Officers Report

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Applicant: Department For Health And Social Care Proposal Conversion and extension of nurses' home to provide 37 apartments and cafe with takeaway with associated car, motorcycle and bicycle parking and landscaping Site Address Nurses Home Westmoreland Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM1 4AJ Case Officer : Mr Chris Balmer Site Visit: Expected Decision Level Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Approve subject to Legal Agreement Date of Recommendation 30.05.2022

Conditions and Notes for Approval

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions

• C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

• C 2. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or operated until the parking areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans IOM- EWA- ZZ- ZZ- GA- A17701 REV P1. Such areas shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking and turning of vehicles associated with the development and shall remain free of obstruction for such use at all times. Reason: To ensure that parking provision is made for off-street parking
• C 3. The development shall not be occupied or operated until the secure and/or covered bicycle stores and motorcycling parking bays have been provided in accordance with the approved plans IOM- EWA- ZZ- ZZ- GA- A- 17701 REV P1 . The secure and covered bicycle store and/or motorcycling parking bays shall be retained at all times thereafter.

Reason: To promote sustainable travel in the interests of reducing pollution, congestion and given the lack of parking provision within the site.

• C 4. The development shall not be occupied or operated until the secure and covered bin stores have been provided in accordance with the approved plans IOM- EWA- ZZ- ZZ- GA- A- 17701

REV P1 and 2781_LG(9-)01 REV P0. The secure and covered bin stores shall be retained at all times thereafter for this purpose.

Reason: To ensure adequate and appropriate bin storage.

• C 5. Prior to the occupation of the apartments hereby approved details of the rear boundary (northeast) treatment shall be submitted and approved by the Department and these shall be completed prior to the occupation of any apartment and retained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Department. Reason: To improve the residential amenities of the occupants of the ground floor apartments.
• C 6. No development shall commence until a schedule of materials and finishes and samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces, including roofs, windows, new brickwork and movement joints have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed with the Department. Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.
• C 7. No development shall commence until an alternative means of fall arrest system to the roof have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed with the Department. Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.
• C 8. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping on drawing IOM-EWA-ZZ-ZZ-DR-L-79001 REV P0 must be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the completion of the development or the occupation of the development, whichever is the sooner. Any trees or plants which die or become seriously damaged or diseased must be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species. The hard landscaping works (i.e. footpaths etc) shall be completed in full accordance with the approved details prior to the first operation/occupation of the development thereby permitted. Reason: To ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development.
• C 9. The area identified as "café" at ground floor level and as shown on drawing IOM- EWAZZ- ZZ- GA- A- 17701 P1 is permitted to operate under Use Classes 1.3 & 1.4 only. Reason: Approval has been sought for these uses only and has been considered as such.
• C 10. All recommendations listed within the approved "Protected Species Report" prepared by Manx Wildlife Trust dated January 2022 (Section 6.1) are to be fully adhered to. Reason: To provide adequate safeguards for the ecological species existing on the site.
• C 11. The development shall not be occupied or operated until the bat, bird and bee boxes as shown on approved drawing IOM-EWA-ZA-ZZ-GA-A-70501 REV P1 (additional as per Ecosystem Policy Office comments are also approved) and shall be retained at all times thereafter. Reason: In the interest of bio-diversity of the site. This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.

The proposed application requires a balanced decision, against the scheme is the "clear and pleasant" outlooks for some of the apartments to the rear of the building, the lack of affordable housing provision on the site at this time (albeit off set for a future development or a commuted sum payment) and lack of on-site parking. These factors go against the application.

However, a balance needs to be taken and whether the positives of developing the site sufficient outweigh these concerns or not. In favour the site is designated for mixed use and this proposal for residential and for a café would comply with this designation and fit well within this area of Douglas, which is the main settlement for housing, services, education, shops, employment & public transport and the most sustainable town on the IOM. The aims of the IOM Strategic Plan and the Area Plan for the East both promote sustainable developments which can utilise existing services and have good transport links. Clearly, therefore the principle of developing the site for residential development/cafe weight in favour of the application. Further, the proposal to redevelopment an existing building of architect, historical and social interest, while extending in a sensitive and appropriate way all weighs significantly in favour of the development.

On balance, and in light of the above, it is concluded the proposals complies with the relevant planning policies of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, Residential Design Guide 2021 and the Area Plan for the East 2020 and therefore it is recommended the application is approved.

Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawings reference numbers all received; 10.03.2022

- 100 REV A - 101 REV A

- 300 REV A - 301 REV A

• IOM- EWA- ZZ- ZZ- GA- A- 10411 REV P1 IOM- EWA- ZZ- ZZ- GA- A- 10414 REV P1
• IOM- EWA- ZZ- ZZ- GA- A- 10412 REV P1

- IOM- EWA- ZA- ZZ- GA- A- 70501 REV P1

• IOM-EWA-ZZ-ZZ-DR-A-10501 REV P0 IOM- EWA- ZA- ZZ- GA- A- 10601 REV 01 IOM- EWA- ZA- ZZ- GA- A- 19001 REV P3

IOM- EWA- ZA- ZZ- GA- A- 70502 REV P1

- IOM-EWA-ZZ-ZZ-DR-A-10502 REV P0

- IOM- EWA- ZZ- ZZ- GA- A- 10413 REV P1

- 05 IOM- EWA- ZZ- ZZ- DR- A- 19002 REV P0

• 02

• 20 10 2781_LG(9-)01 REV P0 Design and Access Statement - Elliswilliams Fire Strategy - SPL Fire Engineering Ltd Flood Risk Assessment - BB Consulting Engineers Planning Statement Relating to Drainage - BB Consulting Engineers Planning Energy Statement - March Consultants Limited Planning Statement - Sarah Corlett Town Planning Consultancy Protected Species Report - Manx Wildlife Trust Structural Inspection and Report - BB Consulting Engineers
• 21.03.2022

IOM-EWA-ZZ-ZZ-DR-L-79001 IOM- EWA- ZZ- ZZ- GA- A- 17701

_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the following Government Departments should be given Interested Person Status on the basis that they have made written submissions relating to planning considerations:

Public Estates & Housing Division (DOI) The IOM Fire and Rescue Service

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 4(2):

16 Brighton Terrace, 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.

7 Belmont Hill, Douglas 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; are 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; as they do not refer to the relevant issues in
• accordance with paragraph 2C of the Policy and as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy. ________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

THE PLANNING APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THE PROPSOAL WOULD RESULT IN A DEVLEOPMENT OF 8 OR MORE RESIDENTIAL UNITS

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is the curtilage of the Former Nurses Home which is a substantial five storey detached building which is located to the northern side of Westmoreland Road and north of the recently constructed Henry Bloom Noble Primary School within Douglas. The building is "Art Deco" in appearance/style albeit was constructed in the 1950's. The building accommodated 101 bedsit rooms (originally 126 rooms) with communal facilities and an Entertainment Space / Hydrotherapy Pool for the then occupants. - 1.2 The site includes land to the front and rear of the building, together with the route through the adjacent car park (west of building) to access the site, albeit does not include the adjacent car park which has been used for the purposes of Manx Care given the health facilities opposite the site.

- 2.0 THE PROPOSAL

2.1 The application seeks full approval for the conversion and extension of nurses' home to provide 37 apartments (seventeen 2 bed units & twenty 1 bed units) and cafe with takeaway with associated car, motorcycle and bicycle parking and landscaping.

• 2.1.1 The main alterations to the external of the building are the construction of an additional floor to the building above the existing roof and the rebuilding of the existing fourth floor. The extension to either side of the clock tower and would run the full extent of the building, albeit is set back slightly from the elevations of the building. The extension would be finish mainly in glazing to give a lightweight appearance. The fourth floor re-build would match the existing in terms of finish, design and window layout. Movement joints are proposed to be installed throughout the building.
• 2.1.2 The new café would be located at ground floor within the original Entertainment Space.
• 2.1.3 Other main external works include;

• o Cleaning of existing brickwork and repointing;
• o Replacement of existing uPVC windows/doors with aluminium windows/doors of the
• original Art Deco design;
• o A total of 6 on site parking spaces (4 accessible spaces and 2 electric vehicle spaces);
• o The existing feature curved Critall Windows to the east and west gable elevations will be repaired and restored and damaged glazing replaced, however should this not be possible then new windows shall be manufactured in a similar style;
• o The rear external fire escape will be removed (no longer suitable or required for fire escape);
• o reinstatement of the clock within the clock tower;
• o repair/replace door/window lintels and/or cills;
• o landscaping to Westmoreland Road;
• o Covered bin storage to rear (commercial and residential bins); and
• o Cycle rack provision.

• 2.1.4 For information the applicants are the Manx Development Corporation which is a new arm's length company with sole shareholder, the Isle of Man Treasury. The vision is to make a long-term contribution to urban and brownfield regeneration and be a catalyst for the positive transformation of the Island's urban landscape for the benefit of all Manx citizens. The regeneration of the Former Manx Care Nurses home on Westmoreland Road will be the first project for the Corporation. This project will seek to reinforce the mission statement standards of the organisation to focus on high quality regeneration of key sites and disused buildings with a strong focus on sustainability.
• 2.1.5 The applicants comment; "The aim of this application is to take a well-loved, derelict, landmark building and repurpose it to create contemporary homes of the highest standard for rental. It is hoped that this opportunity will attract keyworker, graduates and young professionals and offer a steppingstone for retention and attraction of talent to the island."

- 3.0 KEY DOCUMENTS / POLICY

3.1 Material Considerations

• 3.1.1 Section 10(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act states: "In dealing with an application for planning approval… the Department shall have regard to -

• (a) The provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application,
• (b) Any relevant statement of planning policy under section 3;
• (c) Such other considerations as may be specified for the purpose of this subsection in a development order or a development procedure order, so far as material to the application; and
• (d) All other material considerations."

3.2 Area Plan for the East 2020

• 3.2.1 The application site is within an area recognised as being an area of "Mixed Use" under the Area Plan for the East 2020. The site is not within a Conservation Area.

• 3.2.2 Development in areas of 'mixed use' There are a number of areas of 'mixed use' outside of Douglas town centre. Some are identified by a site number on the Maps and others are not, for instance Village Walk in Onchan does not have a site number. Development types within areas of mixed use generally comprise a variety of different but compatible uses. Appropriate new uses may include a mix of shops and some services (financial and professional), food and drink, office and light industry, research and development, tourist and residential uses, and other uses such as clinics or health centres, childcare or education, community facilities, and places of assembly and leisure. Uses which are not compatible with residential development will generally not be supported within the areas of mixed use.

3.3 Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016

• 3.3.1 The Strategic Plan takes its lead from the Government aims which include the pursuit of manageable and sustainable growth based on a diversified economy which is intended to raise the standard of living of the people of the Island and to provide the resources to sustain and develop public services. It also includes the protection and improvement of the quality of the environment such that it continues to be an asset for future generations.

• 3.3.2 The Strategic Aim is: "To plan for the efficient and effective provision of services and infrastructure and to direct and control development and the use of land to meet the community's needs, having particular regard to the principles of sustainability whilst at the same time preserving, protecting, and improving the quality of the environment, having particular regard to our uniquely Manx natural, wildlife, cultural and built heritage."

• 3.2.3 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application:
• 3.2.4 Strategic Policy 1 states: "Development should make the best use of resources by:

• (a) optimising the use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and under-used land and buildings, and re-using scarce indigenous building materials;
• (b) ensuring efficient use of sites, taking into account the needs for access, landscaping, open space(1) and amenity standards; and
• (c) being located so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services."

• 3.2.5 Spatial Policy 1 states: "The Douglas urban area will remain the main employment and services centre for the Island."
• 3.2.6 Environment Policy 42 states: "New development in existing settlements must be designed to take account of the particular character and identity, in terms of buildings and landscape features of the immediate locality. Inappropriate backland development, and the removal of open or green spaces which contribute to the visual amenity and sense of place of a particular area will not be permitted. Those open or green spaces which are to be preserved will be identified in Area Plans."
• 3.2.7 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:

• (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief;
• (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them;
• (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape;
• (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses;

• (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea;
• (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks;
• (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality;
• (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space;
• (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways;
• (j) can be provided with all necessary services;
• (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan;
• (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding;
• (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and
• (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."

• 3.2.8 Environment Policy 4 states: "Development will not be permitted which would adversely affect:

• (a) species and habitats of international importance: (i) protected species of international importance or their habitats; or (ii) proposed or designated Ramsar and Emerald Sites or other internationally important sites.
• (b) species and habitats of national importance:

• (i) protected species of national importance or their habitats;
• (ii) proposed or designated National Nature Reserves, or Areas of Special Scientific Interest; or
• (iii) Marine Nature Reserves; or
• (iv) National Trust Land.

• (c) species and habitats of local importance such as Wildlife Sites, local nature reserves, priority habitats or species identified in any Manx Biodiversity Action Plan which do not already benefit from statutory protection, Areas of Special Protection and Bird Sanctuaries and landscape features of importance to wild flora and fauna by reason of their continuous nature or function

• as a corridor between habitats. 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."

• 3.2.9 Housing Policy 4 states: "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: otherwise new housing will be permitted in the countryside only in the following exceptional circumstances:

• (a) essential housing for agricultural workers in accordance with Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10;
• (b) conversion of redundant rural buildings in accordance with Housing Policy 11; and
• (c) the replacement of existing rural dwellings and abandoned dwellings in accordance with Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14."

• 3.2.10 Housing Policy 17 states: "The conversion of buildings into flats will generally be permitted in residential areas provided that:

• (a) adequate space can be provided for clothes-drying, refuse storage, general amenity, and, if practical, car-parking;
• (b) the flats created will have a pleasant clear outlook, particularly from the principal rooms and

• (c) if possible, this involves the creation of parking on site or as part of an overall traffic management strategy for the area."

• 3.2.11 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."
• 3.2.12 Transport Policy 1 states: "New development should, where possible, be located close to existing public transport facilities and routes, including pedestrian, cycle and rail routes."
• 3.2.13 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."
• 3.2.14 Transport Policy 6 states: "In the design of new development and transport facilities the needs of pedestrians will be given similar weight to the needs of other road users."
• 3.2.15 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."
• 3.2.16 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."
• 3.2.17 Strategic Policy 10 states: "New development should be located and designed such as to promote a more integrated transport network with the aim to: (a) minimise journeys, especially by private car; (b) make best use of public transport; (c) not adversely affect highway safety for all users, and (d) encourage pedestrian movement."
• 3.2.18 Energy Policy 5 states: "The Department will prepare a Planning Policy Statement on Energy Efficiency. Pending the preparation and adoption of that PPS the Department will require proposals for more than 5 dwellings or 100 square metres of other development to be accompanied by an Energy Impact Assessment."
• 3.2.19 Community Policy 10 states: "Proposals for the layout and development of land will be permitted only where there is provided proper access for fire-fighting vehicles and adequate supplies of water for fire-fighting purposes."
• 3.2.20 Community Policy 11 states: "The design and use of all new buildings and of extensions to existing buildings must, as far as is reasonable and practicable, pay due regard to best practice such as to prevent the outbreak and spread of fire."

