**Document:** Officer Planning Report
**Application:** 05/92112/B — Demolition of existing hall and erection of an apartment block containing 15 dwellings, basement car parking and incorporating a vehicular access through the site to the existing adjacent Baptist Church car park
**Decision:** Permitted
**Decision Date:** 2006-02-20
**Parish:** Rushen
**Document Type:** report / officer_report
**Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/79849-rushen-former-methodist-church-demolition-dwelling/documents/1459913

---

# Officer Planning Report

## Planning Report And Recommendations [Table omitted in markdown export] [Table omitted in markdown export] [Table omitted in markdown export] [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Considerations [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Written Representations Mr A Jessop<br/> G P Torkington<br/> M Nolan ### Consultations [Table omitted in markdown export] Car parking spaces and the aisle are not wide enough to accommodate modern vehicles manoeuvring. Visibility splays of 2.4 metres by 18 metres are required to serve the needs of this development. The front wall of the development could be lowered to satisfy this requirement.

## Officer's Report

### The Site

The site represents a rectangular parcel of land situated on the corner of Gellings Avenue and Cronk Road. The site presently accommodates an unused hall with associated parking space: the building is sited in the north eastern, lower part of the site with an access onto Gellings Avenue approximately midway into the site along this frontage. Gellings Avenue is very steeply sloping upward from north east to southwest and there is on street parking on the south eastern side of the street.

### Planning Status

The site lies within an area of Residential use on the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan Order) 1982. In the Port St. Mary Plan which emerged as far as a public inquiry but was not progressed to Tynwald the site falls within an area of Mixed Use where residential, Industry, Offices or Retail would be considered an acceptable land use.

### Planning History

Previously, planning permission was sought and granted for the change of use of the site from a hall to a food processing facility (ready frozen meals) under PA's 94/0190 and 94/0895.

### The Proposal

Proposed here is the demolition of the building and its replacement with a new building which will accommodate 14 parking spaces in the basement, five apartments on the ground floor (4 x 1 bed and 1 x 2 bed) with 7 ground level parking spaces, six apartments on the first floor (2 x 2 bed and 4 x 1 bed) and four apartments on the second floor (4 x 2 bed): making a total of 15 apartments with 22 bedrooms with 21 parking spaces. The parking spaces in the basement are a little under 5m in length and 3m wide which exceeds the minimum standard width. The spaces at ground level are only 2.2m wide and with 5.5m separating the end of the spaces from the end of the building. The applicant has confirmed, having received adverse comments from the Department of Transport, that these spaces and aisle can be increased to satisfy these concerns and has provided a further plan, received on 6th December, 2005 showing how this can be done (by reducing the space between the back of the car parking spaces and Cronk Road).

The new building will be sited towards the eastern end of the site although occupying more of the site than does the present building: the existing has a footprint of approximately 16m by 14m: the proposed is 22m by 14.5m. The new building will be 2.8m taller than the existing. The new building is an attractive building with triangular dormers along the front and rear pitches. The site slopes steeply upward from north east to south west and this slope is taken care of by planted troughs which are at their tallest, 1.5m above pavement level.

There are two trees at the highest end of the site. The uppermost tree would be retained: the lower would be removed to make way for the new entrance and car parking spaces. The trees are self-seeded and are the only trees in the streetsce. The loss of the lower tree is not considered sufficiently detrimental to warrant refusal of the application.

There is a car park to the rear of the site, over which the proposed windows in the rear elevation will look out. There are residential properties opposite the site - some 15.5m from the frontage of the new building. New windows will therefore be within the usually accepted minimum distance of 20m of existing windows.

The proposal makes provision for access through the new car park to the existing car park associated with the Baptist Church behind the application site. This car park would be land-locked if this access

were not provided and I understand the applicant has reached a legal agreement with the Trustees of Port St. Mary Baptist Church to provide and retain this access.

## Representations

There are views from:

The Fire Prevention Officer who recommends consultation with him (standard note 2) The Isle of Man Water Authority who recommend approval of the application of standard note 22 Port St. Mary Commissioners who have no objection to the application A resident of Port Soderick who supports the development although is not inspired by the design

The occupants of 1 and 3, Gellings Avenue respectively who would prefer that the site is used for car parking for local residents, are concerned that the development will create parking problems and that the construction of the building will create noise and dust. They also suggest that the existing building should be used for community purposes.

Most developments have the potential to create noise and dust nuisance, particularly those, like this, which involve the demolition of built fabric. However, the control of demolition and the management of noise and dust is controlled by the Environmental Protection Section of this Department. The fact that a development may cause or have the potential to cause such a nuisance is not, in itself a sustainable reason for refusal.

Department of Transport Highways Division object on the basis of the dimensions and layout of the car parking. This is addressed by the applicant in his submission of 6th December, 2005.

## Assessment

The one outstanding issue is the number of parking spaces: the applicant seems to be counting the single bedrooms in the 2 bed units as 1.5 bedrooms when they are clearly 2 - the overall floor area compared with the Housing (Flats) Regs 1982 would permit 3 persons occupying the building and as such would clearly acknowledge the single bedrooms as such and not half a room. However, a very slight increase (100mm) in the width of the two longest runs of parking spaces in the basement would enable 5 rather than 4 vehicles to be parked in this space, thus increasing the parking capacity of the basement to 16 and the overall capacity to 23 or possibly 24 spaces.

