DEC Officer Report

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Application No.: 22/01071/B Applicant: William Armstrong Ltd Proposal: Conversion of redundant public house space (class 1.3) on basement and ground floor to residential accommodation (class 3.4) including installation of balconies and window / door alterations to rear Site Address: Peveril Court (Bleak House) Mooragh Promenade Ramsey Isle Of Man IM8 3AB Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 02.02.2023 _________________________________________________________________ R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons Reasons for Refusal - R 1. The proposed development would represent an unacceptable risk for on-site flooding for future occupants of the three apartments proposed for the basement and is, therefore, contrary to Environment Policy 13 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. - R 2. Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that appropriate mitigation measures could be implemented on site to safeguard the occupants of the basement apartments from future flood occurrence as required by Environment Policy 10 of the Strategic Plan. - R 3. In terms of its layout and design the proposed development fails to ensure that all the flats - particularly the basement flat - created within the property will have pleasant clear outlook, particularly from the principal rooms, which would be contrary to Housing Policy 17 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. _______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status

Additional Persons

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:

DOI Flood Risk Management _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is Peveril Court (Bleak House), Mooragh Promenade Ramsey which is a traditional Victorian semi-detached property. The building is four and half storeys in height with a lower ground floor level (basement) and dormers to front elevation to accommodate living accommodation within roof space. - 1.2 The site is in a poor state of repair, but still retains a number of architectural details to its front elevation. The rear elevation has also retains its original appearance, including the existing window pattern and fenestration sizes which are similar to the adjacent semi-detached property to which it is attached. - 1.3 The property is set out such that the ground floor is on high ground, with the bottom of the windows set above or almost level with the road level. A low boundary wall runs along the entire front elevation, opening up only at the main entrance. A high stone boundary wall about 2m high encloses the rear elevation and rear yard of the property.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The planning application is sought for seeks approval for conversion of redundant public house space (class 1.3) on basement and ground floor to residential accommodation (class 3.4) including installation of balconies and window / door alterations to rear. - 2.2 The changes to the external elevation would come in the form of:

• a. New balconies created centrally at the rear of the ground floor, first, second, and third floors. These balconies would be 1.2m wide and 2.8m long and have stainless steel and glass balustrades about 1.1m high. New entrance doors would be formed through the alterations to the existing window apertures on the first floor, second floor and third floor rear elevations, while a completely new aperture would be created on the ground floor rear elevation.
• b. Altering the size of the apertures for some of the windows flanking the balcony and new door openings to form window symmetry on the rear elevation.
• c. Enlarging some window openings on the north elevation of the property.

2.3 There would be internal alterations to change the configuration and layout of the existing property to create two 1 Bedroom apartments on the basement, two 1 Bedrooms apartments on the ground floor, and a 1 Bedroom apartment set over the basement and ground floor (two levels). - 2.4 The applicants have provided a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) prepared by Crompton's Architectural Design and Build Ltd and dated 25 July 2022. The FRA states the following:

• o There would be no alterations to the floor level of the basement.
• o There has been a major flood event in the area which affected large parts of Parliament Street and the Quay in January 2014. However, there was no impact on Mooragh Promenade where the application property is situated.
• o The applicants have owned the property in excess of 25 years and the property has not been the subject of flooding in this period.
• o In 40 years, there has not been a flood at Peveril Court, or similarly built properties on Mooragh Promenade.
• o There are flood defences in the form of concrete sea walls and rock armour around the coastline which offer some protection for properties in the area.

• o No details of mitigation within the property is provided to protect the proposed residential use on the basement within the Flood Risk Assessment.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY - 3.1 The application site is within an area recognised as "Residential/Office" uses under the Ramsey Local Plan 1998 and the site is not within a Conservation Area. On the Isle of Man Indicative Flood Maps, the site is considered prone to high tidal flood risks. - 3.2 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically relevant to the assessment of this current planning application: - 3.3 General Policy 2 states: "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;
• (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses;
• (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea;

• (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;
• (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan;
• (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding;
• (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and

3.4 Strategic Policy 1: Development should make the best use of resources by:

• (a) optimising the use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and underused land and buildings, and reusing scarce indigenous building materials;
• (b) ensuring efficient use of sites, taking into account the needs for access, landscaping, open space(1) and amenity standards; and
• (c) being located so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services.

3.5 Strategic Policy 2 New development will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions(2) of these towns and villages. Development will be permitted in the countryside only in the exceptional circumstances identified in paragraph

• 6.3.

3.6 Strategic Policy 3: Proposals for development must ensure that the individual character of our towns and villages is protected or enhanced by: (b) having regard in the design of new development to the use of local materials and character. - 3.7 Strategic Policy 10: New development should be located and designed such as to promote a more integrated transport network with the aim to: (a) minimise journeys, especially by private car; (b) make

best use of public transport; (c) not adversely affect highway safety for all users, and (d) encourage pedestrian movement

3.8 Environment Policy 43: The Department will generally support proposals which seek to regenerate run-down urban

and rural areas. Such proposals will normally be set in the context of regeneration strategies identified in the associated Area Plans. The Department will encourage the re-use of sound built fabric, rather than its demolition.

3.9 Housing Policy 4 states (in part): New housing will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions of these towns and villages where identified in adopted Area Plans. - 3.10 Strategic Policy 11: The housing needs of the Island will be met by making provision for sufficient development opportunities to enable 5,100 additional dwellings (net of demolitions), and including those created by conversion, to be built over the Plan period 2011 to 2026. - 3.11 Paragraphs 8.13.1 - 8.13.3 of the Strategic Plan

• 8.13.1 There are in the Island, and particularly in Douglas, many substantial buildings which, because of their size or form, are no longer suitable for the originally intended use as either single dwellings or holiday accommodation, but which are still structurally sound. The Department has for many years encouraged the conversion of such buildings, where appropriate, into flats.
• 8.13.2 The size, layout, occupancy, etc., of flats are controlled by the Housing (Flats) Regulations 1982. However, all flats should also have a good external environment, characterised by -

• (a) a pleasant, clear outlook, particularly from the principal room(s) of the flat and
• (b) access to external space for the purpose of clothes-drying, refuse storage, car-parking, and general amenity.

• 8.13.3 Many buildings which are generally suitable for conversion into flats not only have very little space around them, but also have an annex or "outlet" at the rear. The Department may require the demolition, in total or in part, of such "outlets" even where the immediate use of the cleared space may not be possible, for example where more than one rear annex may be needed to be removed to gain access or highway work such as road widening may be required to make the cleared space useful. Such demolition will:

• (a) remove accommodation which has a poor environment and limited outlook;
• (b) permit the creation of parking space; and
• (c) assist in admitting light and air to the rear of the building proper.

Where such demolition is not so required, the accommodation must generally be organised so that every flat has an outlook from the front of the building, and so that no flat is contained entirely within an "outlet". Exception may be made to this general approach where the environment at, and the outlook from, the rear are pleasant and open.

3.12 Housing Policy 17: The conversion of buildings into flats will generally be permitted in residential areas provided that:

• (a) adequate space can be provided for clothes-drying, refuse storage, general amenity, and, if practical, car-parking;
• (b) the flats created will have a pleasant clear outlook, particularly from the principal rooms and

• (c) if possible, this involves the creation of parking on site or as part of an overall traffic management strategy for the area.

3.13 Paragraph 10.8 'Retention of Existing Local Shops and Public Houses' that precedes Community Policy 4 states; "The loss of facilities such as neighbourhood shops in towns and or village shops and public houses reduces customer choice and can also necessitate people travelling further to meet their needs. This is a particular problem in rural areas where village shops, post offices and public houses can be central to village life. It would be preferable to retain viable facilities, or those that can be made viable and where a change of use or re-development is proposed developers will be expected to show evidence of attempts to market the property as a business in these areas." - 3.14 Community Policy 4: Development (including the change of use of existing premises) which involves the loss of local shops and local public houses, will only be permitted if it can be demonstrated that the use is no longer commercially viable, or cannot be made commercially viable. - 3.15 Environment Policy 10: Where development is proposed on any site where in the opinion of the Department of Local Government and the Environment there is a potential risk of flooding, a flood risk assessment and details of proposed mitigation measures must accompany any application for planning permission. The requirements for a flood risk assessment are set out in Appendix 4. - 3.16 Environment Policy 13: Development which would result in an unacceptable risk from flooding, either on or off-site, will not be permitted.

- 4.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

- 4.1 FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT ACT (2013)

• 4.1.1 Section 68 of the Flood Risk Management Act (2013) indicates that any published Flood Risk Management Plan and the extent to which the proposed development creates an additional flood risk are material considerations.

4.2 RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDE (2021)

• 4.2.1 Whilst not adopted planning policy, DEFA's Residential Design Guidance is a material consideration in the assessment of this application as, "It is intended to apply to any residential development within existing villages and towns, including individual houses, conversions and householder extensions". Sections 2.0 on sustainable construction, 4.11 on Roof Terraces, Balconies, Decking and Patios, and 7.0 which deal with impact on neighbouring properties are considered relevant to the current scheme.

- 5.0 PLANNING HISTORY

5.1 The site has been the subject of the following previous planning applications which are considered relevant in the determination of this application; - 5.2 PA 22/01070/B for Reinstatement of front dormers, installation of replacement rear roof in matching slate, ten additional roof lights and replacement timber front door and frame APPROVED. - 5.3 PA 03/01120/A for Approval in principle for the conversion of the basement and ground floor to six residential units - REFUSED. - 5.4 PA 03/01766/A for Approval in principle for the conversion of basement and ground floor to three residential units - APPROVED.

- 6.0 REPRESENTATIONS

Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.

6.1 Representation from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division confirms that they 'Do not oppose' in a letter dated 26 August 2022. They have also noted that they find the application to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and /or parking. - 6.2 DOI Flood Risk Management have stated that they object to the application as they do not support any residential planning application in a flood zone. They note that the basement of the property is well below the adjacent road surface and if there was a weather event there would be significant risk to Life and property at the basement level (30 August 2022). - 6.3 DEFA's Ecosystem Policy Team have made the following comments regarding the application (27 September 2022):

• o Forward to the Ecosystem Policy Team's previous responses to these applications, they would like to retract their comments requesting swifts surveys prior to determination, as based
• on the additional information received, they do not believe that swifts currently nest within the Peveril Court building.
• o They note that there is still potential for swifts, or other nesting birds to be present and therefore request that care must be taken and checks for nesting birds undertaken prior to works taking place.
• o They advise that checks should be undertaken at any time throughout the year, as some species of birds, including feral pigeons, will nest year-round. They advise that if nesting birds are present then the works must stop immediately and advice by obtained from the DEFA Ecosystem Policy Team (651577).
• o They note that due to the height and location of the building, there is good potential for swifts to nest in the building in the future if appropriate provision is made. Therefore, as an enhancement for swifts, they recommend that swift nest bricks are installed high up on the front elevation when the works on the front windows and dormers are being undertaken. Their recommendation for placement of the bricks would be somewhere around the central window
• on the front elevation, so there is a clear flight path underneath.

6.4 Ramsey Commissioners have no objection to the application (03.10.2022). - 6.5 No comments have been received from neighbouring properties.

- 7.0 ASSESSMENT

7.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are:

• a. The principle of development/ Loss of community facility (STP1, STP2, SP3, GP 2a, HP4, STP10 & CP 4);
• b. The visual impact of the proposed development (GP 2b & c & STP 3b);
• c. Clear outlook and adequacy of amenity space (HP 17 & Paragraphs 8.13.2 - 8.13.3);
• d. Impact on the neighbouring amenity (GP 2g);
• e. Parking and Highway Safety (GP 2 & TP 7, STP 10); and
• f. Biodiversity Impacts (EP 4 & GP2); and
• g. Flood Issues (GP 2, EP 10 & EP 13).

- 7.2 THE PRINCIPLE

• 7.2.1 The starting point here is the land designation. The Ramsey Local Plan identifies the land as "Residential/Office uses". As such, the principle of converting the redundant public house space (class 1.3) on basement and ground floor to residential accommodation (class 3.4) would be acceptable. It is also considered that Strategic Policies 1 and 2 directs new development into existing named towns and villages where existing services can be utilised. This approach to managing residential developments is further echoed within HP4. Furthermore, by virtue of the site fronting onto an existing highway, along a public transport

• corridor, and situated along the promenade where cycling is achievable, it is considered that the scheme meets the requirements of Strategic Policy 10(a)-(d) which aims to promote integrated transport network. Therefore, the principle of the proposed change of use is acceptable.
• 7.2.2 There is a general presumption against the loss of town centre public houses for the reasons given in paragraph 10.8 of the Strategic Plan. Whilst in this case it is noted that the opportunities to reinstate the public house would be lost via the current application, the public house is not currently open, having closed for a period in excess of 20 years (assessment documents for PA 03/01766/A showed it to be non-operational as at November 2003). In addition, approval in principle was granted in January 2004 for Approval in principle for the conversion of basement and ground floor to three residential units under PA 03/01766/A, which indicates that the principle was acceptable. Therefore, it is not considered that the loss of the public house to residential use would be objectionable in this case; as it wasn't in the case of the previous application (PA 03/01766/A) which was approved by the Planning Committee.
• 7.2.3 Another factor that weighs in favour of the scheme is the fact that Ramsey is regarded as one of the service centres to provide regeneration and choice of location for housing under Spatial Policy 2; and this is supported by Spatial Policy 3 which states that "Housing should be provided to meet local needs and in appropriate cases to broaden the choice of location of housing". More so, the proposal would ensure the revitalisation of a site which is currently showing signs of deterioration and degradation, and help limit the process of decline for the site by providing a platform for regeneration in line with Strategic Objective 3.3 (f) and Environment Policy 43 of the Strategic Plan.
• 7.2.4 Therefore, it is judged that the scheme to encourage the redevelopment of this brownfield site as proposed is acceptable in principle. This is, however, not an automatic reason to allow development as further material planning matters as indicated previously need to be considered, to determine if the proposed would be appropriate for the site.

- 7.3 VISUAL IMPACT

• 7.3.1 In terms of visual impacts of the scheme, it is considered that the application does not propose significant material alteration to its elevations save for the enlargement of fenestrations on the side and rear and creation of new doors and balconies on the rear; which are judged to respect the existing property and enhance its overall appearance.
• 7.3.2 Additionally, the slight material alterations to the external elevations are not be considered to have any detrimental impact on the character of the street scene nor would it be considered to detrimentally impact on the views achievable from the surrounding highways, particularly from the rear.
• 7.3.3 Accordingly, the proposed works are considered to be acceptable forms of development in this respect and comply with the requirements of GP2 and STP 3 (b).
• 7.4 CLEAR OUTLOOK AND ADEQUACY OF AMENITY SPACE FOR FUTURE OCCUPANTS

• 7.4.1 With regard to the amenity space provisions, it is considered that although most of the principal rooms within the new flats created on the basement and ground floor are positioned such that they are afforded views out with adequate amount of space within each apartment suitable for the occupants, the basement flat to the rear would have the windows to two principal rooms (living room and kitchen area) confined within the walled enclosure at the rear. As such, it is not considered that there would be a pleasant, clear outlook from these rooms.
• 7.4.2 Granting the bedroom to this apartment would be afforded a pleasant clear outlook over the undeveloped land to the side and onto the surrounding street, it is not considered that an exception can be made for the poor outlook for the living room and kitchen area, given the

fact that the rear elevation is not pleasant and open. The proposal is, therefore, considered to be contrary to Housing Policy 17 (b) and Paragraph 8.13.2 of the Strategic Plan.

- 7.5 IMPACT ON NEIGHBOURING AMENITIES

• 7.5.1 With regard to potential impacts on neighbours as a result of the proposal, it is considered that the enlarged fenestrations are positioned at distances from neighbours that would not result in adverse impacts; 39.4m from the nearest window on Belvedere Court, Mooragh Promenade to the north level and 44.1m from the nearest windows on 'Hartshill', Hope Street, Ramsey. As such, it is not considered that overlooking, overbearing impacts or overshadowing would result. More so, the scale of development proposed are considered to be minimal and not judged to cause harm to the enjoyment of the neighbouring amenity. On balance, these aspects would be considered to be compliant with those sections of General Policy 2(g).

7.6 PARKING AND HIGHWAY SAFETY

• 7.6.1 In terms of parking provisions, there is no specific parking to be allocated for this development. Whilst this has the potential to create pressure on kerbside parking in the vicinity, Highway Services have confirmed that they have no objection so the impact on parking is considered acceptable.

