**Document:** Officer Report **Application:** 17/00968/C — Additional use of existing self-storage/document storage warehouse as offices and use of yard for car sales (retrospective) **Decision:** Permitted **Decision Date:** 2017-10-31 **Parish:** Marown **Document Type:** report / officer_report **Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/22228-crosby-john-lancaster-house-dwelling/documents/1020830 --- # Officer Report **Application No.:** 17/00968/C **Applicant:** Christopher Bell T/a Simply Store **Proposal:** Additional use of existing self-storage/document storage warehouse as offices and use of yard for car sales (retrospective) **Site Address:** John Lancaster House Main Road Crosby Isle Of Man IM4 4BN Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley **Photo Taken:** 22.09.2017 **Site Visit:** 22.09.2017 **Expected Decision Level:** Planning Committee **Recommended Decision:** Permitted **Date of Recommendation:** 23.10.2017 _________________________________________________________________ ## Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions - C 1. At no time shall there be on the site more than six vehicles offered for sale. Reason: In the interest of highway safety and protection of public and private amenity. - C 2. The administration services ancillary to the car sales use hereby approved shall operate between 9:30am and 5:30pm daily, and no customers related to that use shall be served or remain within John Lancaster House outside of those hours. Reason: In the interest of general amenity and controlling the use of the site. - C 3. For the avoidance of doubt, no retail use shall take place from the application site beyond that expressly approved under this application (car sales). Reason: In the interest of controlling the future use of this site, in view of its location near to residential dwellings and with a poor highway access. ### Plans/Drawings/Information; The development hereby approved relates to Drawings 1-01 Rev A and 2-02 Rev A, both datestamped as having been received 10th October 2017. _______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons It is recommended that the following persons should be given Interested Person Status as they are 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): - The Secretary of Crosby Methodist Church, the church being sited immediately adjacent the application site _____________________________________________________________________________ ### Officer’s Report THE APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE FOR DETERMINATION AS THE PROPOSED USE IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAND USE ZONING BUT THE APPLICATION IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL. 1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is an irregularly shaped parcel of land situated south of the Peel Road in Crosby, from which its sole access is achieved. As originally submitted, a thin sliver of land extending westwards towards the Old Church Road, between the Methodist Chapel and Crosby Methodist Hall was included within the application site, but this was in error and an accurate site plan has now been supplied and circulated for comment. - 1.2 Within the site is an industrial-style building that currently has planning approval for use - as a personal storage facility. This is accessed from the Peel Road and benefits from screening from the highway from mature trees at the northwestern / southeastern boundaries and a wall - at the northeastern, highway-facing boundary. There is also a bus stop adjacent the access. 1.3 There is also an accountancy business operating from a small element of that building (shown on the submitted drawing), while it is also understood that a limited number of car sales take place from the site - although there were none actively advertised as being for sale at the time of the site visit. An element of the office area occupied by the accountancy business is used for the sourcing of the vehicles for sale. 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION - 2.1 Retrospective planning approval is sought for the addition of the uses described in paragraph 1.3 above. The applicant explains that there will be a single extra employee at the premises as a result of the change, while five parking spaces have been specifically identified for the sales use (albeit that six are shown with this annotation on the submitted drawing). This would still leave four spaces for staff parking and a further two for those with disabilities to park: beyond this is an existing yard area that was being used informally for parking at the time of the site visit. The numbers above refer to formally marked out spaces. - 2.2 The applicant explains that there is no intention to advertise vehicles for sale using prices boards on the site, and will instead rely on "a modern sourcing model". - 2.3 The applicant explained further: "In response to your query regarding the car sales the 'modern sourcing model' basically refers to sourcing to order rather than the traditional forecourt of stock vehicles. We will primarily be sourcing vehicles to client specification and will rarely have stock vehicles for sale on site so we are more than happy with a planning condition of a maximum of six vehicles for sale on the site at any one time. The office hours for the administration services will be open from 9am till 5:30pm. " ## - 3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The current lawful use was approved under PA 12/01367/C, which follows the initial approval for the erection of the building for horticultural storage under PA 96/01446/B (which itself followed Approval in Principle for the same use - 96/00267/A). ## - 4.0 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 4.1 Despite the long-established built development on the application site, it is within an area zoned as "High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance" on the 1982 Development Plan. - 4.2 Given the extant use, though, it is considered most appropriate to assess the application against General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan. Transport Policy 7, Environment Policy 22, Strategic Policy 9 and Business Policy 7 are also relevant. ## - 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services requested that the application be deferred on 29th September 2017, noting that: "Any development that may result in additional traffic movements in and out of the access require a more detailed consideration of its impact on the free and safe flow of traffic on a busy strategic link serving the Island. "The application does not provide any details of how the proposals will work in terms of traffic generation / movements etc. "Whilst this response is not suggesting the application be refused, there are concerns over the lack of information to determine." 5.2 Marown Parish Commissioners comment on the application in a letter received 22nd September 2017. They do not use the word 'object', but their comments are judged to comprise an objection on three separate grounds: (1) the Commissioners have concern about additional vehicle movements into and out of a premises where exit visibility is sub-standard; (2) there is no indication of operating hours and the Commissioners have previously objected to the use of the premises out of office hours for "environmental reasons" [no elucidation of this phrase is made], and (3) the Commissioners believe that the thin strip of land between the buildings fronting onto Old Church Road is not in the ownership of the applicant and so should be excluded from the application site. On 19th October 2017, they sent another letter, noting that their third concern had been addressed by the amended plan but that the first two concerns remained and, moreover, that Highway Services had yet to make a formal comment and that they shared similar concerns regarding access and egress. 