Loading document...
Application No.: 17/01308/A Applicant: Mr Mark Ellison Proposal: Approval in principle for the construction of 24 apartments Site Address: Warehouse & Premises Millmount Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 1HD Principal Planner: Mr Chris Balmer Photo Taken: 17.01.2018 Site Visit: 17.01.2018 Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 11.03.2019 _________________________________________________________________
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
Reason: To comply with article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013.
Reason: To comply with the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure)(No2) Order 2013.
Reason: To provide adequate safeguards are in place to ensure Japanese Knotweed is not spread.
N 1. The decision to grant planning approval, subject to a Section 13 agreement, was made by Planning Committee on the 18th March 2019. The issue of the decision notice has been triggered by the Section 13 agreement having been concluded. The 21 days for appeal (for those with Interested Person Status) runs from the date of the decision notice.
This approval relates to the submitted documents Design & Access Statement and Flood Risk Statement both date stamped as received 20th December 2017, drawing reference numbers 17/2630/01 A date stamped as received 16th February 2018 and 17/2630/03 A date stamped 11th June 2018. Along with the replacement application form date stamped 21st February 2019.
Please note NO approval is hereby given to the to the submitted documents Traffic Statements, Road Safety Audit & Response to Road Safety Audits and drawings reference numbers 16/2630/10A and 16/2630/11A, 17/2630/20 received on 20th December 2017 and 11th June 2018 as all these documents/plans deal with access arrangements to the site which were subsequently removed for consideration under this application.
_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons
It is recommended that the following persons should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not 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):
Manx Utilities - Drainage as they do not clearly identify the land which is owned or occupied which is considered to be impacted on by the proposed development in accordance with paragraph 2A of the Policy and they do not clearly identify the land which is owned or occupied which is considered to be impacted on by the proposed development in accordance with paragraph 2A of the Policy.
Rosemanly, New Castletown Road, Douglas is not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy. _____________________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS A SECTION 13 LEGAL AGREEMENT IS REQUIRED TO BE UNDERTAKEN
1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The site is the a parcel of developed land which accommodates an existing three storey Warehouse building within the Millmount area in Douglas. The site sits to the southern side of New Castletown Road, south of Mylchreest Motors complex and west of the National Sports Centre complex. - 1.2 The site is accessed via an existing access which serves Mylchreest Motors, other business and residential properties (The Laurels/The Hollies), albeit both properties are empty. Permission was also recently approved of a single dwelling which would also utilise this access, albeit this has not yet been constructed.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The application seeks approval in principle for the construction of 24 apartments. All other matters (siting, design, access, external appearance of the building[s], internal layout, and landscaping of the site etc) would be considered at any future Reserved Matters application. - 2.2 The site plan shows an indicative position of the new apartment building, being sited over four floors and also showing a total of 48 parking spaces. Access to the site (albeit not a matter for consideration at this stage) is proposed to be from the existing entrance onto the New Castletown Road, where an existing roadway runs in a southern direction towards the site which could give access to the new apartments and other properties in the area.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY AND STATUS - 3.1 The site lies within an area of 'Residential Use' on the Douglas Local Plan of 1998. The site is not within a Conservation Area. The site is also within a Flood Risk Area from the adjacent River Dhoo. Under the Draft Area Plan for the East the site is re-designated as "Industrial". As such, the Strategic Plan is considered relevant in this case as follows: - 3.2 Strategic Policy 1 states: "Development should make the best use of resources by:
3.4 Strategic Policy 2 states: "New development will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions of these towns and villages. Development will be permitted in the countryside only in the exceptional circumstances identified in paragraph 6.3." - 3.5 The Strategic Plan identifies a hierarchy of settlements that guide what type of development is appropriate within them. Douglas is designated as the main employment and service centre for the Island. - 3.6 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:
3.7 Housing Policy 4 states that: "New housing will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions(1) of these towns and villages where identified in adopted Area Plans…" - 3.8 Environment Policy 4 states that: "Development will not be permitted which would adversely affect:
Some areas to which this policy applies are identified as Areas of Ecological Importance or Interest on extant Local or Area Plans, but others, whose importance was not evident at the time of the adoption of the relevant Local or Area Plan, are not, particularly where that plan has been in place for many years. In these circumstances, the Department will seek site specific advice from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry if development proposals are brought forward."
