Loading document...
Application No.: 18/00682/B Applicant: Douglas Borough Council Proposal: Variation of condition 1 of PA 16/01108/B for a temporary site storage compound, to extend the period of approval for a further 2 years. Site Address: Former Site Of 60 & 62 Snaefell Road Willaston Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 6NG Principal Planner: Mr Chris Balmer Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 06.08.2018 _________________________________________________________________
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
Reason: The use proposed is only temporary, and in view of its potential impact on neighbouring living conditions needs to be monitored.
The development hereby approved relates to Drawings PA/01 PA/02 and PA/03, all datestamped as having been received 29th June 2018. _______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons None _____________________________________________________________________________
THIS APPLICATION IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is a rectangular parcel of land situated between nos58 and 64 Snaefell Road in Willaston, Douglas. The land until fairly recently contained a pair of semidetached dwellings, much like those found nearby, but these have been demolished. - 1.2 The wider estate, in the ownership of Douglas Borough Council, is in the process of being renovated and refurbished to include the removal of chimney stacks and re-rendering of the dwellings. To this end, a large storage compound is currently in place on part of an area of public open space, which is sat opposite a church and bounded on three sides by the Willaston Crescent highway and on the fourth side by Barrule Road.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Planning approval is sought for the variation of condition 1 of PA 16/01108/B for a temporary site storage compound, to extend the period of approval for a further 2 years (apx September 2020). The use of the application site as another temporary storage compound for use in conjunction with the wider renovation works. The applicant is Douglas Borough Council. - 2.2 The site is, at present, almost entirely bounded by lollipop fencing, with a pair of inward-opening gates formed by sections of Heras fencing. The lollipop fencing does not completely surround the site, and it returns across the back of the site roughly 3.5m from its rearmost edge. As such, the fencing directly bounds adjacent dwellings to the sides but not to the rear.
2.4 The applicant, as before has explained that there is nowhere else on the northern part of the housing estate to provide what is stated as being an essential storage area. The site is located so as to reduce vehicle movements across the site as a whole, and preventing it from being used as such will considerably increase traffic movements "to the detriment of public
safety". The site is visited on average ten times per day to load or unload materials, and a banksman is always present when the site is in use and pedestrians are directed away from the area. (It is worth noting that, at the time of the site visit, the case officer found the gates open, the site accessible, and no banksman or other such official present.) The applicant indicates that the site has all the necessary safety signs in place.
2.5 The contractor's hours are between 8am and 5pm Monday-Friday, and between 8am and 12midday Saturday, but it is closed during school opening and closing hours [this is presumed to mean the times when children are on their way to, or from, school] as a safety precaution. The site is also closed on Sunday, Manx public holidays, TT week and the Christmas period.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 Creation of a temporary storage compound (retrospective) were approved under PA 16/01108/B. The following conditions where attached:
"C 1. The use hereby approved shall cease by 1st July 2018, and the site cleared of any storage materials by that date.
Reason: the use proposed is only temporary, and in view of its potential impact on neighbouring living conditions needs to be monitored.
3.2 The renovation works were approved under PA 15/00426/B. There was also an application recently before the Planning Committee that sought approval for the redevelopment of a smaller part of the Willaston Estate (PA 16/00775/B) for 41 sheltered apartments.
4.0 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - 4.1 The application site is located within an area zoned as Predominantly Residential on the Douglas Local Plan and Draft Eastern Area Plan.
4.2 Although the proposed use is not in compliance with the Local Plan zoning, the general development considerations as set out in General Policy 2, as well as the pollution-specific parts of Environment Policy 22, of the Strategic Plan should be considered again. - 4.3 General Policy 2 states, in part: "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:
4.4 Environment Policy 22 states: "Development will not be permitted where it would unacceptably harm the environment and/or the amenity of nearby properties in terms of:
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 Highway Services of the Department of Infrastructure offered no objection to the application on 06.08.2018: "Condition 1 of the previous 16/01108/B planning approval allowed the site to be used as a temporary site compound during refurbishment works of the adjacent residential estate until the 1st July 2018. The current application seeks permission to extend this for an additional 2 year period.
There would be no changes to the existing vehicular site access which is served by dropped kerbs and gates that open into the site. The level of site traffic should not be increased as works are ongoing, so no new highway issues should arise from the proposals.
Highway Services does not oppose the application."
6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The main consideration of this application is whether an additional two years (or till September 2020) is considered acceptable or not. The previous approved application did initially seek till September 2020 (5 years) but, it was considered by the Department that this 5 year period would be "too long a period, given the somewhat balanced foregoing assessment, and the impact of the proposal should be re-assessed before then.". - 6.2 The following is taken from the previous officer's assessment which is once again important to consider:
"6.1 It is to be borne in mind that the use to which the site is proposed to be put is, were the site in the position required by the Conditions of that PDO, one that has been considered acceptable in principle by the Department in certain circumstances. That those circumstances
are not, as noted earlier, concluded to apply here is of course such as to mean that an application is required and it must be assessed as such.
6.2 The main issues are therefore considered to be whether the use is acceptable, with due regard had to how its use might affect neighbouring living conditions, and the length of time to which that use should be restricted. - 6.3 It is undeniable that the use of land proposed will be less pleasant to live near relative to its previous use - that is, a pair of dwellings, and on a fairly quiet housing estate as well. There will be more comings and goings of large plant than was previously the case, more noise, more airborne particulates, and more manoeuvring in the highway. None of these is an especially pleasant thing to live near, and it is unfortunate indeed that there is nowhere else on the estate that the proposed use can be sited. - 6.4 That this site is to be used in conjunction with approved works across the entire estate is to be remembered - and, moreover, it is also true that the whole estate is going to feel some level of disturbance along the lines raised above during the coming years. It is certain that some dwellings will feel that effect more than others, and the effect will be different depending on where the works take place. The positioning of the larger storage compound on the public open space, then, while on first appearances seeming to be really a rather unfortunate use of valuable amenity land, at least keeps worst of the effects a good distance from people's homes
6.5 The argument of the applicant that the refusal of this application would lead to the enlargement of the larger compound, and also to more vehicle journeys across the site. This is not considered to be a particularly problematic outcome of the application's refusal. The two sites are about 500m apart on an estate where the approved renovation works are approved to take place on 730 dwellings - it is not considered that a site as small as this will bring an overwhelming strategic benefit to the management of the renovation project. - 6.6 Against that, though, it is noted that the applicant has spent time and money making the site appear in fairly good order (for a storage site), and so in some ways it would be strange were they to do this without particularly good reason. It is not known why the two houses previously in situ here were demolished. - 6.7 All that being said, the key issue is really the extent to which the use that is proposed will have an acceptable impact on neighbouring living conditions. There is not proposed to be any (for example) manufacturing work undertaken on the site, which may be noisy, smelly or eject particulate matter. The use is to be entirely for the storage of plant and materials. That storage will be of inert materials, and so no leachate will find its way into the land, and nor is there likely to be any problematic pollution of the ground resulting - particularly since all the materials are likely to be stored in the short-term only. - 6.8 The use of the site for the purpose intended, then, and subject to appropriate controls of opening hours, is considered to be acceptable. While this is may be disappointing and upsetting to immediate neighbours, it is concluded that there is insufficient harm, and perhaps a wider public benefit, that might be said to arise from the use of the site for the manner proposed that has to be balanced against the nearby and short-term impacts arising from the site's use for this purpose. This is considered to be the fundamental test, and not whether or not there is a better place for this use. - 6.9 In light of the above, the good management and appearance of the site is paramount to ensuring its impact on neighbouring living conditions is kept to a suitable minimum. Accordingly, a number of conditions are recommended.
6.10 The applicant has requested a five year approval. This is considered to be too long a period, given the somewhat balanced foregoing assessment, and the impact of the proposal should be re-assessed before then. It is accordingly concluded that a condition limiting the approval to 24 months, which would match the period as set out in the Temporary PDO, would be appropriate. That period should commence from roughly the time that the yard was opened. No exact date is known, but it is believed to be mid-June. This is not to say that the development will be unacceptable after that period, but, rather, that a fresh assessment of the impact at that time would be appropriate to seek. - 6.11 A condition limiting the opening hours to those set out by the applicant is recommended. A condition limiting the property to a single storage container is recommended. A condition preventing anything above 2.4m in height (except the storage container) being stored on the site is recommended. A condition requiring there to be no manufacturing undertaken on the site is recommended. A condition requiring a remediation plan be provided to the Department at the end of the temporary approval period is recommended."
7.1 Given no objections have been received and given the need for the use of the site to enable the renovating works throughout the estate, it is once again considered acceptable subject to the conditions discussed and approved previously and therefore recommended for an approval. - 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:
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:…13.08.2018
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 officerreport).
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 onlineservices/customers and archive records.
Application No. : 18/00682/B Applicant : Douglas Borough Council Proposal : Variation of condition 1 of PA 16/01108/B for a temporary site storage compound, to extend the period of approval for a further 2 years. Site Address : Former Site Of 60 & 62 Snaefell Road Willaston Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 6NG Principal Planner : Mr Chris Balmer Presenting Officer As above Addendum to the Officer’s Report The Planning Committee approved the application subject to alterations to Condition 2.
Reason: The use proposed is only temporary, and in view of its potential impact on neighbouring living conditions needs to be monitored.
The development hereby approved relates to Drawings PA/01 PA/02 and PA/03, all datestamped as having been received 29th June 2018.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