3.3 Residential Design Guide - July 2021 - specifically relating to "Sustainable Construction" which includes a section of Climate Change - 3.4 Climate Change Bill 2020 "Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 20191 amended After paragraph 2 of Schedule 1 to the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, insert «2A All applications except those for approval for change of use, reserved matters, replacement windows and doors in conservation areas and minor changes

• (1) This paragraph applies to applications for planning approval except those referred to in subparagraph (2).
• (2) This paragraph does not apply to —

• (a) an application for change of use only;
• (b) an application for approval of reserved matters;
• (c) an application to replace a window or a door of a building in a conservation area; and
• (d) a minor changes application.

• (3) Every application to which this paragraph applies must —

• (a) demonstrate that the application has been made having regard to the following climate change policies —

• (i) the maximisation of carbon sequestration;
• (ii) the minimising of greenhouse gas emissions;
• (iii) the maintenance and restoration of ecosystems;
• (iv) biodiversity net gain;
• (v) the need for sustainable drainage systems; and
• (vi) the provision of active travel infrastructure; or

• (b) explain why consideration of one or more of those polices is not practicable in relation to the proposed development."

• 3.4.1 The Climate Change Bill has received Royal Assent; however, has not yet become an Act (Appointed Day Order has not yet been agreed for it to come into force) and therefore has only limited material planning weight. However, it does give a clear direction of travel. All these matter will be considered in the relevant sections later in this report.

- 4.0 PLANNING HISTORY

4.1 The previous planning application is considered relevant in the determination of this application:

4.2 Construction of a car park, Garden Area, Nurses Home, Noble's Hospital, Westmoreland Road, Douglas - 87/01322/B - APPROVED. It appears this parking area was approved for use by the then Nobles Hospital on Westmoreland Road, rather than the Nurses Home; which since it was originally constructed in 1953 has never had any dedicated parking associated with it. - 5.0 CONSULTATIONS

5.1 DOI Highway Services have made the following comments;

23.03.2022 "The refurbishment scheme will reduce the overall number of units of accommodation within the building from 101 singles to 37 units of which 20 are to be single bed and 17 two bed units.

The site is accessible, being within a mile of Douglas town centre. There is a bus stop is directly in front of the site with stops on the other side of the road and these serve the 4B and 13 routes to Peel and the west weekdays and Saturdays, mid morning to early evening under the current winter timetable with access to the rest of the Island's bus services within a ten minute walk at the Lord Street interchange. Accessible and cycle parking spaces are to be provided.

The existing shared vehicular access and service route will be retained with vehicular traffic entering the site from Westmoreland Road through the car park and passing behind the existing building and out onto Demesne Road. It is considered it would remain fit for purpose.

Within the site, six car parking spaces are to be retained on repositioning and repurposing. There are to be four accessible spaces provided. Two for the café on what is now a grassed area at the north west of the building, and two for the apartments at the other end of the site, towards the exit onto Demesne Road. Another two are to be allocated for electric vehicle use.

The IOM Strategic Plan requires one space per one bedroomed apartment and two for two beds and above and for town centre shops space must be available for service vehicle use and neighbourhood shops should have spaces for staff customers and service vehicles. In combination, this would equate to a total of 54 parking spaces. Notwithstanding, these car parking standards may be relaxed, in the case of town centre and previously developed sites. Consideration can be given to reducing requirements, including:

• o the location of the housing relative to public transport, employment, and public amenities
• o any occupancy restrictions
• o the impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area
• o the need to find a use for redundant buildings which are in sound condition and this requirement outweighing the drawback of any shortfall in parking provision.

In this instance, a reduction is accepted with a reasoned justification presented. The IOM Strategic Plan car parking standard cannot be realised. It is impossible to provide the required amount of car parking within the site. The adjoining the car park was and is not for the specific use by occupants of the proposal building with it being used by other adjacent land users.

The building is of historic and architectural interest and proposed for reuse with limited parking associated with it and these spaces are not lost. Further context can be given in comparison with a multi-occupation facility should the building have remained habitable. There would be still a theoretical shortfall similar in amount to the IOMSP car parking standard for flats. A typical UK parking standard for HMO's in absence of one from the IOM is one space per two units, equivalent to 51 spaces. It is recognised that there are pressures associated with onstreet parking on the adjoining public roads and this development could exacerbate it. Yet, this space is finite, and predominately, controlled with a limit of two hours during the daytime. It is used on a first come first served basis and unlikely to be always available to users of this proposed development who may choose to own or use a car. Occupants could be made aware

• of the on-site and nearby facilities on letting which would dampen parking demand.

Furthermore, the scheme is intended for shorter-term occupancy whose residents may not need or want a car. The Applicant could consider providing two pool vehicle s for hire to residents and to widen mode choice. These could be electric and take up the two evcp parking spaces.

Residents may take up bicycle ownership. There is to be secure bicycle storage in the basement. Originally, there was such provision. In this case, there is to be 54 cycle spaces allocated for residents, including facilities for electric bicycle charging. Four places are to be for the staff in the commercial unit, long with six Sheffield type cycle hoops at ground level outside the building for the commercial facility. There are to be five motorcycle bays. These amounts are in accordance with Manual for Manx Roads requirements.

All motorised vehicle parking bays are suitably dimensioned. For the basement bicycle parking, further details are necessary on the steps as well as access and passage through the first doorway to those for the residential block to show how the cycle parking areas are easily reached, such as by a profile and swept path.

Waste bins are to be accessed from the service road and can be reached by a large waste collection vehicle as demonstrated by the swept path analysis with commercial waste separated from the residential. Douglas Borough Council may comment further.

The Applicant / Developer will be required to install surface water drainage where necessary to ensure its containment within the site.

The submission references a Transport Assessment as being unnecessary for this application. HDC confirm this is the case. The number of proposed units is below the threshold and there are fewer proposed than existing.

Overall, given the context and policy tests on car parking, the proposal is acceptable in the main. Further details are necessary on the bicycle parking access.

Recommendation: Additional details"

• 08.04.2022 "Highways Development Control notes the additions uploaded on 6 April 2022 and for the most part address the issues raised by HDC. The dimensions and layout of the accessible, electric vehicle and motorcycle spaces are acceptable. For the bicycle parking, those within the basement runnel along the steps to serve the bicycle store within the basement is acceptable and there should be space to access through the doors and to reach and use the racking. There is a concern as to whether there is adequate height within the basement for two-tier racks and this should be confirmed to ensure the quantity for the residential provision can be met. All other bicycle parking is acceptable."

5.2 Douglas Borough Council makes the following comments;

25.03.2022 "I am in the process of compiling a report for the Council's Environmental Services Committee who will be reviewing the application in due course.

Having now had the opportunity to look through the application I have noted within the applicant's planning statement that they believe that the project would be unviable if they were to contribute towards affordable housing or provide affordable housing as part of the development (if suitable). The planning statement also refers to public open space and infers that because these units will "unlikely be occupied by persons with children" and because there are recreational facilities already within the town, (the applicant refers to the NSC, bowling green ect being close to the proposed development) the applicant states that if a commuted sum were required that it would add additional costs to the project and undermine the financial viability of the scheme.

Given these statements are being made at such an early stage of the project I would kindly ask if the applicant will be required to provide a financial viability assessment prior to any recommendations being made as to whether the application should be approved.

It would be extremely beneficial to also have a view on the applicant's planning statement from the Department of Infrastructure's Public Estates and Housing Division who I believe is responsible for Section 13 Agreements relating to the provision of affordable housing and contributions in lieu of providing affordable housing within a development.

As the applicant has not provided a financial viability assessment to demonstrate whether there are grounds to reduce the requirements for affordable housing contributions or to provide affordable housing as part of the project, it is unlikely that the application could be recommended for support at this stage based upon the lack of information provided to date although any final decision as to whether the Council will support or object would be made by the Council's Environmental Services Committee.

I also note that concerns have been raised in relation to the lack of on-site parking provision within the development. This particular part of the town has some major issues with parking and although it is accepted that this is a separate issue, it would be extremely helpful to have comments from the Highways Services Division of the DOI in relation to the adequacies of the parking proposals as well as the applicants proposals for bicycle parking as to whether these comply with the design guidance for bicycle storage from the Manual for Manx Roads.

I very much appreciate that the application has only just been advertised (18/03/22) so this information may be forthcoming, however until such time that this information has been made available we will not be able to provide you with our comments on the application."

• 06.04.2022 - Head of Parks, Douglas Borough Council "This development would be subject to a section 13 agreement between the Council and developer for off-site open space provision. The charge for the development indicated below would be £23,040. The sum would be spent within the Borough to improve or enhance open spaces or features."

16.05.2022 "Following consideration of the planning application listed above by the Council's Environmental Services Committee at a meeting held on the 16/05/22, I can advise that after careful consideration the Committee resolved to support the application conditional upon the developer entering into a Section 13 Agreement with Douglas Borough Council as a contribution towards the provision of community recreational open space for which a figure has already been provided to the applicant."

5.3 Public Estates & Housing Division (DOI) make the following comments; 28.03.2022 "We refer to the aforementioned planning application, and we can confirm that we have looked

• at the detail of the application and have considered the provision of a 25% Affordable Housing requirement.

Current data drawn from Housing Division records for Douglas indicates that there are 203 persons on the general public sector waiting list for affordable housing to rent in the area.

There are 151 persons without children on the First-time Buyers Register seeking to purchase a first home in the east of the Island, including Douglas. Of this total number of applicants, 49 are on the Active Purchaser List who are seeking to purchase a home within the next 12-18 months. This figure is not indicative of likely final purchases as the ability to progress to completion would depend upon personal circumstances and mortgage ability at point of allocation.

The department would request that consideration be given by the Planning Committee to include a requirement, in respect of any approval granted for this site, for the applicant to enter into a Section 13 Agreement with the Department to provide either affordable housing, based upon the usual calculation of 25% of the number of units approved within the application, or an equivalent Commuted Sum.

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to comment on the proposal."

5.4 Ecosystem Policy (DEFA) make the following comments;

30.03.2022 "The Ecosystem Policy Team are very glad to see that ecological consideration was undertaken at an early stage and that a Protected Species Report written by the Manx Wildlife Trust dated January 2022 has been submitted with this application. We can confirm that a suitable level of assessment has been undertaken and the MWTs report is all in order.

We request that the mitigation measures detailed in section 6.1 of the MWTs Protected Species Report, are secured as a condition on approval. This includes either an inspection of the basement or a summer emergence survey for bats between May - August. A report detailing the findings of these investigations, with any additional mitigation measures, should be submitted to Planning for written approval prior to works impacting on the basement from taking place.

We are also pleased to see that a number of enhancements for wildlife have been included on the new building, this includes, bee, bat and bird boxes, and they are to be located on suitable elevations and heights. We therefore request these measures are secured via a condition on approval.

Our one observation in regards to these features would be to ask, if possible, if a couple more swift nest boxes could be installed on the northeast or northwest elevations, close to where the swift box is proposed on the northeast elevation. We request this because swift numbers have declined dramatically across the UK because of nest site losses, swifts like to nest communally where possible and because the location and height of the building is very suitable for swifts and therefore presents a very good opportunity to support more than 1 breeding pair.

In regards to the planting schedule, we note that 2 non-native invasive plant species listed on Schedule 8 of the Wildlife Act 1990 are included: Griselinia littoralis and Cotoneaster Gnom.

It is an offence to plant or otherwise cause to grow in the wild, any plant listed on Schedule 8. We would therefore request that these species are removed and replaced with non-invasive shrubs."

5.5 The IOM Fire and Rescue Service comments;

15.05.2022 "The developer has been in contact with us in relation to the development. We need to go through the strategy in more detail as a quick scan still references the Fire safety Order which is not in force on the island and it refers to the HMO & Flats Regulations as guidance, it isn't it's the legislation they have to comply with. Also the last meeting we had it was confirmed that this building would be flats and not a HMO as mentioned in the complainant's letter.

I will ask Mark Walker to see if we have an officer free to go through the strategy, if not I will go through it later on in the week when I am back in.

So basically to answer your question we are working with the developer to ensure compliance with the relevant legislation. If we come up against any major issues we will let you know."

18.05.2022 "Further to the below, we are continuing to work with the developer to ensure compliance with the relevant legislation and several points that I have picked up from the strategy this department will clarify with the developer directly.

The building design as shown, along with a finalised fire strategy would meet with this departments requirements to comply with the relevant legislation."

5.6 The owner/occupier of 16 Brighton Terrace, Douglas objects to the application which can be summarised as (15.03.2022); As a local resident (Brighton Terrace), this proposal has limited to no parking identified for the proposed 37 flats and café/commercial properties being considered and will cause an increase in cars trying to park on the roads, increased traffic around the school entrance, problems for residents and visitors to the medical centres around the site which cannot be overcome by providing a "cycle park" within the building; The area is currently heavily residential with commercial businesses taking up the majority if not all the available on street car parking, especially the multiple garages and businesses in Demense Road with little or no parking on their premises; It is already difficult to park during despite it being a disc zone area, causing problems for both residents and businesses; Providing 2 disabled bays for a café and 2 for the residents is not sufficient and will put more traffic onto the surrounding roads, especially as the amount of apartments far exceed the parking

• availability despite the claim for providing sufficient bicycle parks within the building (surely that will only work if a caveat is put on any potential tenants that no vehicles will be permitted and no parking permits can be issued to any tenants); and it is totally unrealistic to expect any tenants (even temporary/short term/contract workers) not to have a vehicle whilst on Island and as such any planning consent should include the sufficient parking needs as determined within the strategic plan requirements.
• 5.7 The owner/occupier of 7 Belmont Hill, Douglas objects to the application which can be summarised as (13.04.2022); Having been inside the building while it was in use I can confirm that it was in effect several HMO's with shared facilities rather than individual self-contained apartments; housing policy 5, requires 25% must be affordable; the existing fire escape at the rear of the building and additional stairwells and that these have been removed from the proposed scheme; I would turn your attention to the Fire Precautions (Houses in Multiple Occupation and Flats) Regulation 2016, 2016/0218, a statutory document that must be given the same if not greater material weight as the strategic plan itself; Section 26 of the act specifies that there is a need for a secondary means of escape from the 5th story or higher (4th Floor); Smoke extraction is not a replacement and is not suitably addressed in the fire safety report provided by the developer; The response from the developer to DBC does not provide details of their feasibility study but merely states that it will be a 2 million loss of value to the tax payer if sold on the open market and therefore the value of the development itself is -2M; I do not consent to this waste of tax payers money; Knock it down and let the community create some much needed allotment provision in Douglas instead; parking provision is illogical; Even if any future tenants know they don't have a car space they will still be entitled to a permit within the district outside of the planning application process.