3.9 Environment Policy 7 states: "Development which would cause demonstrable harm to a watercourse, wetland, pond or dub, and which could not be overcome by mitigation measures will not be permitted. Where development is proposed which would affect a watercourse, planning applications must comply with the following criteria:
3.10 Environment Policy 10 states: "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." - 3.11 Environment Policy 13 states: "Development which would result in an unacceptable risk from flooding, either on or off-site, will not be permitted." - 3.12 Housing Policy 5 states: "In granting planning permission on land zoned for residential development or in predominantly residential areas the Department will normally require that 25% of provision should be made up of affordable housing. This policy will apply to developments of 8 dwellings or more." - 3.13 Recreation Policy 3 states: "Where appropriate, new development should include the provision of landscaped amenity areas as an integral part of the design. New residential development of ten or more dwellings must make provision for recreational and amenity space in accordance with the standards specified in Appendix 6 to the Plan." - 3.14 Transport Policy 4 states: "The new and existing highways which serve any new development must be designed so as to be capable of accommodating the vehicle and pedestrian journeys generated by that development in a safe and appropriate manner, and in accordance with the environmental objectives of this plan." - 3.15 Transport Policy 7 states: "The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards. The current standards are set out in Appendix 7."
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 4.1 There are no previous planning applications which are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 All the comments received where made when the initial application was proposing the access also being a matter consideration at this time. However, the initially application was altered so only the principle of the use of the land for 24 apartments is now under consideration.
5.1 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services make the following comments: "18.01.2018 - The application is for approval in principle for construction of 24 apartments. The accompanying Traffic Statement states at section 4.0 that "The proposal has been designed to provide 2 parking spaces per apartment". However, no drawing has been provided which shows the car park access arrangements or the car park layout and circulation. The Traffic Statement states at section 5.0 that "The proposal will include for secure cycle parking". However, no detail regarding the type, quantity or positioning of the cycle parking is given. The Traffic Statement states at section 6.0 that "The proposal includes for an area of shared surface" it is proposed to provide a shared surface between the development and the main vehicular entrance at New Castletown Road. Section 6.0 of the Traffic Statement also states that "The proposals for the shared access area are shown on the drawing included in appendix
H". However, no appendix H was included with the traffic statement. It is important that any such shared surface arrangements are designed to accommodate those who may find shared surfaces difficult to interpret such as the blind/visually impaired, disabled people and people with cognitive difficulties. In addition, given that there are shared uses in the area careful design detail will be required to avoid poor parking behaviour on the undifferentiated shared surface. The traffic statement does not discuss servicing and it is unclear as to how fire engines and servicing vehicles would manoeuvre within the development. In addition, Section 5 of the Traffic Statement does not discuss the potential impact of the additional Trips generated by the proposed development on the existing priority access junction. Highway Services have no objection in principle to the proposals. However, it is recommended that consideration is given to the above comments before any formal application is made."
Following these initial comments the applicant's provided additional plans/comments, and Highway Services made the following comments:
There is conflicting information in the application between the various plans submitted and therefore none of the plans are agreed or accepted by Highway Services. The red line application boundary is different on various plans.
Drawing no. 16/2630/10A dated May 2017 shows that the existing site access route from the A5 New Castletown Road is approximately 5m wide. This should be acceptable for emergency vehicle access as it is above the minimum 3.7m width for a fire appliance which is the largest emergency vehicle. However, the plans do not demonstrate that a fire appliance would be able to turn around within the site. An indicative proposed site layout drawing at a suitable scale is therefore required to demonstrate that this would be achievable, with an AutoTRACK plot of a 2.6m x 8.6m fire engine turning left in and left out of the site and turning around within the site. The proposed refuse collection arrangements for the apartments have not been provided and it may be that a refuse vehicle needs to be able to enter, turn around and leave the site in forward gear (depending on the refuse arrangements for adjacent premises). A scale AutoTRACK plot of a 10.5m length large refuse vehicle is required to show that the indicative site layout requested above could facilitate this. Alternatively, the proposed refuse collection arrangements should be discussed with the refuse collection authority and submitted for highway approval. There is no direct pedestrian and cycle route between the site and New Castletown Road according to the latest proposals which is required for a residential development. Although drawing no. 16/2630/11A dated May 2017 shows alternative routes, some of these are outside the ownership of the applicant and not on the adopted highway which may therefore be unusable and unsuitable for pedestrians, particularly the disabled and visually impaired pedestrians, and cyclists. If the applicant wishes to promote these routes they would therefore need to confirm that the relevant landowners agree to their use by pedestrians and cyclists, the footpath/cycle route widths, the gradients (1:12 maximum) and if on a Public Right of Way (PROW) it must be designated for cycle use as necessary. These alternative routes cannot be accepted without this level of detail and even if this is subsequently adequately demonstrated, a convenient and direct pedestrian and cycle route is still required between the site and the A5 New Castletown Road for some journeys on foot and by bicycle.
As a result, pedestrians and cyclists would need to be able to use the existing site access route in a safe manner although there is highway concern about the conflicts with vehicle users of the adjacent businesses. The car sale business in particular is likely to generate a lot of vehicles manoeuvring around the site and access road as vehicles are taken on test drives. It is
therefore suggested that this is discussed with the adjacent premises to develop a safe pedestrian and cycle route that would not adversely impact on the operation of these businesses. It is anticipated that any changes to the site access to improve safety, as suggested by the applicant, could not be implemented without the agreement of the businesses as they are likely to (partly) own or have a legal right of access to their premises along this route. This issue has to be resolved now as this application seeks approval for means of access.
The parking standards in 'The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016' require 2 car parking spaces for a dwelling with 2+ bedrooms and 1 space for a 1 bedroom apartment. An indicative site layout should be provided to show that this level of site parking would be achievable, with adequate space within the site to enable cars to manoeuvre in and out of the spaces and for an on-site turning area to allow vehicles to enter and leave the site in forward gear. The final parking layout could be secured via a planning condition if the parking access, egress and turning arrangements are agreed as part of the current application. Car parking spaces should be 2.5m x 5m with a 6m aisle width. The proposal for some of the parking below ground floor level may not be practical at this location, particularly due to the proximity of the site to the adjacent river.
The parking standards also require 1 cycle parking space per apartment. A proposed cycle parking location should be shown on a revised indicative proposed site layout plan. The full details of the cycle parking could be agreed at a later date via a planning condition.
The highway visibility arrangements at the existing site access junction onto New Castletown Road are considered adequate. However, any subsequent changes to the junction layout as advised in the RSA would need to be accompanied by highway visibility splays of 2.4m x 43m in both directions for the 30mph speed limit.
The designer's response to the RSA does not adequately deal with the following highway issues which need to be considered as part of the current application, rather than subsequent detailed design, as they refer to and/or affect the site access arrangements:
5.2 Douglas Borough Council does not oppose (09.01.2018).
5.3 Senior Biodiversity Officer (DEFA) recommends a bat survey be undertaken before the building is demolished which could be a condition of any approval; and also note that Japanese Knotweed is recorded along this river and therefore recommend a check for this plant before any detailed plans come forward as the plant must not be spread by development activates such as moving dug materials. (12.01.2018). - 5.4 Manx Utilities - Drainage have no objections to this proposal in principle. Should the proposal be approved a full Flood Risk Assessment should be submitted (26.01.2018). - 5.5 Inland Fisheries Development Manager (DEFA) have no objection in principle to this development, although some concern regarding the potential impact on the nearby watercourse and associated fish populations; notes Environment Policy 7 (d) which normally prevent development within 8m of any watercourse in order to protect the watercourse; acknowledges there is an existing building but protection of the remaining natural bankside would be required; also appropriate lighting to limit the impact on fish migration would need to be considered as part of any detailed design; and should the application be approved the applicants need to complete a 'Development within 9m of the Watercourse' form which will deal the matters above (03.01.2018). - 5.6 Department of Infrastructure - Public Estates and Housing Division (14.02.18) comment that there are 384 persons on the general public sector waiting lists or affordable housing and 52 persons on the active first time buyers register seeking to purchase a first buyer home in the Easter Area; and 25% of the number of units approved within the site should be affordable units. - 5.7 The owners/occupiers of Rosemanly, New Castletown Road, Douglas (16.01.2018) make the following comments which can be summarised as (15.01.2018); can see why there would be amenity advantages to redeveloping the site; however, are aware of potential noise/light issues to the new occupants given the floodlights and PA system form the NSC outdoor pitches; although site is designed as residential it is currently used as mixed use with car showroom, light industrial and distribution uses, although aware of limited number of small residential properties to the south of site; do not agree with the traffic movements will be 0.5
6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 In determining the application it is considered the main issues are; the principle of developing the site for residential use; potential impact upon highway network/parking; potential flood risk; amenities of future occupants; open space provision; affordable housing; and ecologic issues. PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPING THE SITE FOR RESIDENTIAL USE - 6.2 Initially there was concern given that any occupants of the new units would need to travel past Mylchreest's garage and forecourts (sale of vehicles) to access the site. Furthermore, beyond the application to the south are a number of buildings used for light industrial/warehousing purposes. Accordingly, there was concern of the amenity value of the proposed new apartments due to the character and appearance and use of the immediate and surrounding area initially appears more light industrial/warehousing than residential.
6.3 These views were also shared when applications for a new dwelling (15/01041/A & 16/01244/REM) further to the south of the site was considered and for the creation of an additional apartments (total of two) within the adjacent building (15/00650/B) to the north of the site. Approval (15/00724/A) has also been granted to two additional dwellings (replacing an existing dwelling) adjacent to the area, albeit using an alternative access to the application site. These two dwellings are adjacent to the west of the warehouse building (WDS Premises), while the application site is opposite this warehouse building to the east of it. It is noted that in the immediate area there are or the potential to be a total of ten residential dwellings which essentially forms part of the site/immediate adjoin the area. - 6.4 Significant material weight is given to the Douglas Local Plan which designates the site as residential use. Therefore it is arguably that the plan aims to encourages residential development, which in tune has the potential to improve the character and appearance of the area and perhaps encourage the non-residential uses to more appropriate locations. Ideally, this would be undertaken by one single scheme; however, that is not what has been submitted. - 6.5 Since the application was submitted the Draft Area Plan for the East has been published and designates the whole area (including sites of recent approvals for residential) as "Industrial". As the plan is a draft at this stage there is little weight attached to it; albeit it is a material planning consideration. - 6.6 Consideration should also be given to The Isle of Man Strategic Plan which has been adopted (June 2007 & 1st April 2016). Within this document Strategic Policies 1 & 2 require that new dwellings be located within existing sustainable settlements. Spatial Policy 1 also indicates that the Douglas urban area will remain the main employment and services centre for the Island. - 6.7 More recently update to the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 has been undertaken and adopted, which identified that a total of 2,440 new dwellings is required to be provided