Loading document...
Case Officer: Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken: Site Visit: Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation
1.1 30 & 32a Parliament Street in Ramsey accommodates a home furnishings and clothing shop known as "Looneys"; the shop has operated for some 70 years and has expanded from its original location (and drapery business) into the adjacent 32a following a late 1980s conversion of the adjacent Crown Hotel. It is now running from two units side-by-side on Parliament Street, with an associated store running all the way through to West Quay to the north.
1.2 Number 30 is a particularly impressive building, three storeys in height and with ornate brick detailing at the first and second floor; at ground floor, the shopfront - painted cream - retains a number of its traditional late-Victorian/early-Edwardian features. Adjacent, number 32 is one-and-a-half storeys in height, also painted cream and also with a number of traditional shopfront features; it is a far less imposing building than number 30, but no less attractive or well looked after.
1.3 The view of the site from West Quay is rather less auspicious. There is an attractive, three-storey building to the left (southeast) side of the site, which the plans indicate is currently used for storage at the ground floor. No information about the rest of the building is given. No address data or planning history can be found for this building alone. There is a monopitched roof building to the northwest, which is used for storage but at ground floor gives the impression of a shop window. It has two large windows alongside a panelled door, with wooden garage doors towards the centre of the site's frontage. This gives way to other three-storey buildings outwith the site that are imposing but not ornate nor especially well-looked after.
1.4 The entirety of the site is within the Ramsey Conservation Area.
2.1 Full planning approval is sought for alterations and extension to the West Quay-side of the site, which would add a monopitched roof, complete with three rooflights, above the existing flat roof and convert the existing flat-roofed store into a secondary shopfront. There would also be a narrow, but roughly 11m-long, section of flat roof sitting alongside this mono-
| Application No.: | 14/00342/B |
| Applicant: | Mr Geoff Gell |
| Proposal: | Alterations and erection of extension to rear of existing shop |
| Site Address: | Looney's 30 & 32A Parliament Street Ramsey Isle Of Man IM8 1AW |
pitched roof. Both these sections of roof would be hidden partially (in respect of the pitched section) and completely (in respect of the flat section) by a parapet wall.
2.2 Within the newly-created roofspace would be a new storage area. Beneath here, the present storage area would be converted to an extension of the existing shop premises; a new shopfront to West Quay would be created as a result. The existing garage to the side would be converted to storage use also, while a new garage would be created in the ground floor of the three-storey building via the removal of the existing front door and window.
2.3 In terms of finishings, blue-grey slate is proposed for the new roof while timber, aluminium or uPVC frames are proposed for the doors and windows; no colour is given for any of these. The garage door would be a retractable up-and-over or sectional door; no colour is proposed. The rooflights would be velux; no further details are provided.
2.4 Signage is also shown on the Proposed Drawing, but this is an application seeking approval for development rather than advertisement consent; no application in respect of the former has been submitted.
2.5 No changes are proposed to the Parliament Street-side of the application site.
3.1 Full planning approval was granted for the erection of a flat-roofed extension within the application site in 2001 under PA 01/00707/B. As noted earlier, 32a was converted from a hotel into retail under PA 89/01363/B, which was permitted on review.
4.1 The Ramsey Local Plan identifies the site for Mixed Use - Town Centre purposes; the Written Statement accompanying the Local Plan has one policy, R/TC/P6, which is considered relevant. It reads: "The West Quay area is allocated for mixed use, with a presumption in favour of rehabilitation and conversion (as against demolition) of the warehouse buildings". As the site does not contain a warehouse building, it is not considered that the second element of this policy is especially relevant.
4.2 The Strategic Plan, meanwhile, contains several policies of relevance. General Policy 2 reads (in part): "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:
4.3 Appendix 7 builds on General Policy 2(h) in respect of what 'adequate parking' is taken to mean, and for town centre shops the standard required is space for service vehicle use.
4.4 Environment Policy 35 reads: "Within Conservation Areas, the Department will permit only development which would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Area,
and will ensure that the special features contributing to the character and quality are protected against inappropriate development".
4.5 Environment Policy 42 reads: "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".
4.6 Business Policy 9 reads (in part): "The Department will support new retail provision in existing retail areas at a scale appropriate to the existing area and which will not have an adverse effect on adjacent retail areas".
4.7 Business Policy 10 reads (in part): "Retail development will be permitted only in established town and village centres". 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services do not object to the planning application. 5.2 Ramsey Town Commissioners do not object to the planning application.
6.1 The key assessment points are those relating to the principle of the use and the acceptability of the physical changes proposed. As such, it is necessary to consider whether or not a new retail operation here would be acceptable, whether or not the highways / parking arrangements proposed are acceptable, and whether or not the design of the new shopfront is acceptable.
6.2 In respect of the principle, the fact that the area is zoned for mixed town centre uses suggests that support would normally be forthcoming for a new - or expanded - retail presence here. Although the main retail frontages are to the south of West Quay, the two Business Policies of the Strategic Plan are clear that retail uses should generally be supported unless there are reasons to indicate otherwise. There are some retail units on West Quay and it is not considered that the expansion of this existing business in such an area would be unlikely to have a detrimental effect here. In fact, the somewhat unloved nature of West Quay at this point makes it reasonable to consider the proposal would offer an improvement in this respect. For the same reason, it is also not considered that the proposal could be said to be contrary to the provisions of Environment Policy 42. This in-principle acceptance of the proposal must, however, be balanced against the specifics of what is proposed.
6.3 It is noted in the first instance that no objection has been received from Highway Services. Additional retailing space is being created without any additional parking provision being provided. However, the site is centrally-located within Ramsey and it would not be practicable or reasonable to seek additional car parking. This is doubly true given that this location is close to existing disc-controlled public parking areas, and also that town centre shops do not carry with them the need to provide extra parking.
6.4 The application includes the moving of the existing garage from between numbers 30 and 32a and into the rear of number 30. This garage is presumably for the business owner. Its creation would result in the loss of some storage space but the application also proposes the creation of new storage space. The balance is therefore acceptable. It is noted that the new garage would open out over the highway where there (a) are double yellow lines and (b) is no drop kerb. It is true that (a) is also the case for the existing garage. As noted, no
objection was received from Highway Services, but it remains the case that a drop kerb would probably be required to enable proper access to the proposed garage and, as such, it is recommended that an advisory note to this effect be attached to any approval notice that might be forthcoming. While advisory notes on this point are not normally attached, the lack of reference to the drop kerb anywhere in the application suggests that the applicant may be unaware of the issue and, therefore, perhaps should be made aware. It is further noted that the kerb in question lies outside the control of the applicant and also the application site itself.
6.5 The site is within a Conservation Area and, as such, any and all development should seek to preserve or enhance the character of that Conservation Area. The proposed garage door would remove an existing door and window entrance. While these are not necessarily representative of the special character of the Area, and the removal of the adjacent wooden garage doors would probably be considered a positive, careful attention does need to be paid to the proposed garage door; for example, an inappropriate material or colour could be extremely detrimental. It is noted that the details elsewhere on this building - and also on the adjoining Trafalgar Hotel - are of a dark green colour and successfully lift the appearance of those buildings; the existing door and window are of that same dark green. This in itself is characterful, and it is considered appropriate to require by condition the colour of the garage door be a green to match the existing building. The material or opening style is not considered of especial consequence.
6.6 As discussed, the frontages to Looneys on the business's Parliament Street side fortunately retain a number of their traditional features. The proposed replication of some of these features is welcomed, although there is a slight dearth of information in this respect. There has been no section submitted to show the angle - if there is to even be one - that the proposed fascia and console brackets would sit from the proposed shopfront. A notation on the plans discusses the manufacture of the projecting moulding proposed to surround the windows, and this is helpful. It is considered in any case that the proposed design is significantly better than the existing situation such that to sustain an objection on this minor design feature would not be appropriate nor necessary.
6.7 However, as is often the case with development proposed for a Conservation Area, the importance to the detailing should not be undermined. Advice was sought from the Conservation Officer who considered that the absence of timber from the frontage would reduce the visual depth offered by the design features of the proposed new shopfront and, therefore, should be sought be condition as being timber. Without this, it is considered that the application would not properly satisfy the key tests of Environment Policy 35.
6.8 In much the same vein, the proposed louvred door would not be especially appropriate from a design point of view, albeit that the need for it - to contain and provide aeration for the proposed re-sited oil tank - is such that it is not considered appropriate to object to it. However, louvred doors of uPVC construction very quickly become unsightly and it is considered appropriate to require it be of timber construction via condition. The condition discussed in paragraph 6.7 above substantiates this point inasmuch as having timber materials used throughout would be far more appropriate than a piecemeal approach.
6.9 It is noted that two rooflights are shown on the plans of the existing plan but not on the existing elevation. Given how the roof is angled from the street, this is probably for purposes of clarity rather than a draughting error. It is also noted that the proposed plan shows five rooflights in all, including those two aforementioned rooflights. The proposed rooflights are themselves not objectionable and any deviation between the existing situation and the existing plan is not serious enough to warrant a fundamental objection. They are visible from the streetsceane albeit not powerfully so. It is, however, considered that a condition requiring the rooflights have a grey frame and be of conservation-style is appropriate.
7.1 There is not considered to be an objection to the application in respect of either the principle or the details proposed. Indeed, it is considered that the design changes proposed will likely uplift the application site and also the streetscene in which it sits. It is therefore recommended that approval, subject to conditions, be granted.
8.1 In line with Article 6(4) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure)(No2) Order 2013, the following Persons are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application: the applicant or, if there is one, the applicant’s agent; the owner and occupier of the land the subject of the application; Highway Services, and the Local Authority in whose district the land the subject of the application sits.
Recommended Decision: Permitted
Date of Recommendation: 02.06.2014
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
The garage door hereby approved shall be coloured green to match the green of the building already present on the application site, and shall be retained as such.
Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the surrounding area.
The windows and doors hereby approved shall have timber frames and shall be retained as such.
Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the surrounding area.
C 4.
The projecting moulding details hereby approved shall be constructed of timber and shall be retained as such.
Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the surrounding area.
C 5.
The rooflights hereby approved shall be of a conservation style and have grey frames and shall be retained as such.
Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the surrounding area.
N 1.
The applicant is advised to contact the Network Operations section of Highway Services prior to undertaking any works within the public highway.
This approval relates to the following plans, date-stamped as having been received 20th March 2014: 13 1040 1, 13 1040 2 and 13 1040 3.
I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control /Head of Development Management/ Senior Planning Officer.
Decision Made : Permitted Date : 3/6/14
Determining officer (delete as appropriate)
Signed : _____________________________ Chris Balmer Senior Planning Officer
Signed : _____________________________ Michael Gallagher Director of Planning and Building Control
Signed : _____________________________ Janine Head of Development Management
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown