PA 02/366 Planning Officer Report

PA 02/366 - Isle of Man Steam Packet Company Ltd - Erection of office development at former Imperial Buildings, Bath Place, Douglas ### Planning Report 1. The site comprises the land bounded by Bath Place, Parade Street the Red Quay and the Circus Beach marshalling area. This is very similar to, but not exactly the same as that which was the subject of PA 99/2210. 2. Whilst the current application is thus a full one, rather than a Reserved Matters application, the Committee must have regard to the extant Approval in Principle granted in respect of PA 99/2210. Indeed, in the absence of any pertinent change in circumstances, the Committee should be guided by that decision insofar as the issues of principle are concerned. A copy of the approval is attached to this report. 3. The gist of the written representations received by the Committee is as follows:- a) Highway Authority: conditional approval b) Local Authority: whilst there is not on the file a copy of any written comments from the Douglas Corporation, the representative at the hearing indicated that the Corporation retained its objections in principle, as previously expressed in respect of PA 99/2210 (mainly to the height); I have asked for, but not yet received a copy of these views. c) Disability Access Officer: should be accessible and usable by an unassisted wheelchair users. d) Mr Jessopp: wholly inappropriate. 4. In essence, the matters before the Committee for determination are the details and materials of construction, and the treatment of the spaces around the building. I suggest that, on matters relating to parking provision, access, and the operation of the harbour, we should be guided by the Department of Transport. 5. The architect's submission to the Committee on the 26th of July was helpful and, in my judgment, generally satisfactory. The matters which require further detail, clarification, or change include. a) External space: more detailed, larger-scale plans of the spaces around the building are needed; these should include the specification of any barriers required between the site and the harbour, and of street furniture generally. b) Materials: the samples submitted appear to me to be generally satisfactory, but there need to be samples of all flagging, kerbing, edging etc., and perhaps sample panels showing how the glazing and framing are detailed. c) Atrium Roof: this needs larger-scale detailing; could easily look very cluttered and confusing rather than simple and pleasing. d) Windows: the notion that there might be some opening windows needs sorting out; haphazard, tilting lights would certainly affect the appearance, particularly if the face of the building is breached. e) Artwork: On a project of this size, it would be legitimate to require the inclusion of public art, both within the building and also in the spaces around it. 6. Most of these matters could form the subject of conditions of approval, but the Committee may wish to resolve 5(d) first. If the Committee is minded to approve the application, I will seek clarification of 5(d) and will formulate conditions covering the other matters and the Department of Transports concerns.