5.3 The Secretary of Crosby Methodist Church objected on behalf of the Church to the application on the same grounds that the thin strip of land between the buildings fronting onto Old Church Road is in the ownership of the Church. This letter was received 20th September 2017. ## - 6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 It is to be remembered that land ownership is not a material planning consideration, and while there is a duty on behalf of applicants to notify landowners of applications submitted on their land, this is primarily a duty to ensure that the landowner is aware of the relevant application. In this case, the owner of land that is within the application site but appears to fall outwith the applicant's ownership is aware of the application because they have objected to it on those grounds. No works are proposed to this part of the site, and it is not considered that amended plans are necessary to address this situation. - 6.2 The proposed office use should, according to Business Policy 7 and Strategic Policy 9, be directed towards existing town and village centres. While the site is not zoned for this use, there is no denying that Crosby is a village with some services - which will potentially soon - include a shop, that has planning approval - and therefore it is considered a sustainable location for such employment. This view is reached having regard to the fact that there is already a building in operation here, and while its use for self-storage is unlikely to have a particularly active or regular impact on neighbouring living conditions or traffic flow in the area (indeed, this is a reason it was approved for such a use), equally the additional low-level use for a small office business does not seem likely to generate materially harmful impacts, at least no more so than the existing and approved use. No objection is therefore raised on this ground. - 6.3 The car sales use is perhaps more difficult to assess. The access to the site does not benefit from significant visibility, and moreover there is a bus stop immediately adjacent and other informal parking as well. The previous use of the site was as a retail warehouse, which likely had significant numbers of vehicles movements. In recommending approval to the application seeking approval for the current use, the case officer looked favourably on the reduction in traffic movements, though apparently from the point of view on impact on neighbouring living conditions rather than with regards highway safety. Indeed, Highway Services stated that that application had no highways implications. - 6.4 There is no way to know how many vehicle movements are likely to be associated with the (approved) self-storage or (proposed) office use. The small scale nature of the latter suggests that a limited number is likely. However, the remainder of the building is large and while self-storage does not attract significant vehicle movements, this is only a general assumption and there is no planning condition limiting the number of daily vehicle movements. Against this context, it is not considered that the number of daily vehicle movements associated with what is a very small-scale level of car sales would be so significant as to be judged a reason to refuse the application on highway safety grounds. The traffic movements would, over the course of a week, be unlikely to be significant against the context of the lawful and proposed use of John Lancaster House. - 6.5 Were the proposed scale to be larger, then further information would have been sought. It may be that a larger scale car sales business would be found unacceptable given the site's poor access. Approval to this application would not prejudice a future application for a larger scale operation, but nor should it be taken to mean that a greater intensity of use would be acceptable. As such, it is considered that a condition limiting the number of cars on the site for sale at any one time to six would be necessary, and the alteration of that condition would very likely require additional information to be provided. - 6.6 It is also considered that a condition specifying the opening times for the car sales business would be appropriate, in order to minimise the impact of the car sales use on the surrounding area, both in terms of highway safety and general amenity. It is noted that the self-storage element of the site operates 24 hours per day. ## - 7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 Subject to the condition outlined, it is concluded that the application is not likely to have such a significant impact on highway safety or neighbouring living conditions as to warrant the application's refusal. - 8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 (Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons: - (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; - (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested; - (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material - (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure, and - (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated. 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 in Article 6(4) who should be given Interested Person Status. I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority. Decision Made : Permitted Committee Meeting Date: 30.10.2017 Signed : E RILEY 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 ## 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. ### Planning Committee Decision 30.10.2017 Application No. : 17/00968/C Applicant : Christopher Bell T/a Simply Store Proposal : Additional use of existing self-storage/document storage warehouse as offices and use of yard for car sales (retrospective) Site Address : John Lancaster House Main Road Crosby Isle Of Man IM4 4BN Presenting Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Addendum to the Officer’s Report The Planning Committee noted that there was a discrepancy between the opening times recommended in the condition and that sought by the applicants. This was an error on behalf of the case officer, and was amended accordingly. ### Conditions of Approval - C 1. At no time shall there be on the site more than six vehicles offered for sale. Reason: In the interest of highway safety and protection of public and private amenity. - C 2. The administration services ancillary to the car sales use hereby approved shall operate between 9:00am and 5:30pm daily, and no customers related to that use shall be served or remain within John Lancaster House outside of those hours. Reason: In the interest of general amenity and controlling the use of the site. - C 3. For the avoidance of doubt, no retail use shall take place from the application site beyond that expressly approved under this application (car sales). Reason: In the interest of controlling the future use of this site, in view of its location near to residential dwellings and with a poor highway access. ### Plans/Drawings/Information The development hereby approved relates to Drawings 1-01 Rev A and 2-02 Rev A, both datestamped as having been received 10th October 2017. --- *Data sourced from the Isle of Man public planning register under the [Isle of Man Open Government Licence](https://www.gov.im/about-this-site/open-government-licence/).* *Canonical page: https://planningportal.im/a/22228-crosby-john-lancaster-house-dwelling/documents/1020830*