Loading document...
Application No.: 17/01079/B Applicant: Victoria Street Properties Ltd Proposal: Alterations to front facade and internal layout to create two storey curtain walling Site Address: 67 Strand Street Douglas Isle Of Man IM1 2EN Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 21.11.2017 Reasons for Refusal: R 1. The existing building benefits from a significant number of traditional shopfront features at its ground floor, and other traditional details on the floors above, and therefore positively contributes to Strand Street in this edge-of-Conservation Area location. Its replacement in the manner proposed would, accordingly [1] fail to respect the scale, form and design of the surroundings, [2] adversely affect the character of the surrounding townscape and locality, and [3] adversely affect important views into and out of the Douglas Promenades Conservation Area, contrary to parts (b), (c) and (g) of General Policy 2, Strategic Policy 5 and Environment Policy 36 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
_______________________________________________________________ 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):
THIS APPLICATION IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE OWING TO THE NATURE AND SCALE OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED.
0.0 SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT - 0.1 The application came before the Planning Committee Members and while the principle of replacing the existing shop front with a more modern frontage was acceptable to the Members, they
My reasoning for applying for a full height glass frontage was because I went into Butlers Choice at the far end of the street and they had implemented a similar layout inside but when you walk in and look back you have four windows at first floor level which there is no way of getting to and in my own opinion it looks odd and like the job was only half done. I can understand why they haven't put in a full height glazed front because in terms of costs based on 67 Strand Street the shopfront would cost approximately £20,000 to take the shopfront up another level would cost in the region of £80,000 which is a considerable difference as I am sure you would appreciate."
0.4 In terms of the design and finish the applicants have indicated that the proposal would replicate the window frame system which can be seen opposite the shop at JD Sports, which was recently opened. The proposed frames are dark grey powder coated aluminium frames. Furthermore, they have no horizontal framing across the windows, unlike JD Sports and therefore retain a more vertical proportion (in a more contemporary way). In terms of the finishes of the building, it is also proposed to replace the existing render with a smooth painted render to complete the more contemporary appearance. The second floor windows would also be replaced with dark grey powder coated aluminium frames, to tie in with the windows below. - 0.5 The use of the aluminium frames in a dark grey will reduce the appearance of the framing around the glazing, being a dark colour and as aluminium is thinner and has a more lightweight appearance. - 0.6 The original Case Officer recommendation is unchanged (other than in relation to Interested Person Status - see below), however if the Planning Committee considered that the principle of replacing the existing more traditional styled frontage with a more contemporary design was acceptable, then this scheme could be considered an appropriate way of going about it. - 0.7 As recorded in the minutes from when last before Committee, a representation has been received from the owner/occupier of Flat 1, 48 Market Street, Douglas (received 10/12/17). This was received after the report was drafted but before the Committee Meeting, and so was presented verbally. In the interests of completeness it is summarised here. The representor states that they live next door to the application site (over 69 Strand St, Argento Jewellers) and that whilst their address is Market Street, the living room and bedroom look out onto Strand Street. The representation indicates no objection to the change of frontage but ask that noise nuisance guidelines regarding hours of work are abided by due to the close proximity of the residential property. The IPS recommendation of the report has been amended to reflect this representation.
0.8 Should the Planning Committee approve the application, the standard 4 year commencement condition should be applied and consideration could be given to the imposition of a condition in relation to hours of working as requested by the neighbour. - 0.9 Please note no further changes have been made to this report.
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is a rectangular parcel of land within which sits the three storey building with a dual aspect onto Strand and Market Streets in Douglas: its address, though, is 67 Strand Street, and it is to the Strand Street-facing elevation that the application the subject of this report relates. - 1.2 The lawful use of the ground floor of the building is for retail, with the floor above in ancillary storage use. The unit is currently vacant, but was until recently occupied by the Ann Summers franchise. - 1.3 The Strand Street frontage is, with the exception of the window opening style, almost entirely traditional in form. The ground floor shop front has a number of traditional features, including decorative stall risers, console brackets, cornice and cill lines and a fascia: there are also decorative features on the entrance door and associated fanlight. - 1.4 Above the ground floor, the window frames are all top-opening casements. The apertures do, however, benefit from decorative render bands and a strong course below the uppermost windows. - 1.5 The site is not within the Douglas Promenades Conservation Area. It does, however, immediately front onto that Conservation Area, which appears to include the adopted highway of Strand Street and all the buildings to the east, but excluding the buildings to the west. The site cannot be seen from the Promenade itself.