- 6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 Given the land-use designation and the type of development the following elements are relevant to consideration in the determination of this application:

• (a) principle of development;
• (b) potential impact upon highway safety/parking provision
• (c) potential impact of the works to the street scene
• (d) potential private amenity for future occupants
• (e) potential impact upon neighbouring amenities;
• (f); potential drainage/flooding issues;
• (g) affordable housing provision;
• (h) open space provision;
• (i) ecology;
• (j) fire provision; and
• (k) Energy/sustainable construction/biodiversity

PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPING THE SITE FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES

6.2 As stated earlier in this report, the application site is located within a wider area of land that is designated as "Mixed Use" under the Area Plan for the East. Accordingly, the principle of using this site for residential and a cafe is considered acceptable given it land use designation. However, this is not an automatic reason to approve the application as there other issues outlined need to be considered also.

POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON HIGHWAY SAFETY/PARKING PROVISION

6.3 The impact upon existing on-street parking is arguably one of the main concerns with the proposal. The site when originally constructed in 1953 and was purpose built to be nurse's staff accommodation for the immediately adjacent Nobles Hospital. Accordingly, given this location there was no parking associated to the nurse's home. Further, levels of car ownership where significantly less than today. Also, its location and proximity to Douglas Town Centre would have meant the nurses would have been able to walk into the town for shops/services. It is also presumed bus services would have been nearby to the nurse's home/Nobles Hospital.

• 6.3.1 The nurse's home accommodates 101 single units and the proposal would result in 37 units of which 20 are to be single bed and 17 two bed units. This equates to a parking requirement of 54 parking spaces, just for the apartments. In terms of the café which is also proposed to be offer a takeaway service (Use Classes 1.3 & 1.4) the IOMSP doesn't specifically comment on the parking requirements for café/takeaway. It does indicate that for "Neighbourhood shops" that "Spaces for staff, customers, and service vehicles will be required" but does not indicated a number. It is noted Highway Services refer to "Town Centre Shops"; however, this is site is not designated within Douglas Town Centre under the Area Plan for the East and therefore this designation does not apply. For reference the "Town Centre Boundaries" run along Bucks Road and Circular Road, which are approximately 300+m away from the site. Highway Services have calculated that overall there is a parking requirement for the development of 54 parking spaces.
• 6.3.2 The proposal would provide a total of six spaces for the whole development, this being

4 accessible spaces and 2 electric vehicle chargers. There are also 5 motorcycle bays and the provision of bicycle parking in the basement in accordance with the BREEAM standards (one per bedroom) plus bicycle parking for staff and some for customers of the cafe. Accordingly, the development is clearly well below the required parking standards as outlined by the IOMSP and could be considered contrary to Transport Policy 7. Also General Policy 2 (h) requires development to provide satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space.

• 6.3.3 However, it should be noted that the IOM Strategic Plan does indicate that;

"Town centre and brownfield residential development - Typical residential standard may be relaxed in accordance with paragraph A.7.1 above."

• 6.3.4 Paragraph A.7.1 states these maybe relaxed where; "(a) would secure the re-use of a Registered Building or a building of architectural or historic interest; or

• (b) would result in the preservation of a sensitive streetscape; or
• (c) is otherwise of benefit to the character of a Conservation Area.
• (d) is within a reasonable distance of an existing or proposed bus route and it can be demonstrated a reduced level of parking will not result in unacceptable on street parking in the locality."

• 6.3.5 The General Policy 2 (h) also requires development to provide satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space.
• 6.3.6 In terms of the application it is considered the proposal could be considered to meet the majority of the potential relaxations.

• 6.3.6 Firstly, the building is of architectural interest and is in a prominent location within Douglas. While not in a Conservation Area nor a Registered Buildings; given the architectural interest of the building the Registered Building Officer has made the following comments (12.05.2022); "The applicants have engaged with me through the entire process, although the Nurses home is not a registered building nor located within a Conservation area, it has a social interest and a level of architectural interest.

I fully support the reuse of the building the scheme is considered and works with the positive elements of the building enhancing its character. Could we please condition materials and finishes including windows and new brickwork; Conditions should include method statement and details of the proposed movement joints, I would also question the proposed fall arrest

system due to potential visual impact, could other systems be considered that are less visually intrusive?"

Accordingly, it is clear from these comments that the view that the building has architectural interest is supported by the Registered Building Officer.

• 6.3.7 Second the proposal would preserve the sensitive streetscape. While the visual impact of the works will be considered later in this report, the proposal would be retaining the existing building and making no significant alterations to it. Further, the proposal to reuse the building and to convert in a sensitive manner as proposed would be beneficial to the street scape/area.
• 6.3.8 The third exception does not apply as the site is not within a Conservation Area, and from public views it is not especially visible (if at all) from adjacent Conservation Areas.
• 6.3.9 In terms of the fourth exception reason, there are bus stops immediately next to the site (fronting the building on Westmoreland Road). These bus stops (4B & 13) all run from the site to Lord Street Bus Station and in the other direction the bus services 13/14 runs up to Cooil Road (IOM Business Park) and then return to Douglas, while the 4B Services travels to Peel and then back to Douglas. These services are limited and not especially regular hours and limited on Saturdays and no Sunday/Public Holiday services. However, it should be noted that main

• bus routes are located on Circular Road and Bucks road which are all within less than 5mins walk away and provided access throughout the IOM. The site is within less than a minutes' walk of a GP's surgery (Kensington Health Centre) and the Spar convenience store. Further, the site is approximately 700m from Stand Street/Victoria Road (Starbucks) which is approximately an 8 mins walk. It is considered the site is a prime example where the standards could be relaxed. However, the question is perhaps how much they should be relaxed.

• 6.3.10 In terms of relaxation as indicated above, the proposal could comply; albeit the requirement does still require the applicants to demonstrate a reduced level of parking will not result in unacceptable on street parking in the locality. This is difficult to demonstrate. On street parking (Westmoreland Road, Demesne Road, Allan Street, Hillside Avenue and Upper Church Street) in the locality is in high demand during the day (health services/residents/local businesses and school drop off & pickups) and during the evening (residents). All the local roads have Parking Permit systems in place, for this very reason, parking is in high demand. Generally, the Department would seek a parking survey been undertaken for a suitable period; however, in this case there would appear to be little point, given it is accepted by the Department and the applicants that on-street parking is in high demand throughout the day and night, so it is considered this is unlikely to be demonstrated in this location.
• 6.3.11 It is perhaps important to note the applicant's intention for the building which is reflected by the costs of developing the site and the accommodation the applicants are trying to provide. The applicants have indicated that;

"…It is the applicant's intention that the accommodation be provided for people who don't currently live on the Island and who would use the accommodation on varying lengths of short stay either whilst they are here on business or for contracted working or whilst they find more permanent accommodation. It is notable that in the local press it has been reported that the Island's younger population are moving off Island or not returning after having left in pursuit of further education elsewhere, due to unaffordable housing here on the Island. This scheme could provide accommodation to help with this.

As such, it is not envisaged that the potential occupants would necessarily have, want or need their own vehicle."