• 7.6.2 It is also important to note that the property is within a public transport corridor and within walking distance to employment centres, and public facilities and spaces within Ramsey. As well, on street parking is a common feature within the vicinity with available on street and public parking provisions in the area considered to be appropriate.
• 7.6.3 Furthermore, Appendix 7 of the Strategic Plan makes it clear that the Department would consider reducing the requirement for parking provisions should certain conditions be met, which includes the conversion of existing buildings to create new dwellings Thus, it is considered that the proposal would satisfy the requirements of Transport Policy 7 and General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan.

7.7 BIODIVERSITY IMPACTS

• 7.7.1 In terms of impacts on Biodiversity, there has been communication between the applicants and the Biodiversity Team who have indicated that they do not believe that swifts currently nest within the Peveril Court building. As such, it is not considered that the scheme would result in the removals of ecological habitats within the site. The Biodiversity Team have also provided further advise on how the development could be carried out without resulting in adverse impacts on swifts, or other nesting birds which may be present at the site, with no request made for conditions to address these.

• 7.7.2 Additionally, Ecosystems Policy Officer has requested that conditions be imposed to ensure that swift nest bricks are installed high on the buildings elevation as the site still holds good potential for swifts to nest in the building in the future if appropriate provision is made. To the extent that the above points relate to the planning applications, it is considered that suitable conditions could be attached to ensure this element of the proposal complies with the requirements of Environment Policies 4 and 5.

7.8 FLOOD RISK

• 7.8.1 With regard to flood risk impacts, a flood risk assessment has been provided by the applicant, which details the measures that have been taken without the site (particularly along the shore to address floods), as well as providing historic details which opine that floods have not been a concern for the site or the Mooragh promenade in over 40 years as reasons why mitigation is not required.

• 7.8.2 Whilst the information provided by the applicants within the FRA are noted, there remains an issue which cannot be overcome by the proposal and that is the flood risk to those

living in the new apartments proposed for the basement. In a major flood (1 to 100 year plus 30% CC) event there is the potential that apartments on the basement would be prone to significant risk of flooding. This risk is exacerbated by the fact that all the windows to the basement apartments have their cills set below the road level enabling easy access for flood water. The layout of the one-bedroom apartment at the basement level which fronts onto the coastline is also set out such that there is only one entrance/exit; a condition that would increase the potential for harm should floods occur. Moreover, the primary habitable spaces for the basement are mainly confined at the basement level where they would be vulnerable to increased risk from floods; thus resulting in increased risks for the occupants.

• 7.8.3 The risks to floods at the basement has also been highlighted by the DOI Flood Risk Management Team who note that a future flood occurrence (if there is a weather event) would result in significant risk to Life and property at the basement level which is set well below the adjacent rood surface. It should be noted that even the applicants in their flood risk assessment (See conclusion), acknowledge that flooding associated with global warming and unusual weather conditions could affect the property. Thus, they have not refuted the assertion that a major flood event could impact the property, yet no mitigation measures have been proffered within the scheme. Therefore, it is has not been demonstrated that the proposal would not result in unacceptable risk from flooding on-site.

• 7.8.4 Overall, whilst the scheme has been accompanied by a flood risk assessment, this document does not detail proposed mitigation measures to be carried out should floods occur. Also, the scheme has not demonstrated how the development could be carried out without resulting in unacceptable risks from flooding on-site, particularly for the occupants of the basement apartments. As such, it is considered that the proposal fails to meet the requirements of Environment Policies 10 and 13 of the Strategic Plan.
• 8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 It is concluded that although the principle of converting the pub house on the ground floor and second floor would be acceptable, with the scheme not resulting in any adverse visual impacts or detrimental impacts on neighbouring residential amenity and highway safety, the potential for increased and unacceptable risk from flooding would be high for the proposed residential apartments at the basement. As such, the scheme is recommended for refusal as the development which would result in an unacceptable risk from flooding on-site.
• 9.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

9.1 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.

9.2 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.

9.3 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 a Principal Planner 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 : Refused Date: 02.02.2023 Determining officer

Signed : C BALMER Chris Balmer Principal Planner

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.