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for a replacement shopfront, to include works on the ground and first floor. - 2.2 The existing shop frontage and first floor windows and associated masonry would be removed, to be replaced with an almost entirely glazed finish: there would be a masonry band between the ground and first floor glazing, on which would be sited the new signage associated with the retail premises. The glazing would have powder-coated aluminium frames. - 2.3 The proposed works reflect internal alterations that would provide the building with a void between the ground and first floor.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 Planning approval was granted for the installation of a new shopfront under PA 84/00615/B. Approval was also granted for refurbishment works under PA 90/00303/B. - 3.2.1 Also relevant is the pair of applications submitted to the north on Strand Street at the Joe Jennings betting shop. The first (PA 13/91013/B) sought to remove the existing, traditional frontage and replace it with a large, single window with a lower stall riser below that was devoid of any detailing. This was refused under delegated authority, with the appeal inspector and Minister subsequently confirming that decision, with the following reasons:
"In my view, the unimaginative and utilitarian design of the proposed shop front pays no heed to the local distinctiveness of Douglas's main shopping area. I accept that there are some fully-glazed shop fronts in the vicinity. But, to my mind, their appearance only serves to demonstrate the detrimental effect that insensitive designs can have on an area's distinctive local character. Fortunately, enough traditional shop fronts have survived to make Douglas' shopping environment unique; it still retains its own sense of place." (12)
"Strategic Policy 5 and General Policy 2 (b) and (c) of the IoMSP [Isle of Man Strategic Plan, which at the time was the 2007-adopted version] require development to make a positive contribution to the environment. They also seek to prevent development that would adversely affect the character of the surrounding townscape. In my opinion, the proposed shop front flies in the face of these objectives because its bald appearance would have a materially adverse effect on the local distinctiveness of the retail area in which it is located." (13)
"…the cost and inconvenience of property maintenance does not, in my view, justify the installation of an 'off the peg' shop front that fails to make a positive contribution to the unique character of its surroundings." (14)
3.3 There have been other applications approved in recent years that proposed works that would result in buildings having a similar appearance to that proposed here - namely, contemporary and with a significant amount of glazing. - 3.4 PA 15/01375/B sought and gained approval for the replacement of a pair of single storey buildings with a glass-fronted, two-storey building at 62-66 Strand Street opposite the site that is the subject of this report. Some of the case officer's report is set out below for context - again, the bracketed numbers refer to his report's paragraph numbers:
"The existing buildings (Nrs 62 to 66) is judged to represent an inefficient use of what is a large site set in the centre of the Island's main shopping street. It mainly covers a single floor and has a wide frontage. The use and its current appearance provides little in the way of vitality to the street, nor is beneficial to the visual appearance of the street scene. The replacement of this building with a two storey retail unit is judged to be in accordance with Strategic Policy 1 and Business Policy 10." (6.3)
"…this design is considered appropriate and a vast improvement over the existing units which have very little architectural interest, and arguably have a negative appearance detracting from the street scene." (6.5)
"The proposed building would present a very active frontage onto Strand Street by allowing views into the shop at both ground floor level and first floor level. Very large areas for the display and merchandising of goods would be available. At darker times of the day, the frontage would be illuminated from within the building which would be a significant improvement over the existing situation whereby the amusement arcade presents little in the way of vitality or interest to passersby." (6.6)
"Importantly this type of shop should also act as a further 'draw' of shoppers to this part of the townscape, which again can only be of benefit to the vitality of the town centre." (6.7)
3.5 Adjacent to that site, at 68-72 Strand Street, there is another relevant application. PA 12/00966/B sought and gained approval for the demolition of an amusement arcade and its replacement with a glass-fronted retail unit. The officer assessing the application made a number of very similar comments / assessment conclusions in respect of the application. - 3.6 Both PAs 12/00966/B and 15/01375/B have been implemented.