The 1982 Order requires (Part 3 paragraph 11 (2) that regard should be made to the land use designation of the site, which in this case accords with the proposed use of the site. The Order goes on to require that regard is had to the character, amenities and existing and future use of land in the area: in this case the surrounding area is characterised by residential use with no proposals for the residential use or development of the land to the rear and a proposal for residential use of the land opposite (PA 05/92275 - decision pending). There are limited alternative opportunity for development in Port St. Mary and as such, and considering the relatively small scale of the development, the proposal cannot be considered premature. The proposal introduces variety in the appearance of the streetscene as required by 11(2)bi and whilst the building would breach the skyline as viewed from the road, it would do so only marginally more than does the existing building with no detriment to the public view. The existing building is not of architectural interest and is not on any list for consideration for Registration. The proposal meets the requirements of Department of Transport and as such is considered safe and provides for the requisite amount of car parking spaces.

The proposal would occupy a village location and would go towards the satisfaction of the Department's Strategic Objective of providing "for sufficient housing of an acceptable standard and of an appropriate nature and in appropriate locations to meet the needs of the community (including

special needs)" (there are in the proposal lifts and disabled persons' parking spaces which would go towards satisfying the latter) in accordance with the provisions of the emerging Island Strategic Plan which has yet to be considered by Tynwald.

This would appear to be a sustainable location for good use of a presently under-used site and the provision of housing in a local area where there are only limited opportunities for such provision should be welcomed. The scheme makes adequate provision for servicing and car parking and the elevational treatment is not unsympathetic to the streetscene.

Subject to the resolution of the car parking numbers, I would recommend approval of the application following the receipt of the amended plans covering the parking issues above: I requested such plans by e-mail on 14th December, 2005.

Amended plans resolving the parking situation have been received - reference 3B, 4B and 6B. These plans increase the basement parking to 15 spaces (even though the annotation suggests that there will be 14: this has not been amended from the previous plan) and the ground level spaces have more space to the front, resulting in one space per bedroom as is generally required, with some of these spaces being wide enough for use by disabled persons.

Whilst there is less than the generally accepted distance of 20m between overlooking windows front to front across Gellings Avenue (there is around 15m), this distance is generally required between the backs of houses across private amenity space and not across the public highway where unrestricted views into the properties on both sides may already be available.

I would recommend that the following parties are afforded party status:

- Port St. Mary Commissioners
- Department of Transport Highways and Traffic Division
- Fire Prevention Officer
- Isle of Man Water Authority and
- The occupants of numbers 1 and 3, Gellings Avenue who are directly opposite and sufficiently close to the site to be directly affected by the proposed changes and the change in the nature of traffic coming and going to the site.

I would recommend that the Port Soderick resident is not afforded party status as he resides a considerable distance from the development site and cannot be said to be directly affected by the proposal.

### Supplementary Report

The matter of affordable housing was not dealt with in the initial report and further discussions have been held between the applicant, the Department's Housing Section and the Planning Office in this respect. The Housing Section would suggest that there is a need for the provision of affordable units within Port St. Mary and that this site would be acceptable for such provision particularly as only around 10 persons on the waiting list for First Time Buyers' accommodation in the south have children and for whom apartments would be an attractive proposition. The units are, however not true single person units and provide more than 63 square metres of floor space.

The applicant has suggested that the scheme already provides public benefit from the provision of the access to the church car park: provision which reduces the number of apartments and constrains the design and scale of the development. In addition, the development costs which include the demolition of the existing building and disposal of demolition material together with the significant slope of the site, would result in the requirement for affordable housing as part of the scheme rending the project unviable. In addition the applicant would point out that the site was purchased prior to the Tynwald resolution which would have prevented the applicant taking the need to provide affordable units, into the cost and value of the site.

On this basis I would not recommend the inclusion of a requirement for any of the units to be provided as affordable housing.

### Recommendation

**Recommended Decision:** Permitted

**Date of Recommendation:** 09.01.2006

### Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal

**C : Conditions for approval**
**N : Notes attached to conditions**
**R : Reasons for refusal**
**O : Notes attached to refusals**

**C 1.**
The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.

**C 2.**
This permission relates to the erection of an apartment block with associated parking all as shown in drawings 1029/S01, -/02 and -/05A received on 1st November, 2005, -/07 received on 7th December, 2005 and -/03B, -/04B and -/06B all received on 16th December, 2005.

**C 3.**
No apartment may be occupied until such times as the parking spaces shown in drawings 1029/03B and -/04B have been created and are available for use.

**C 4.**
The parking spaces proposed as part of this application must be retained for the sole use of the occupants of the proposed apartments and visitors thereto.

**C 5.**
Prior to the commencement of building works on site, the applicant must have approved by the Planning Authority a scheme for dealing with the storage and collection of refuse from the site.

**N 1.**
For water connections that comprise more than a single connection to a water main or service, or where new water mains and hydrants will be required, the applicant should contact the Isle of Man Water Authority Planning and Projects Section, telephone 695958.

**N 2.**
PRIOR to the commencement of any works the applicant is advised to consult the Chief Fire Officer to ensure that adequate fire precautions are taken.

**N 3.**
The applicant’s attention is drawn to the provisions of the Building Control Act 1991 which includes specific controls on, and requirements in connection with, demolition of buildings in whole or in part. For further information contact the Department’s Office of Environmental Health.

Decision Made : ...
Committee Meeting Date : ...

---

*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/79849-rushen-former-methodist-church-demolition-dwelling/documents/1459913*