Officer Planning Report

{{table:507694}} ## Application No: 03/1646 Page of ### Planning Report and Recommendations #### General Report Site Visited YES/NO 1. Agenda item for P.C. on 23/4/04: To consider letter dated 30/4/04 from DFF following refusal of PA 03/1646. Briars to report 2. I judge that this revised proposal would be acceptable. B&W 15/4 Signed Date ### Summary of objections/views #### Recommendations Approve/Refuse Request withdrawn by applicant by phone B&W 25/4 Signed Date ## Continuation Sheet APPLICATION No. 03/1676 Page of The proposed fencing (whether of "Paladin" mesh or diagonal slatted timber) around the "Dot Com" service yard would present a poor, low-grade appearance to the principal access route, which serves not only the Tesco supermarket but also the redevelopment area south of Lake Road. Note: This decision is without prejudice to a further application proposing walling of facing-bricks to match the existing walling along the north side of the car park. Kirk {{table:507695}} {{table:507696}} I have asked the architect to consider walking in place of the majority of the "Paladin" fencing. {{table:507697}} ## 5th February 2004 Mr B Sindon Planning & Building Control Directorate Planning Section Murray House Mount Havelock Douglas Isle of Man 21 The Crescent Bedford MK40 2RT Tel 01234 358863 Direct 01234 321141 Fax 01234 271210 Dear Brian, ### Tesco Store, Lake Road, Douglas #### Construction of home shopping area, canopy and link walkway #### Planning Ref. 03/1646/B Further to our telephone conversation yesterday I enclose six copies of an amended plan (ref. 15151-013 B) that details the boundary treatment for the dot.com enclosure at Tesco's store in Douglas. We have taken on board your colleague's comments and amended the scheme to include a chevron finish close-boarded fence in place of the previously proposed black weld mesh. The plans also detail the placement of the landscaping on the site, taken from the survey, which would soften the impact of the proposal. I hope that the scheme is now acceptable to you, clearly Tesco are anxious to move forward with this scheme quickly in order to improve working conditions and safety for their staff. I would be grateful if you could contact me to advise on the outcome of the your discussions prior to the application being reported to committee. I look forward to hearing from you. Yours sincerely, Chris Akrill THE DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PARTNERSHIP mailto:[email protected] Enclosed. cc Mr S Fricker Mr B Turnbull Tesco Stores Limited Woods Hardwick BEDFORD - LEEDS - MANCHESTER - GLASGOW - CARDIFF - DUBLIN PARTNERS - RJ Flick wntri - JHI S Riley wntri - SCT Arnold wntri wntri - RJ Robinson wntri - JD Francis wntri - G Armstrong wntri - MR Dodds wntri - SJ Mackay wntri - GE Sollen wntri ASSOCIATE PARTNERS - Michelle C Baib wntri - JRE Mills wntri - EJN Cussen wntri - RA Geo wntri - JJ Williams wntri - A Ramford wntri - Lynsey S Rigg wntri - DT Culahy wntri AD Hughes wntri - Eleanor C Pickles wntri www.devplanning.com 30th March 2004 Mr B Sindon Planning & Building Control Directorate Planning Section Murray House Mount Havelock Douglas Isle of Man Dear Brian, Construction of home shopping delivery area and enclosure Tesco, Douglas Following the refusal of the scheme indicating a timber enclosure for the home shopping area, my Client is pleased to provide for you a revised plan that details a compromise position where by a timber and brickwork enclosure is provided. The Plans are as follows: - 15151-020 B – Proposed detail plan - 15151-032 B – Proposed elevations This includes a half height brick wall, with brisk piers supporting a timber infill panels. The existing landscaping would be retained to soften the development when viewed from the road. It is our view that this solution is a good compromise between our previous timber fence proposal and the Committees requirement for a brick enclosure, with the added benefit of avoiding the inherent solidity of a solid wall, which could be viewed as being overbearing and very stark. The timber insets provide a more natural screen to the dot.com area, which would be every bit as effective as a solid brick wall. This is not an unattractive solution to the enclosure of the dot.com area, and is entirely in keeping with the appearance of the Conservation Area, which does not include the Tesco site. I hope that your Committee Members now feel able to support these proposals and that you are able to provide me some feedback on this scheme in the near future, so that a planning application can be made. BEDFORD LEEDS MANCHESTER GLASGOW CARDIFF DUBLIN PARTNERS - RJ Flack natri - Jill S Riley natri - SCT Arnold natri natcs - RJ Robinson natri - JD Francis natri - G Armstrong natri - MB Dodds natri - SJ Mackay natri - GE Sutton natri ASSOCIATE PARTNERS - Michelle C Bath natri - JRE Mills natri - EJN Cussen natri - RA Gee natri - JJ Williams natri - A Bamford natri - Lynsey E Rigg natri - DT Coleby natri AD Hughes natri - Eleanor C Pickles natri - MK Busten natri - D Jones natri www.devplanning.com I look forward to hearing from you shortly. Yours sincerely Chris Akrill THE DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PARTNERSHIP mailto:[email protected] Enclosed. cc Mr S Fricker Tesco Stores Limited Mr R Seward Tesco Stores Limited Mr M Skillen Stace Mr B Turnbull Woods Hardwick