4.1 The site is zoned as Predominantly Shopping on the Douglas Local Plan.
4.2 Being mindful of the nature of the application and location of the site, the proposal falls to be assessed against the relevant parts of General Policy 2 ((b), (c), (g)) as well as Strategic Policy 5 and Environment Policy 36 of the Strategic Plan.
4.3 The Douglas Town Centre Masterplan was adopted in 2014 and is capable of being a material planning consideration. There are some relevant 'goals' set out under the Vision section of the document:
"To revitalise the high street by creating new retailing opportunities, retaining and enhancing the independent offer, attracting well known high street brands and investment to support town centre activity."
"To create an inviting and attractive place where residents and visitors alike can enjoy a mix of attractions and activities, interlinked by high quality public space."
5.1 Highway Services of the DoI stated the proposal had no highway implications on 7th November 2017, while Douglas Borough Council offered no objection on 30th October 2017. - 6.0 ASSESSMENT
6.1 While the existing shopfront is probably not original to the building, it is nevertheless formed of traditional materials and offers a traditional appearance. It is also prominent from the Douglas Promenades Conservation Area, and prominent on the Island's principal shopping street. Careful consideration is required of the impacts arising from the proposed alterations, which are significant in the context of the building. It is also appropriate to bear in mind the relevant planning history in the area - with applications that have been both approved and refused being material to the assessment here.
6.2 It is of course welcomed that a property owner is willing to invest in their building. However, the development proposed will result in the loss of one of the traditional shop frontages on Strand Street. The street benefits from a number of such units, as well as from highly contemporary units such as those described. The planning system should not stifle innovation nor prevent change for the sake of it. Strand Street is varied in appearance and appears to have a low vacancy rate, and while it is not possible to say what debt is owed to this from the mixture of older and newer properties in the street it is nevertheless a shopping street where appropriate contemporary development has been encouraged. It retains, as noted by the Inspector considering the Joe Jennings replacement shop frontage, "its own sense of place". - 6.3 It is not considered that that proposed here would be appropriate for this building. Were the existing building of poor or inappropriate form or appearance, then a contemporary intervention of the kind proposed would likely be welcomed - as was the case in the aforementioned two schemes opposite to the application site. However (and while it is noted that the existing frontage is not original), what is proposed here is the removal of an almost wholly traditional frontage. One
7.1 Inserting what is judged to be a rather generic glazed finish in a building that contributes positively to the historic appearance of Strand Street is not concluded to be acceptable, and is therefore contrary to parts (b), (c) and (g) of General Policy 2; for the same reason, it is concluded that the proposed development would detrimentally affect important views into and out of the Conservation Area, contrary to Environment Policy 36.
7.2 This conclusion is consistent with the outcome in respect of the Joe Jennings applications. - 7.3 It is not concluded that the other highly contemporary and substantially glazed frontages in the area form a persuasive precedent in this case: the aforementioned buildings were approved in place of buildings judged highly inappropriate to the character and appearance of the area such that their removal was of clear benefit to the quality of experience / appearance of Strand Street. The current appearance of 67 Strand Street already contributes positively to that quality, and accordingly it has been concluded that its loss in the manner proposed would be contrary to the aforementioned policies.
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:
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: 12.02.2018
Signed : C BALMER 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
Application No. : 17/01079/B Applicant : Victoria Street Properties Ltd Proposal : Alterations to front facade and internal layout to create two storey
curtain walling Site Address : 67 Strand Street Douglas Isle Of Man IM1 2EN Presenting Officer : Mr Chris Balmer Addendum to the Officer’s Report
The Committee unanimously overturned the recommendation of the case officer and the application was approved subject to the following condition(s).
Reason: To comply with article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
Reason: To comply with article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawings reference numbers 1 REV 1, 2, 11 REV 2 and 12 received on 11th October 2017 & 18th January 2018.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
