Loading document...
Murray House, Mount Havelock, Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 2SF. Tel: (01624) 685859 Fax: (01624) 685945 E-mail: [email protected] Chief Executive K. A. Kinrade
Please reply to the Chief Executive
Our ref: KAK/MC 29th July 2009.
Dear Sir/Madam,
ON APPEAL: PA08/2176 – The Borough of Douglas – Erection of 12 apartments and associated car-parking, 47-50 Lord Street/20-23 Queen Street, Douglas
I refer to the recent appeal hearing in respect of the above planning application.
In accordance with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, I am enclosing herewith a copy of the report of the person appointed to hear this appeal.
Having considered the whole report, the Minister has looked in greater detail at each of the separate conclusions reached by the appointed person:-
(a) Continuation of Phase 1 of Hanover House: Whilst the report concludes that the proposed building has been designed as a continuation of Phase 1, that it would harmonise with that Phase, and that it would represent a significant enhancement when compared with the building previously on the site, it makes no reference to the fact that Phase 1, as it stands, is almost self-evidently an incomplete building. There is a visual expectation that the existing building will be continued in similar form, height and architectural style. The Minister finds that the appointed person has given insufficient weight to the visual need for, and general expectation of, completing the building in the general way now proposed.
(b) Car-Parking: The Minister concurs with the conclusion that the proposed parking provision would be adequate.
(c) On-site amenity space: The Minister concurs with the conclusion that the provision of on-site amenity space would not be a necessary pre-requisite for the proposal.
Continued/...
(d) Daylight and sunlight: The appointed person concludes that the impact on daylight and sunlight in the flats across the road would be unacceptable, based largely on comparison with the impact of the previous building. Having considered this very carefully, the Minister has concluded that the appointed person should also have had regard to whether or not, in a town-centre area characterised generally by buildings of four and five storeys, the reasonable expectations for daylight and sunlight would be met. The Minister is not persuaded that, in these south-facing flats which are separated from the proposed development by the full width of Lord Street, the light levels would be so poor as to be unacceptable.
(e) Privacy: The Minister concurs with the conclusion that the consequences in terms of privacy would not be sufficiently serious to warrant refusal.
Having concluded that the impact on light in the flats across Lord Street would not warrant refusal, and having had regard to the benefits of the proposal in providing much-needed social housing and in completing the enhancement of the street-scene started by Phase 1, the Minister has rejected the recommendation that the appeal should be allowed, and has directed that the Planning Committee’s decision to grant approval should be confirmed.
Yours faithfully, Handwritten signature Handwritten signature Chief Executive. Please see over for circulation list/...
Circulation List – PA08/2176
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown