearly defines the work area which would only involve works within the internal area of the smaller retail unit (Costa Coffee); works which would include the extension of the Costa unit to allow more operating space on the first floor and the addition of stairs to provide access to this area. Based on the foregoing, any works related to changes to the parking arrangement within the site, the extension of the canopy and the inclusion of the balustrades will not be assessed in the current application. These works are outside the red line boundary and not indicated as works to be assessed on the submitted plans.
6.2 Therefore, the main issue to be considered in the current application is whether the principle of adding a second floor area would be acceptable in terms of potential impacts on the wider amenity (in terms of noise, parking and capacity of Biodisc), and when considered against the need to carry out a retail impact assessment for the inclusion of additional floor
7.1 For these reasons the proposal is considered to comply with the relevant polices of the Strategic Plan and therefore recommended for an approval. - 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:
8.2 The decision maker must determine:
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: 26.04.2021
Signed : P VISIGAH 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
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown