Report to Council of Ministers

Report To The Council Of Ministers ### Application By The Department Of Infrastructure For Planning Approval For Erection Of An Elevated Car Parking Deck And Amendment Of Existing Parking Layout At The Car Park, The Tongue, Douglas, Isle Of Man Case Reference: DF13/0004 Planning Application: 13/00133/B ### Introduction 1. The application relates to a site in which the Department of Infrastructure has an interest as tenant and operator. The Department is also the applicant. Consequently, the application has been referred to the Council of Ministers for determination pursuant to Article 10 of The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005. I have been appointed to consider the application and to make this report. I inspected the site on 29 April 2013. This report provides brief descriptions of the site and of the proposal, and a summary of a Planning Statement provided by the Department of Infrastructure. It also details the main points from a Flood Risk Assessment ("FRA") and comments made by the Highways Division. It continues with my assessment, conclusions and recommendation. ### The Site And Surroundings And The Proposed Development 2. The site comprises a parcel of land which is an existing car park. It lies on the eastern side of Bridge Road between North Quay and South Quay. There is an adjacent building to the east whose occupants include Manx Marine and Douglas Yacht Club. It is proposed to erect a car parking deck above the existing car park and to amend the layout of the existing parking. The deck would be of concrete, supported by columns and steel beams. The car park would be operated on a pay and display basis. ### Planning Statement The main points made in the Department of Infrastructure's Planning Statement are: 3. There are no previous planning applications that are specifically material to the assessment of the proposed development. The site is located within a wider area designated as "Waterways, Harbours, Marina (Inner Harbour)" under the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998. It is in an area identified as being at flood risk on the Douglas Harbour Tidal Flood Risk Map. General Policy 2 and Environment Policies 10 and 13 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan ("the Strategic Plan") are material to the assessment of the planning application. ### Flood Risk Assessment The main points made in the FRA are: 4. The site has an existing ground level of 4.15 m AOD. The proposed car park would have 2 separate levels, with the lower floor level at 4.2 m AOD and the upper floor level at 6.95 m AOD. 5. The site is in a High Risk Flood Zone for river/coastal flooding. The 1 in 200 year tidal flood level for the site is 5.36 m AOD including climate change. That is above the lower floor level but below the level of the proposed parking deck. There is no significant flood risk from rainfall, ground water, sewers or other sources. The last known flood of the site in February 2002 reached levels of around 5.0 m AOD. The proposed upper floor level would not be subject to a significant flood risk. The proposed access from Bridge Road would allow the upper floor to be operated without risk from flooding. The proposal would not increase the risk of flooding elsewhere. Taking account of the non-residential type of development proposed, and the intended use of construction materials that are resistant to flooding, it is not proposed to raise the lower car park above the 1 in 200 year flood level. The lower level would not remain in use at times of potential flooding. The Department would monitor potential flooding events, and electronic signage would advise of closure of the lower level at times of potential flooding. 6. The existing car park has a concrete impermeable surface. The proposal would use the existing outfall through the River Douglas wall. It would not increase the existing impermeable area or the existing rate of runoff. ### Comments Of The Highways Division 7. The Highways Division raised 5 matters of detail in response to the drawings originally submitted, but has confirmed that its concerns have been satisfied by Revision B of Drawing No. SC1271/P/10-03 and by clarification provided in an accompanying message. The revised drawing included the provision of visibility splays of 2.4m by 35m and of tactile paving at the proposed additional access. ### Inspector'S Assessment And Conclusions 8. The main issues in this case relate to visual impact, highway safety and flood risk. 9. On the first issue, the proposed development would be seen both by users of Bridge Road and by the occupiers of properties on the west side of that road. These properties include the apartments at Quay West, directly opposite the site. However, the outlook and vista would only be marginally changed. Rather than overlooking the existing hard surfaced car park at the lower level, users of the road and the occupiers opposite would see the new deck of car parking. This would be at roughly the same level as Bridge Road, although slightly above the level of the road at the northern end due to the fall of the road northwards across the site frontage. The new deck would also be at roughly the same level as the 1st floor of the adjacent building to the east. Given that the general view of which the proposed parking deck would form part incorporates the boats and other paraphernalia of the harbour, the extent of the visual impact of the proposal would not be so great as to cause significant harm to the character and appearance of the area sufficient to justify refusal of the application. The incorporation of balustrade railings around the proposed deck, to match the existing railings on this side of Bridge Road, would help to integrate the development visually with the context. 10. I have concluded that the visual impact of the proposal would be acceptable. I have identified no conflict in that respect with the parts of General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan which expect development to respect the site and surroundings, and to avoid adverse effects on the character of the surrounding townscape, the amenity of local residents and the character of the locality. 11. On the second issue, the revised plan which is under consideration provides for the necessary visibility splays at the proposed site access, and the provision of tactile paving at the point at which pedestrians would need to cross that access. Although the Highways Division initially objected to the provision of an additional access, preferring use of the existing access, that objection has not been maintained. It is difficult to see how the existing access, which comprises a ramp down to the lower level, could facilitate entry and exit from the proposed deck, given that provision of a ramp back up within the car park would significantly reduce the space available for parking in a scheme which would only provide 40 parking spaces on the proposed upper deck in any event. The spacing between the proposed and existing accesses should be sufficient to avoid undue conflicts between the movements of vehicles entering and exiting at these 2 points. Case Ref. DF13/0004 Application No. 13/00133/B Page 2 12. I have concluded that the proposal would be unlikely to cause any significant harm to highway safety. I have found no conflict in that respect with the part of General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan which seeks to avoid unacceptable effects on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways. 13. With respect to flood risk, the FRA indicates that the parking spaces on the proposed upper parking deck would not be at any material risk of flooding. The FRA also establishes that the proposal would not increase the risk of flooding on other sites. Although the lower deck of car parking would be liable to flooding, that would also be the case if the proposed development did not take place and the existing ground level car park remained in operation in its current form. I have found no justification on flood risk grounds for refusing the proposed development. As the FRA has been provided, and as the development would not result in an unacceptable risk of flooding, I have identified no conflict with the intentions of Environment Policies 10 and 13 of the Strategic Plan. 14. In the light of my assessment of the 3 main issues given above, I have concluded that the proposed development should be approved. The approval should be subject to conditions to cover matters which have been suggested by the Planning Authority in an email response to my request for further information. I have amended the wording suggested for condition 2 to include the numbers of all the submitted drawings which have not been superseded. The copy of Drawing No SC1271/P/10-03 Rev. B on the appeal file is not date stamped, but I have included the reference to the date of 26 March 2013 suggested by the Planning Authority on the assumption that the office copy of that drawing bears that date. I have amended the suggested wording of condition 3 to require retention of the electronic signage system for flooding and potential flooding events. #### Recommendation 15. I recommend that the planning approval be granted for erection of an elevated car parking deck and amendment of existing parking layout at the Car Park, The Tongue, Douglas, Isle Of Man, subject to the following conditions: 1. The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of 4 years from the date of this notice. 2. This planning approval relates to Drawing Nos. 0001, SC1271/P/10-00, SC1271-10-01, SC1271/P/10-02 Rev. A, SC1271/P/11-01 Rev. A, SC1271/P/12-01 Rev. A and IM1437/SK01 (all date stamped 5 February 2013) and Drawing No. SC1271/P/10-03 Rev. B (date stamped 26 March 2013). 3. Prior to the commencement of development details of electronic signage to advise of closure of the lower level of the car park at times of flooding or potential flooding must be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. Prior to the first use of the car park the agreed electronic signage must be installed and must be operational. The electronic signage system shall be retained and maintained thereafter for the lifespan of the use of the car park. Stephen Amos MA (Cantab) MCD MRTPI Independent Inspector Case Ref. DF13/0004 Application No. 13/00133/B Page 3