Loading document...
units (252 square metres), the units would require 17 spaces. Again there will be sufficient number of parking spaces (visitor and unallocated) for the proposed office use. 100. The development will provide bike racks which will help to promote alternative modes of transport. The site is within walking distance of the a supermarket, the main office district of Douglas and public transport links. 101. It is considered the overall car parking provision for the development is acceptable due to the site's location i.e. close to public transport links, cycleway, employment and town centre facilities etc. ## Open Space Provision 102. Recreation Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan states that "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 of the Plan" 103. In assessing the open space provision, the provision depends on the number of bedrooms within the dwelling. The overall open space provision for this development is as follows: 88no. two bedroom apartments of open space 104. Appendix 6 of the Strategic Plan states that "Once the open space requirement has been established it is then necessary to determine how the open space will be provided. There are three possibilities: 1) Provided on site, 2) Provide off site but adjacent or close to the development, 3) Provided by payment of a commuted sum to enable the Local Authority to provide the open space on behalf of the developer. Where possible, open space should be provided in the first instance on-site or off-site where this would improve the quality of the development and the open space provided. Where the first two options are not practical then commuted sums will be considered." 105. The application is not proposing to provide any on-site or off-site provision; however, it should be noted that the Planning Authority has not opened up any negotiations between the applicant and the Local Authority regarding the open space provision for the proposed development. This is down to the fact that the flooding issue has remained unresolved. Therefore, due to the lack of open space provision, the proposed development is contrary to Recreation Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007. 106. It should be noted that, if the flooding issue was overcome, officers would have opened up negotiations to try to secure the necessary off site provision and/or commuted sum. ### Affordable Housing 107. Housing Policy 5 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan states that "In granting planning permission on land zoned for residential development or in predominantly residential areas the Department will normally require that of provision should be made of affordable housing. This policy will apply to development of 8 dwellings or more." 108. Back in 2009, the then Estates and Housing Directorate of DLGE commented "Given due to the land availability and demand for affordable housing in the Douglas area, the site should be considered for the provision of affordable homes (there are considerable numbers of persons on the Public Sector Housing waiting list and the First Time Buyer Register for the Douglas area. The Developer proposed 88 dwellings on this site therefore 22 units of the affordable housing would be required (88 x 25% = 22). I understand that the Developer is also required under the planning approval for the former Bridge Garage Site (PA08/01046/B) to provide an additional 14 no. units of affordable housing on this site ("the contiguous land to the west") making a total requirement of 36 units. I note from the application that the developer still owns further developable land to the west of this site where, I assume, similar consideration will be given to the provision of the 25% quota. I am a little disappointed that no preliminary indication has been given of future strategy for the remainder of the site since there may have been an opportunity to consider the needs of the site as a whole. The Developer should not assume that only first time buyer affordable housing is required on this site and the Douglas are also requires growth in provision of public sector rented housing for elderly persons as well as general use. In view of the above I would recommend that the Developer discusses the provision of affordable housing with the Estates and Housing Directorate before proceeding further and that consideration be given to constraining further progress within the scheme until a Section 13 Agreement is concluded between the D.L.G.E and Developer for the provision of this affordable housing. 109. It should be noted that the affordable housing element of Quay West has already been dealt with in an earlier application for the retention of that development. Therefore, the affordable housing provision should only be based on 25% of the 88 dwellings that are proposed, which equates to 22 units. The applicant has indicated this may be provided in a number of different ways depending upon need; on site provision, off setting against provision on other sites and the use of commuted sums. Due to the flooding issue, the affordable housing element of the scheme has not been progressed in any detail. Due to the lack of any detail about the affordable housing provision, this is an additional reason to refuse the application. 110. Notwithstanding the above, it should be noted that, if the flooding issue was overcome, officers would have progressed in working out the detail on the affordable housing provision. RECOMMENDATION 111. It is recommended that the application be refused for the above reasons. PARTY STATUS 112. The local authority are, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (c) and (d), considered "interested persons" and as such should be afforded party status. 113. The Environmental Health Officer has not commented on planning matter and therefore should not be afforded party status. 114. The Access Office has commented on planning matters; however, they do not have sufficient interest in the site and therefore should not be afforded party status. 22 August 2013 09/01386/B 115. The occupier of 12 Leigh Terrace lives on the opposite side of the River Douglas. It is considered they have sufficient interest in the application site to be afforded party status. 116. The Isle of Man Water and Sewerage Authority and the Housing Division of the Department of Social Care have commented on planning matters and therefore should be afforded party status in this instance. 117. The Department of Transport Highways Division is now part of the Department of Infrastructure and as such cannot be afforded party status. ## Recommendation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation:
The proposed development would be contrary to General Policy 2(l) Environment Policy 13 as it has not been adequately demonstrated that the development would not result in an unacceptable risk in terms of on-site and/or off-site flooding.
The proposed development would be contrary to General Policy 2(h) and Housing Policy 6 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007, in that by reason of the design of the balconies, terraces and apartments, it would create an unacceptable residential environment for the future occupiers of the development in terms of overlooking and loss of privacy.
The proposed development would be contrary to General Policy 2(i) and Transport Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 in that the transport infrastructure will not be able to safely accommodate the traffic generated by the new development.
The proposed development would be contrary to Recreation Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 in that the development does not provide any recreational and amenity space that is in accordance with appendix 6 of the plan.
The proposed development would be contrary to Housing Policy 5 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 in that the development does not provide any affordable housing provision.
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the Town and Country (Development Procedure) 2005
Decision Made : ..RREMSB.O. Committee Meeting Date : 28 8. 13 Signed : Presenting Officer Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason is required. Signing Officer to delete as appropriate
Recommended Decision: Refused
Date of Recommendation:
N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
R 1 . The proposed development would be contrary to General Policy 2(l) Environment Policy 13 as it has not been adequately demonstrated that the development would not/result in an unacceptable risk in terms of on-site/and/or off-site flooding.
R 2 . The proposed development would be contrary to General Policy 2(h) and Housing Policy 6 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007, by reason of the design of the balcohies, terraces and apartments, in that it would create an unacceptable residential environment for the future occupiers of the development in terms of overlooking and loss of privacy.
R 3 . The proposed development would be contrary to General Policy 2(i) and Transport Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 in that the transport infrastructure will not be able to safely accommodate the traffic generated by the new development.
R 4 . The proposed development would be contrary to Recreation Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 in that the development does not provide any/recreational and amenity space that is in accordance with appendix 6 of the plan.
R 5 . The proposed development would be contrary to Housing Policy 5 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 in that the development does not provide any affordable housing provision.
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the Town and Country (Development Procedure) 2005
Decision Made : ......................... ......................... Signed : Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason is required. Signing Officer to delete as appropriate
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown