Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
21/00501/B Page 1 of 7
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 21/00501/B Applicant : Manxonia Limited Proposal : Conversion of existing office, residential and retail space to retail (class 1.1) and tea rooms (class 1.3) Site Address : Manxonia House Bay View Road Port St. Mary Isle Of Man IM9 5AE
Planning Officer: Mr Nick Salt Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 16.06.2021 __
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. No customers shall be served or remain in the building outside the following hours: 8am - 9pm.
Reason: In the interests of public amenity.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposal is considered to be in accordance with the land use designation and policy set out in the Area Plan for the South and with policies GP2, EP35, BP1 and TP7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 in that it is acceptable in principle and no unacceptable visual, residential amenity or other impacts were identified.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the following plans and drawings, received 16.04.21:
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
==== PAGE 2 ====
21/00501/B Page 2 of 7
It is recommended that the following Government Departments should be given Interested Person Status on the basis that although they have made written submissions relevant to a material planning consideration.
DoI Flood Risk Management __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site relates to Manxonia House, a prominent former Victorian school building on the southern corner of The Promenade and Bay View Road in Port St Mary. It adjoins the properties of 'Overcliffe' on the Promenade Road side and 'Beach House' on the Bay View Road side - both dwellings. The site is within the proposed Port St Mary Conservation Area.
1.2 There is currently off-road parking on the site accessed from The Promenade for three cars. The main entrance to the building is via Bay View Road.
1.3 The building is an attractive stone-faced structure which has two storey elements, roof accommodation and single storey annexes. The last use of the ground floor of the corner unit was a shop with offices on the two floors of accommodation alongside with living accommodation above the shop unit. The building is presently vacant and in a degree of disrepair.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The proposed works seek both a change of use of the vacant building, and external alterations as part of a proposal to bring the building back in to use.
2.2 The application seeks approval for the use of the ground floor as a bakery, farm shop and tea rooms, with tea room seating and an associated office on the first floor.
2.3 An extension to the Bay View Road (southwest) elevation is sought forming a 15m2 single storey glazed entrance with a 2.75m eaves height and roof to match the main building. A 4m2 balcony is proposed at first floor level to the northwest elevation, for staff use. Other minor alterations are proposed including the blocking up of fenestration, a window converted into an access door, and the addition of Velux windows.
2.4 The existing timber windows and shop front would be replaced with aluminium frames with glazing patterns to match the existing. The datestone would be carefully removed, restored and repositioned on the gable over the shop unit.
2.5 Two of the parking spaces on site would be retained with the third space used as a service vehicle access.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site falls within an area zoned as Mixed Use on Area Plan for the South 2013 (Port Erin & Port St Mary). As such, General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan is the key policy in the consideration of this application.
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: (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;
==== PAGE 3 ====
21/00501/B Page 3 of 7
(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; (j) can be provided with all necessary services; and (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan.
3.3 Whilst the site is within a proposed conservation area, as opposed to an adopted one, Environment Policy 35 of the IOMSP has material relevance given the prominence of the site building in the street scene. It states that 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.
3.4 Business Policy 1 is relevant and states that the growth of employment opportunities throughout the Island will be encouraged provided that development proposals accord with the policies of this Plan.
3.5 Transport Policy 7 states that the Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards. These are set out in Appendix 7 of the IOMSP and state that for the proposed type of use in town centres (shop and café/tearoom) space for service vehicle use should be provided. Number for staff/customer parking are not specified in policy.
3.6.1 The Area Plan for the South contains secondary policies. Mixed Use Proposal 2 states: "Within the Port St Mary Mixed Use area alternative uses to retail use on the ground floor of units may be acceptable if such uses would add to the vitality and viability of the Village. Residential uses will not normally be accepted, subject to the circumstances and merits of such a use. Applications will be considered on their merits taking into account the proposed use, impact on adjacent properties and impact on the character and appearance of the area."
3.6.2 Paragraph 6.6.2 of the Area Plan clarifies appropriate uses for the mixed use area: "Development within an area of Mixed Use (as designated on the Proposals Map/Inset Maps) or those sites proposed for Mixed Use (identified on the Maps as 'Proposed Mixed 76 Use') will comprise a mix of some or all of the following uses: residential; shops; financial and professional services; food and drink; research and development, light industry; hotels and hostels; hospitals, nursing homes and residential institutions; community uses; leisure; tourism and open space. For applications relating to sites proposed for Mixed Use, the mix and types of uses on the site will be determined on their merits in accordance with the Proposals in the Area Plan and the Isle of Man Strategic Plan Policies."
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The following planning history on the site is considered materially relevant to the assessment of the current proposal: 4.1.1 14/00451/B - Conversion of existing office accommodation to two dwellings, retention of existing first floor flat and retention of ground floor retail unit, replacement windows and re- instatement of boundary wall. APPROVED June 2014.