• 6.3.12 The applicants accept that; "the planning process cannot generally control the occupants of a building or whether they have their own vehicles but the Strategic Plan makes it clear that exceptions may be made in certain circumstances."
• 6.3.13 Overall, the proposed uses (residential/café) of the site will result in additional parking requirements to the site and on-street parking in the area. How much by is very difficult to determine. If the applicants proposal that the units would be used on varying lengths of short stay either whilst they are here on business or for contracted working or whilst they find more permanent accommodation, there is the potential that people may not bring their cars, until such time they have either settled elsewhere and found other places to stay on the IOM or have completed their contract and returned back to their home for example. The applicants have also suggested that some of the units maybe to accommodate younger population who are currently moving off Island or not returning after having left in pursuit of further education elsewhere, due to unaffordable housing here on the Island. Again, car ownership levels for this type of use is difficult to predicted. This can be said for any users of the apartments.
• 6.3.14 However, the fact remains that the existing building with 101 units will of created a parking requirement to the area in the same way, and again the level of car ownership would have varied during its former usage. Arguably, similarly to what is current proposed. Any use of this substantial building is going to create a parking requirement in the local area. The only possible way to provide the level of parking on the site would be to demolish the building and construct a new building with levels of underground parking. But given the buildings history and architectural interest may not be the preferred option, but potential the easiest way to have all parking on the site.
• 6.3.15 Perhaps, the underlining point is the sites sustainable location being closer to services, shops, employment, facilities, public transport links and walkable distance into Douglas Town Centre, with all of the above being under 10mins walk from the site or less. Douglas is the main settlement and most sustainable location on the IOM. Further, Strategic Policy 10 indicates that new development should be located and designed such as to promote a more integrated transport network with the aim to: (a) minimise journeys, especially by private car; (b) make best use of public transport; (c) not adversely affect highway safety for all users, and

• (d) encourage pedestrian movement. This would comply with all of these requirements. Accordingly, for these reasons it is considered while there will be an impact upon parking in the locality (any use of building would) it is considered in this case the benefits of the proposal to develop this brownfield site with the conversion of the building all outweigh the concern of lack of car parking provision on the site.

• 6.3.16 It should be noted that when converting any historical building on the IOM, especially in Douglas, it is high likely that adequate parking provision will not be meant onsite.

POTENTIAL IMPACT OF THE WORKS TO THE STREET SCENE 6.4 As outlined within sections 2.2 to 2.4 the majority of the works would repair/restore the original brickwork and repair/replace the existing windows and doors (if needing replacing they would be replaced with similar art deco style). These works would be beneficial to the visual appearance of the building and street scene. The entire fourth floor would be replaced on a "like for like" basis due to structural defects. This would raise no concerns.

• 6.4.1 As outlined the main works relate to the top floor extension. This would be partially apparent from several places along Westmoreland Road, the closer to the building viewed the less obvious the top floor extension would be. The clearest Westbourne Drive and St Catherine's Drive to the northwest of the site, which given these roads relevant position would have clear views of the top roof extension, albeit at a distance. Views from Demesne Road would also see the roof extension; albeit given existing buildings along Demesne Road these are limited. More distant views are also achieved from the New Castletown Road (junction with Annacur Lane).

• 6.4.2 While the top floor extension will be apparent from certain public locations; it is considered given its design, mass, scale, form and finish of the extension, it would appear as a light weight additional to the original building and give a clear delineations between old and new. This when done correctly works well and the Department have seen similar works, mainly to converted Manx barns where a clear different design approach and use of different finishes works well. It is considered this proposal would also work well and fit well with the existing building and street scene.
• 6.4.3 There is some concern with the roof level safety railings, which is shared by the Registered Building Officer. A condition should be attached for an alternative arrangement for safety (i.e. harness type system instead).
• 6.4.4 Overall, the proposed scheme would be beneficial to the existing building and would respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them and further does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape. Accordingly, the proposal would comply with General Policy 2 in these respects. POTENTIAL PRIVATE AMENITY FOR FUTURE OCCUPANTS
• 6.5 As outlined within Housing Policy 17 each dwelling needs to have a "pleasant clear outlook, particularly from the principal rooms". Further, General Policy 2 (h) indicates that development; "Provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself…". In this case from the open plan living room/kitchen/dinner rooms all of the proposed apartments are served by at least two windows (some more). The apartments to the south west elevation (front) of the building all have clear and pleasant outlooks and no concerns is raised from this respect.

• 6.5.1 The apartments located to the northeast elevation (rear) there is some concern, especially those at ground and first floors. Their views are of the adjacent gable elevation of the adjacent carpet shop and industrial units (garage workshops/car park of garages). It is considered a condition should be attached which requires a well design rear boundary which would help mitigate the potential poor outlooks. At 2nd floor and above the outlook improves, albeit it needs to be understood the outlook would not be "clear and pleasant" until the fourth and fifth floors apartments. These apartment to the north east elevation especially at lower levels would also be quiet dark, given the suns orientation (east to west) and height of the building. This aspect of the proposal goes against the application, as it is considered difficult to argue that some of the apartments to the rear would have a "clear and pleasant" outlook.
• 6.5.2 Of course this concerns needs to be balanced against the fact the proposal is to convert the building rather than a new build. The existing building while large, its existing corridors/stairwells etc have dictated the layout of the apartments. The building is also narrow in depth and therefore there is no easy way to provide all the apartments with "clear and pleasant" outlooks with the required circulation space (i.e. corridors/stairwells), unless significantly reducing the amount of apartments, which perhaps be at odds with Strategic Policy 1 which requires "optimising the use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and under-used land and buildings, and reusing scarce indigenous building materials". It would likely also make the proposal even less economical viable.
• 6.5.3 In terms of the amenities for the occupants, the bin storage and bike storage is all secure and would appear to be fit for purposes. Landscaping is proposed to the front of the building and existing landscaping retained. Its location as mentioned previously is also in a sustainable location which again would be beneficial to future occupants.
• 6.5.4 Overall, the amenity standards for future occupants for a number of the apartments would have a "clear and pleasant" outlooks and with the new/existing landscaping and the general design and finish of the building will create a pleasant place to live. However, as

• mention some of the apartments to the rear will not be affordable the same level of amenity and their outlooks are not ideal and weight against the proposal.
• 6.5.5 However, on balance and as the proposal is converting the existing building of interest, which given its current layout has constraints, it is the application would sufficiently comply with Housing Policy 17 and General Policy 2 (h). POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON NEIGHBOURING AMENITIES
• 6.6 General Policy 2 (g) seeks development not to adversely affect the amenity of local residents, which generally relate to loss of light/overlooking and/or overbearing impacts upon outlooks.

• 6.6.1 The closest neighbouring property to the site would be Nr 40 Westmoreland Road which is approximately 23+m (measured from north corner of nurses building to southern corner of Nr 40) to the north of the nurse home building. In terms of the physical works, the main potential impact is the increase in the height of the building due to the roof extension. However, given its design/finish (glazing), the distance and the orientation/siting of the building to Nr 40; it is not considered the proposal would have a significant impacts upon neighbouring amenities, namely light and overbearing impacts upon outlooks, to warrant a refusal.

• 6.6.1 The proposal will give raise to a greater level of comings and goings by residents of the new apartments and visitors to the café. However, given there is no car parking associated with the site, the level of disturbance is likely to be from pedestrian traffic which has less potential to cause concern, compared to vehicles which are generally nosier. It is noted the existing car park which is adjacent to Nr 40 is current used in association with the nearby health services will continue as is and so would any potential disturbances to the occupants of Nr 40. However, the proposal is not considered to cause any significantly greater impacts to warrant a refusal on this ground.

POTENTIAL DRAINAGE/FLOODING ISSUES 6.7 The applicants have submitted a Flood Risk Assessment as part of their submission, given a small section of the site is at risk from "Flood Risk - Surface Water" albeit at a lower risk. The area is along the northern boundary of the site along the existing roadway which runs to the rear of the building. No part of the building is within this flood risk designation. The Flood Risk Assessment concludes; "…no flood risk to the building within the parameters outlined by the Department of Infrastructure."

And "The re-development does not result in any adverse flood risk impact to the surrounding areas and downstream catchment. The existing, flood flow characteristics are maintained."

• 6.7.1 No objection/comments have been received from any drainage authority.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVISION 6.8 Housing Policy 5 of the Strategic Plan indicates that 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. Given submission proposed 37 apartments this equates to 9.25 affordable dwellings. A Section 13 Legal Agreement would need to be entered into by the applicant and the Department to ensure the affordable housing is provided. This has also been agreed by Public Estates & Housing Division (DOI).

• 6.8.1 However, the application is seeking no Affordable Housing (AFH) being provided on the site nor a commuted sum payment. The applicants in support of this approach comment;

"…37 units in total are proposed and these are not being provided for sale: the financial model for these scheme only works if the units are retained and rented out giving a projected income over a more prolonged period than for an initial financial gain from sale of the units. Financially the inclusion of affordable housing on this scheme would not result in sufficient funds for the scheme to be financially viable. The scheme involves the retention of a building of significant Island value - historically, architecturally and socially and the scheme aims to restore its original architectural interest, some of which has been lost through historic intervention. The result of this care and attention to detail, together with addressing the structural and condition deficiencies results in a much higher development cost than would be the case if the existing building were proposed to be demolished and rebuilt."

• 6.8.2 The applicants have proposed that the AFH could be provided on future development sites; "…where the provision of affordable housing may be more economically viable and is fully prepared to mitigate the lack of affordable housing in this case by provision of it in future developments in the immediate vicinity although we are fully aware that this cannot be required by condition as the details of that provision is not known and cannot be assured at this time."
• 6.8.3 The Department has accepted that no AFH being provided in the past, this being a Registered Building Bucks House (PA 16/00043/GB) which gained planning approval for ten apartments. This application included a "Indicative Construction Costs for the refurbishment and conversion of Bucks House" undertaken by Bell Burton Associated - Chartered Quantity Surveyors and a "Valuation Report" undertaken by Black Grace Cowley. The "Indicative Construction Costs" report (ICC) essential uses the "Valuation Report" to determine the likely value of each apartment either to sell or rent. These reports completed that if AFH was included that the development would be unviable. Interesting the applicant for this application took the same approach as the current applicants, i.e. the reports indicated that if the applicant where to sell the apartments immediately upon completion, then it is likely the development would have an overall financial loss. Accordingly, the applicant was proposing to retain the units and renting them out with a possible resale in the future.
• 6.8.4 The applicants provide further information which indicated;

"The brownfield nature of the site means that, even excluding affordable housing, the level of financial return (as evidenced by our detailed modelling) is significantly below that which a private developer would consider."

• 6.8.5 They also explain that given the site has remained undeveloped for so long is primafacie evidence of the financial constraints that a developer will be operating under on this project. They comment that a detailed cost exercise has been undertaken and if they were to build and sell the apartments and commercial unit, at current market value (informed by 3 estate agents), they would lose over £2m which is excluding any Affordable Housing which would increase the loss. They indicate that the only financial/business model which works for this development is to refurbish the building and then retain the building for rent over 15 years,

but even this will only provide a percentage yield in single figures.

• 6.8.6 The applicants have also expanded on possible users of the apartments. They comment that they have been in discussion with various Government Departments (DECS, DHSC and DHA) so they can potentially rent space within the building to use to house new teachers, new nurses and new police cadets, for example, that may come to the island.
• 6.8.7 The Department had further comments with the applicants in terms of the viability of the development and whether such information (i.e. viability report) could be provided. The applicant's had concern with this approach given commercial sensitivity and the fact the Department would be required to publicise such information, especially as the applicants are

seeking tenders for the development currently. In response to this the applicants have commented;

"As part of the Nurses Home planning application we are aware of our obligation with regards to the provision of affordable housing. As outlined in previous correspondence the viability around this development means that we need to retain the properties for rental to allow a return. MDC are happy to enter into a section 13 agreement which outlines that we will provide the affordable housing provision attributable to this scheme on a future scheme within Douglas in the next 5 years. If we don't provide this provision on another scheme within the timescales outlined, we will commit to providing a commuted sum of £374,385 as calculated by the Department of Infrastructures Public Estates and Housing Division."

• 6.8.8 As a viability report has not been provided it is difficult for the Department to be able to give significant weight to this aspect. It is noted the building has been empty for a number of years; and the building is of architectural, historical and has historical interest, which is being proposed to be retained and sensitively restored, rather than being proposed to be demolished. Further, the applicants are accepting a requirement for AFH and as indicated above are happy to provide AFH in a future scheme and if not provided within a 5 year period, then they will be required to pay a commuted sum payment in lieu of AFH of £374,385. Estates and Housing (DOI) have accepted this approach also.
• 6.8.9 Accordingly, in this instance it is considered on this occasion, on this site and given the works involve a conversion of the existing building of interest; rather than a new build, the principle of offsetting AFH (9.25 affordable housing units) or a commuted sum payment at a later date is acceptable.

OPEN SPACE PROVISION

6.9 Recreation Policy 3 indicates that 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 of the IOMSP.

• 6.9.1 This proposal would equate to a total of 2048sqm (0.2 hectares) of Public Open Space (1,152sqm of formal open space, 512sqm of amenity space & 384sqm of children's play space). The applicants indicate that the site is not larger enough to accommodate this space, which the Department agrees with. For context the application site (red line) in total equates to 0.24 hectares i.e. the total area of POS space required.

• 6.9.2 The applicants have proposed to increase the amount of amenity space with new landscaping along the frontage of the site where currently hard surfacing, which equates to approximately 158sqm. However, this is amenity space is reduced given some existing grassed area is being lost to create two accessible parking spaces (northwest of main building). However, overall a nett increase of 100sqm of amenity space would be created. This would leave a total of 1948sqm of POS still being required.
• 6.9.3 Douglas Borough Council have indicated that they would acceptable a commuted sum payment in lieu of POS shortfall of £23,040. The applicants have accepted this commuted sum payment.

FIRE PROVISION

• 6.10.1 In terms of the details of fire provision, Building Regulations would consider this in detail. Further, no objection/comment has been received from the IOM Fire and Rescue Service who would normally raise issues if they had concerns.

• 6.10.1 The IOMSP outlines that Community Policy 10 needs to consider proposals for the layout and development of land and such proposals will be permitted only where there is provided proper access for fire-fighting vehicles and adequate supplies of water for fire-fighting

• purposes. Community Policy 11 indicates that the design and use of all new buildings and of extensions to existing buildings must, as far as is reasonable and practicable, pay due regard to best practice such as to prevent the outbreak and spread of fire.
• 6.10.2 As part of the submission the applicant have provided a Fire Strategy report for the site. In relation to Community Policy 11 the report indicates that the apartments are designed with a 60 min fire resisting separation and a 30min fire resisting doors, incorporating a positive action self-closing device with intumescent strips and cold smoke seals which will reduce the likelihood of large quantities of smoke and products of combustion affecting the common areas during the early stages of the fire growth. It also comments travel distance from any apartment door to a staircase is within agreed guidance levels. If the fire develops, the installed fire suppression system will actuate within the affected apartment, suppressing the fire and alerting others to the incident. A sprinkler system is proposed in each apartment, as well as communal corridors and the basement area. Heat and smoke detectors are also proposed within each apartment.
• 6.10.3 In terms of fire-fighting hydrants have been identified within 90m of the building. The report also identifies that there is 100% access around the perimeter of the premises for water ladder tenders and high reach appliances, this is more than the requirements of Building Regulations guidance.
• 6.10.4 The Department sought advice from the Fire and Rescue Service and their comments are outlined within the representation section of this report.
• 6.10.5 Given no objection being received by the Fire and Rescue Service the Department is content that the proposal provides proper access for fire-fighting vehicles and adequate supplies of water for fire-fighting purposes and as far as is reasonable and practicable, pay due regard to best practice such as to prevent the outbreak and spread of fire.
• 6.10.6 It should be noted however the Department (planning) is not the experts in this field and that a Building Regulations will consider this in detail. Part of the Building Regulations is that the relevant Building Control Authority (in this case Douglas Borough Council) will seek comments from the IOM Fire and Rescue Service who will provide recommendations and Building Control will make the final decision. ENERGY/ SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION/BIODIVERSITY

6.11 As outlined earlier in this report since the previous application being approved the Climate Change Bill has received Royal assent, albeit it is not yet in force and therefore has little planning weight; although it does give a clear direction of travel. The submission does appear to cover the other points raised by the Bill. Further, the recently approved Residential Design Guide 2021 does include "Sustainable Construction" section which does include a number of aspects including, construction materials, building design and climate change resilience. Further Energy Policy 5 of the IOMSP indicated that proposals for more than 5 dwellings or 100 square metres of other development should include Energy Impact Assessment. The applicants have provided this.

• 6.11.1 This assessment indicates that the scheme has given a priority given to energy reduction and efficiency. Further, renewable and low carbon technologies have also been considered in the context of their technical feasibility and financial viability. The scheme includes the following;

• o High performance building fabric and energy efficient lighting, services and equipment;
• o Passive design measures to reduce energy demand for heating, cooling, ventilation and lighting;
• o ASHPs for hot water production in the new flats to achieve SAP 88;
• o Roof mounted PV; and
• o No fossil fuels utilised.

• 6.11.2 This would comply with the aims of Energy Policy 5 and the Residential Design Guide.
• 6.11.3 In terms of biodiversity on the site the application includes a Protected Species Report prepared by Manx Wildlife Trust and includes required mitigation as well as recommendations for enhancement to achieve 'no net loss' of biodiversity and aim for 'net gain'. The report indicated that no bats or birds where found within the building. The Ecosystem Policy officer has considered the application and has no objection and recommended the recommendation of the assessment (section 6.1) be undertaken. This can be conditioned as can the proposals for bee, bat and bird boxes. The Ecosystem Policy Officer has sought a couple more swift nest boxes could be installed on the northeast or northwest elevations, close to where the swift box is proposed on the northeast elevation to increase the number of swifts in the area, which has declined in recent time. With appropriate conditions in place it is considered the proposal would comply with Environment Policy 4and General Policy 2 of the IOMSP and the Residential Design Guide.

- 7.0 SECTION 13 LEGAL AGREEMENTS

7.1 The applicant has agreed that a commuted sum payment in lieu of POS shortfall of £23,040 and the provision of 100sqm of Public Open Space (as shown on drawing IOM-EWAZZ-ZZ-DR-L-79001) be provided on site and retained. Further, in relation to affordable housing provision the applicant has accepted that a requirement of 9.25 affordable housing units is generated by this development (25% of 37 units). The S13 agreement will be required which requires the applicants to either provided 9.25 affordable housing units on an alternative site within Douglas within a 5 year period or pay a commented sum payment in lieu of this AFH of £374,385. This has been agreed by the applicant and Public Estates and Housing Division (DOI). - 8.0 CONCLUSIONS

8.1 The proposed application requires a balanced decision, against the scheme is the "clear and pleasant" outlooks for some of the apartments to the rear of the building, the lack of affordable housing provision on the site at this time (albeit off set for a future development or a commuted sum payment) and lack of on-site parking. These factors go against the application.

• 8.1.1 However, a balance needs to be taken and whether the positives of developing the site sufficient outweigh these concerns or not. In favour the site is designated for mixed use and this proposal for residential and for a café would comply with this designation and fit well within this area of Douglas, which is the main settlement for housing, services, education, shops, employment & public transport and the most sustainable town on the IOM. The aims of the IOM Strategic Plan and the Area Plan for the East both promote sustainable developments which can utilise existing services and have good transport links. Clearly, therefore the principle of developing the site for residential development/cafe weight in favour of the application. Further, the proposal to redevelopment an existing building of architect, historical and social interest, while extending in a sensitive and appropriate way all weighs significantly in favour of the development.
• 8.1.2 In conclusion; on balance, for the reasons indicated with this report it is concluded the proposals complies with the relevant planning policies of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, Residential Design Guide 2021 and the Area Plan for the East 2020 and therefore it is recommended the application is approved.

- 9.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

9.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf);
• (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure;

• (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and
• (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

9.2 The decision maker must determine:

• o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and
• o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status

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 can confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to the it by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.

Decision Made : …Permitted……….... Committee Meeting Date:…20.06.2022

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

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 online services/customers and archive records.

PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 20.06.2022

Application No

22/00254/B

Applicant Department For Health And Social Care Proposal Conversion and extension of nurses' home to provide 37 apartments and cafe with takeaway with associated car, motorcycle and bicycle parking and landscaping Site Address Nurses Home Westmoreland Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM1 4AJ Principal Planner Presenting Officer Mr Chris Balmer

As above

Addendum to the Officer Report

The Planning Committee approved the application which included the amended to Conditions 6 & 7 which were recommended to be altered by the Planning Officer. Accordingly, the application was approved subject to a S13 Legal Agreement with the following conditions attached;

• C 6. No external finishes may be applied to the building - including roofs, windows, new brickwork and movement joints - until details and samples of these have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed with the Department. Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.
• C 7. The development may not be occupied or operated until details of an alternative means of fall arrest system to the roof have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed with the Department. Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.

CB 20.06.2022

EJC - Secretary Note - on producing the decision Notice. 19/1/2023

A third party, resident of 12 Killeaba Mount. Ramsey, had made comment on the application, albeit after the decision of the Planning Committee had been made 20th June 2022.

EJC spoke with the Director on the matter and it was agreed to state for the record that the Committee decision had been made 20/6/22

30.01.2023 CB The Planning Committee Considered the application under Any Other Business (30.01.2023).

An update was required due to a change in the Commuted Sum Payment for Affordable Housing, in this case for 9.25 units. DOI Housing have subsequently requested a change in provision for the following reason:

"A reduction is because the new SEPAS amendments came into force on 2nd August before the Section 13 was signed so hence the change. The amendments included an increase in the selling prices of Affordable Homes; 2B apartments increased from £140,000 to £150,000 although there was no change to the average selling prices of open market apartments over the period since the first Section 13 draft was prepared. Accordingly, the Commuted Sum may be reduced as it is calculated as the difference between affordable and open market selling prices. It reduced by 9.25 AH units x £10k each. Hence the reduction."

The Planning Committee Report and Minutes of the meeting on the 20th June 2022 indicated a Commuted Sum Payment for Affordable Housing of £374,385.00 had been agreed by all parties. The Minutes stated

"The Committee unanimously accepted the recommendation of the case officer and the application was approved subject to the applicant entering into a legal agreement for provision of 9.25 units of affordable housing or a commuted sum of £374,385 in lieu of same should such a scheme not be submitted within 5 years from the date of the approval along with the following conditions."

However; as indicated above, during this period the Shared Equity Purchase Assistance Scheme (SEPAS) came into force on 2nd August 2022, before the Section 13 was signed so hence the change now.

Now proposed is an AH sum commuted as £281,884.50 i.e. a difference of £92,500.50 (£92,500.50 which is 9.25 AH units x £10,000 each). This has been agreed by all parties and the application was again recommended for an approval subject to the S13 Legal agreement in relation to the above, and the already agreed Public Open Space, commuted to £23,040 relating to 100sqm provision on site.

The Planning Committee approved the new Commuted Sum Payment for Affordable Housing of £281,884.50.