between the years of 2011 to 2026 in the east of the Island alone. A total of 5,100 dwellings in required over this same period throughout the Island. Given Douglas is regarded as the main employment and services centre for the Island, it is reasonable to consider the majority of these dwellings are likely to be provided in or around Douglas. - 6.8 Accordingly, it is consider the principle of residential development is acceptable. However, it should be noted that this is not an automatic reason to allow such development. Whether 24 apartments are acceptable will be considered in the following paragraphs. POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON HIGHWAY NETWORK/PARKING - 6.9 As noted by Highway Services initially comments, there was a number of concerns. These concerns are still in place. The applicants did try to provide the required information to satisfy Highway Services concerns, including an updated Traffic Statement, Road Safety Audit and a number of plans all to try resolving the concerns raised by Highway Services. However, an agreement has not made. Subsequently, to get the principle for residential development on the site established, the applicants removed the access from this application as a matter to consider now. In making this consideration the applicant should be aware that if this application is approved, The Department in no way is accepting the access arrangement as shown is acceptable. The applicants would need to demonstrate that access to the site can be achieved in a safe and acceptable manner at any future reserved matter stage. If it subsequently transpires that the existing access cannot be utilised for the level of development proposed, then the applicants may have to either reduce the level of development or seek alternatives access arrangements.
carefully designed taking into account the constricts of the site/surroundings and ensuring amenities for future occupants are acceptable. The designer at the Reserved Matters stage will need to consider all these points carefully and the applicants are strongly recommend to discuss and future application with the Department at an early stage. Overall, it is considered the site could be designed to ensure the residential amenities of future occupants are provided in an appropriate way.
6.17 In terms of Open Space provision, where a development is more than 10 units there is a requirement for open space to be provided, ideally on the site, but where not possible (generally apartment sites) a commuted sum payment is required (Recreation Policy 3). This would be undertaken by a Section 13 Legal Agreement. Whilst there is guidance on how Recreation Policy 3 should be applied, as set out in Appendix 6 of the Strategic Plan, there is no advice on how commuted sums should be calculated, other than the sum should be the equivalent of the cost to the developer of providing the open space within the site. In the past we have generally asked the Local Authority to agree an amount with the applicants, as the Local Authority would ultimately be responsible for spending it on open space provision in the area. - 6.18 In this case there is perhaps some scope to some of the Open Space to be provided on site (southern section of the site); although until a detailed plans have been prepared it is difficult to say for certain at this stage. The applicants have confirmed that they are happy to enter into a Legal Agreement (perhaps at the Reserved Matters Stage) for a commute sum payment of any shortfall there may be. Accordingly, it is considered given the precise details are not yet know the Reserved Matters application needs to address this matter in more detailed. AFFORDABLE HOUSING - 6.19 Housing Policy 5 of the Strategic Plan indicates that the Planning Authority will normally require that 25% of provision should be made up of affordable housing. This policy will apply to developments of 8 dwellings or more. Given submission proposed 26 dwellings this equates to 6 affordable dwellings (25% of 24 units=6). A Section 13 Legal Agreement would need to be entered into by the applicant and the Department to ensure the affordable housing is provided. The applicants have no objection to this. ECOLOGIC ISSUES - 6.20 The main issues to ecologic issues relate to the impact's upon bats within the existing warehouse building proposed to be demolished and a potential issue with Japanese Knotweed which has been recorded in the area of the site. It is considered both issues can be addressed via a condition.
7.1 It is considered that the proposal would be comply with the relevant planning policies of The Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016) and Douglas Local Plan, for the reasons set out in this report, it is recommended that the application be approved. - 8.0 SECTION 13 LEGAL AGREEMENTS
8.1 The application requires providing a 25% affordable housing requirement (total of 6 units) which the applicants are happy to do; either in the way of units within the building and/or commuted sum payments in lieu of affordable housing. - 9.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS
9.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 (Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons:
9.2 The decision maker must determine:
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 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:…18.03.2019
Signed :…………………………………….. 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
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