4.1.2 17/01153/B - Replacement of existing softwood windows with hardwood double glazed units. APPROVED December 2017.
4.1.3 18/00534/B - Installation of replacement windows. APPROVED July 2018.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS
==== PAGE 4 ====
21/00501/B Page 4 of 7
5.1 DOI Highways do not oppose the application but have provided a number of comments (10.05.21): "The site is accessible and well connected. Bicycle and disabled parking and an electric vehicle charging point should be considered to aid Active Travel and climate change initiatives. Vehicular access is to be as existing with a driveway from The Promenade to cater for service vehicles, retaining two car parking bays for staff. A waste bin store is to be located at rear of the servicing space for kerbside collection. The layout is appropriate. Theoretically, the required car parking amount for the proposal is less when compared to the existing three spaces on the retail space use being neutral and the office space ancillary. The IOMSP car parking standards require a minimum of 1 space per 50sqm nett for office space, two for residential, and shops within town centres to provide for servicing only. For tea rooms, the IOMSP is silent, but under the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order, it falls within the designation of shops, so only servicing would be necessary. This compares to a typical standard from England where café uses are separated from general retail and, typically, require one car parking space per 3sqm of customer space. On balance, the residual amount of car parking totalling two spaces is acceptable given the: o Designated land use class o Context o Central location o Opportunity for linked trips and non-car based travel, o Need for consistency with arrangements for other town centre uses. Should visitors come by car off-and on-street car parking is close by. Not withstanding, opportunity should be taken to convert one space to disabled use. In absence of formal standards on bicycle parking, we encourage the amount of bicycle parking to correspond to benchmark parking guidelines set out in the UK's Department for Transport's Local Transport Note 1/20 Cycle Infrastructure Design, or other UK guidelines. It should be installed as a covered and secure facility and close as possible to the building entry or a window to allow overlooking. LTN1/20 is silent on tea rooms, but for retail short and long stay provision should equate to one space per 100sqm. For tea rooms, other guidelines from England suggest 1:65sqm long stay and 1 to 40sqm short stay. Two 'Sheffield' type stands would allow a more than appropriate level for parking of four spaces for all the proposed uses on these stands being suitably set out. There appears enough space on site for installation, but these must be separate from the bin store. For evcp's, again there is no formal standard on Island. In England, often for commercial uses, 10% of the total car parking amount is allocated for such and one space would be sufficient. As drawn, the proposal does not raise significant road safety or network efficiency issues. Accordingly, Highway Services do not oppose it. Consideration should be given to the conversion of one car parking space to disabled use, as well as installation of bicycle parking and an ecvp."
5.2 DOI Flood Risk Management team have confirmed that there is no Flood Risk Management interest in this application. (20.05.21).
5.3 Port St Mary Commissioners have no objection (03.06.21).
Highways and parking
6.2 Principle of development 6.2.1 The site is currently vacant. Business Policy 1 of the Strategic Plan seeks to encourage the growth of employment opportunities provided that development proposals accord with the policies of this Plan. The proposed use as a farm shop and associated tearoom would provide direct and indirect support for the local economy through the provision of services for the
==== PAGE 5 ====
21/00501/B Page 5 of 7
occupants of Port St Mary and through the creation of and support for jobs. This carries weight in support of the acceptability of the proposal.
6.2.2 In addition, the Area Plan for the South designates the area within which the site lies as a Mixed Use area. The uses proposed fall under the uses encouraged within these areas. There are similar uses nearby including retail on the other side of the road. The proposal is in accordance with the land use designation.
6.2.3 The proposal would see the reuse of a currently vacant building which is in a highly visible location in the village centre. This could help to encourage growth and viability of the village as a whole.
6.2.4 Overall therefore, the proposed uses and development are in accordance with the relevant planning policy and Area Plan, and subject to the detailed considerations below, are acceptable in principle.
6.3 Design and Appearance 6.3.1 General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 requires that development proposals respect the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them. It is also important that development does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape. Whilst Port St Mary does not have an adopted Conservation Area, the site lies within the proposed Conservation Area (CA), and Environment Policy 35 is of some relevance to this proposal (outlined in the policy section above).
6.3.2 Manxonia House is highly visible from Bay View Road and also from The Promenade given its scale and corner plot siting. It is therefore of particular importance that any development respects the character and appearance of the site and the wider street scene. It is also, however, of importance that the building is brought into an appropriate reuse to prevent further decay and dilapidation in its condition, to the detriment of the appearance of the area.
6.3.3 The modest extension to the Bay View Road elevation would provide a focal point and an entrance to the premises for customers, which would respect the symmetry of the building in a holistic way (including the adjoining 'Beach House'). The use of fenestration with glazing patterns to match the remainder of the site, and a modest footprint and height would ensure that the extension would be appropriate for the site and would preserve the character and appearance of the street scene and proposed CA. The balcony would provide a more contemporary element but would be of a modest 4m2 scale and positioning which would not detract from the overall character and appearance of the Victorian stone-faced property. The use of aluminium framed windows and shop front would be acceptable as the existing glazing patterns and features would be retained as detailed on the submitted drawings. Alternative materials to the window frames (i.e. plastic) have been approved in recent years (18/00534/B) with the emphasis on the retention of the existing patterns of glazing.
6.3.4 Other modest extensions such as roof lights would provide improved amenity and natural light to users of the building with not unacceptable impact on the historic character and appearance of the site. The relocation and refurbishment of the datestone would provide an attractive focal point on the building and a visible link to its heritage.
6.3.5 Overall, the proposed external works would bring the building into a condition more suitable for the uses proposed, would ensure its sensitive refurbishment, and would preserve the character and appearance of this part of Port St Mary in accordance with General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan.
6.4 Residential Amenity
==== PAGE 6 ====
21/00501/B Page 6 of 7
6.4.1 General Policy 2 further requires that new development does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents. Further details of how residential amenity can be impacted are set out in the Residential Design Guide. The key aspects are overlooking (loss of privacy), overbearing (loss of outlook) and overshadowing (loss of sunlight).
6.4.2 The minor external works and the small entrance extension would have no material impact on the amenities of the adjoining occupiers of 'Overcliffe' and 'Beach House'. The small staff balcony would not have direct views onto or into any residential property which does not directly front a public highway and footpaths. No unacceptable loss of privacy or overlooking is likely.
6.4.3 The proposed uses and the bringing of the building back into commercial use will inevitably increase the level of activity within and around the property, which may have some impacts in terms of noise. The use as a farm shop (class 1.1) and tearoom (class 1.3) would not lend itself to an unacceptable noise nuisance. Future 1.3 uses could include a restaurant or public house. However, the site is within a designated Mixed Use area which seeks to ensure that uses of the type proposed are centralised within town and village centres and to ensure that these centres remain vibrant and viable. Separate licensing and other legislation relating to opening hours and noise nuisance may come into consideration should future issues arise. For the current proposal, noise nuisance on the occupiers of the adjacent properties is not considered likely to be so severe as to warrant a refusal of planning permission. A condition restricting opening hours shall be added to ensure that the premises is not open to customers outside the hours of 8am and 9pm, to reduce any risk of noise disturbance during unsociable hours.
6.4.4 Subject to the above, it is not considered that any unacceptable amenity impacts would result.
6.5 Highways and Parking 6.5.1 Finally, parts (h) and (i) of General Policy 2 relate to the provision of adequate parking and to highway safety. Transport Policy 7 relates to parking provision and is also of relevance.
6.5.2 Highways Services have been consulted on the proposal and do not oppose it. The use as tearooms and a small shop would be consistent with that elsewhere on Bay View Road and the site is both within 60 metres of a bus stop, and opposite a car park. The site is therefore considered to be in a sustainable location and easily accessible. The small extension to the front would have no bearing on highway safety as it would remain well within the curtilage of the site as existing.
6.5.3 The total on-site parking provision would be reduced by 1 space to a total of 2 spaces. Given the above, this is considered to be acceptable, and the lack of specific criteria within planning policy on parking standards for shops and café type uses is noted. The site is central and there is adequate parking in the area. Highways have requested that thought is given to both the use of a parking space as a disabled space, and to the provision of electric vehcile charging. The provision of a bicycle stand/cover is also requested. Whilst the applicant is strongly encouraged to provide these, requiring them via condition would not meet the '6 tests' on planning conditions as the application would not otherwise be recommended for refusal.
6.5.4 Appropriate bin storage and access for service vehicles is shown on the proposed drawings.
6.5.5 Overall, there are no concerns in relation to highway safety or access and the proposal is considered to accord with General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 in that regard.
7.0 CONCLUSION
==== PAGE 7 ====
21/00501/B Page 7 of 7
7.1 In summary, the proposal is considered to be in accordance with the land use designation and policy set out in the Area Plan for the South and with policies GP2, EP35, BP1 and TP7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 in that it is acceptable in principle and no unacceptable visual, residential amenity or other impacts were identified.
7.2 The proposal would see a sustainable reuse and refurbishment to a significant local building which would provide economic and visual amenity benefits to Port St Mary and as such, it is recommended for 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: (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; (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
8.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given Interested Person Status. __
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status
Decision Made : Permitted Date : 16.06.2021
Determining officer
Signed : S BUTLER
Stephen Butler
Head of Development Management
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