Approval in principle to replace existing industrial / commercial units with new office building
Site Address:
Bridge Works Site South Quay Douglas Isle Of Man IM1 5AJ
Case Officer:
Mr Ian Brooks
Photo Taken:
Site Visit:
Expected Decision Level:
Planning Committee
This application is recommended for consideration by the Planning Committee rather than under delegated powers due to the non-conformity of the development with the adopted Development Plan.
Site
The site is located between Castletown Road and the River Douglas, and is immediately to the west of the Bridge Road/South Quay roundabout. It is occupied by low-grade commercial buildings, which were most recently used as tyre/exhaust workshops but are currently vacant. The site is linear in form and has two points of vehicular access from Castletown Road. As the highway passes the site, it slopes upwards towards the Bridge Road/South Quay roundabout, and as such the floor level at the eastern end of the site is below the level of the highway.
The River Douglas runs alongside the northern site boundary, with the newly constructed Quay West residential development on the opposite riverbank. Adjacent to the site on the southern side of Castletown Road are a mix of uses – commercial units, multi-storey car parking and residential property.
Proposed Development
The application is seeking an approval in principle for an office development to replace existing industrial/commercial units. No reserved matters are being discharged as part of the application.
Planning Status And Relevant Policies
Within the adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007, the following policies are considered to be relevant in the determination of this application: General Policy 2, Business Policy 7, Transport Policies 1, 4 and 7.
Business Policy 7 states that "New office floor space should be located within town and village centres on land which is zoned for the purposes on the appropriate area plan; exceptionally, permission may be given for new office
(a) on approved business parks for corporate headquarters which do not involve day to day callers
(b) in buildings of acknowledged architectural or historic interest for which office use represents the only or most appropriate practicable and economic way of securing future use, renovation and maintenance."
Business Policy 8 states that New office buildings should, in terms of height and mass, respect the scale and character of adjoining and nearby buildings and should accommodate parking space in accordance with the standards specified in Appendix 7 of the Plan."
Transport Policy 7 states that "The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department’s current standards."
Planning History
There have been previous applications for the site, which are considered relevant in the consideration of this application.
10/01889/B – Erection of an office building to replace existing vacant industrial/commercial units – application withdrawn
04/01417/A – Approval in principle for the redevelopment of site for residential purposes in the form of apartments – granted on review 15th November 2006
The duration of the permission was extended to 15th November 2010 by the previous Director of Planning and Building Control on 8/10/08
Representations
Public Works Committee of Douglas Borough Council has no objection to the application.
The Department of Infrastructure Highways Division have made the following comments: "The site can be developed within its class use with no improvement to the existing access; this application is providing visibility of 90m to the west and to the east the nearside kerbine is visible at the Zebra crossing, traffic approaching from the roundabout to the east is visible at about 65m, due to the proximity of the roundabout and the zebra crossing there should be no overtaking vehicles in the nearside lane. This visibility is acceptable; however it should be noted that the visibility to the west is provided over land not within the applicant’s control (a wall). A condition should be included to have the applicant enter into a legal agreement with the land owner to maintain the visibility splay.
I have spoken to the applicant and they believe that the wall is in Government ownership and agree to the conditions
The traffic impact detailed in the planning statement is acceptable"
The Fisheries Division of the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture have made the following comments: "The department has some concern regarding this application due to the proximity of the associated river. Any proposed development must be a minimum distance of 8 metres from the watercourse in order to minimise the risk of damage or disturbance. Measures must be in place during any construction works to safeguard the nearby watercourse from any run-off and sedimentation."
The Riverside Apartments Management Company does not object to outline planning permission for residential or industrial commercial use. However they are concerned about the scale and height of the development and its impact on their apartment block. They also consider that a large development on the site would have an impact on parking and traffic congestion in the local area.
The owners of Apartment 12 and 13 of Riverside Apartments consider the site is totally unsuitable for use as offices for the following reasons: 1) The residential aspects of Riverside apartments and South Quay development; 2) the unsuitability of office development at a virtually blind corner for traffic purposes; 3) that by virtue of the river bed and the known seepage of water it would be unsatisfactory and unsuitable for garages to be built on the site for office/commercial usage; 4) prospective blockage to Old Castletown Road (a heavily congested arterial road) in respect
of access and egress to any car parking area; 5) that if the applicants have in mind to erect such an overpowering structure as is comprised within the withdrawn application of January 2011 that would not reflect any of the factors which the Planning Authority thought appropriate or the application approved for residential use on the 1st September 2006.
If the Committee are minded to grant permission, the buildings ought to be no higher than the existing buildings on the site i.e. single storey buildings.
The occupier of 16 Leigh Terrace has objected to the application on the following grounds: 1) Highway safety grounds, 2) increased parking in locality, 3) The residents of Riverside Apartments will have a poor outlook, 4) questioning the need for more offices, 5) None of the new builds in the area are sympathetic or in-keeping with the existing three storey Victorian buildings and would strongly object to any future buildings not being in keeping with the existing Victorian buildings, 5) Impact on wildlife of the River, i.e. disturbance to birds nesting in the area, 6) concerned about litter from workmen being discarding into the river.
The Land Drainage Engineer of the Isle of Man Water and Sewerage Authority (WSA) have provided the following comments: "The WSA do not object to the in principle planning application however any detailed application will required an updated flood risk assessment considering the impact of removal of the wall on the river side. WSA would object to any basement parking and the level of the proposed parking will have to be checked against the revised FRA at detailed stage. In the emerging flood risk guidance document it is recommended that the flood depth for a car park is no greater that 300mm above the worst case flood level and 600mm for residential. It must be proved that the proposed site will not increase the risk of flooding to others. All levels have to be to Douglas 02."
Standard comments have been received from the Manx Electricity Authority.
Assessment
The principal issues in assessing this application are a) Land use, b) Highway issues, c) Impact on residential environment and d) flooding. The following paragraphs deal with these issues in the above order.
Land Use
The proposed development of the site for office purposes would not be compatible with the land use zoning of the site. The site is zoned for Light industrial use within the Douglas Local Plan. However, it should be noted that a site to the south of the application site is zoned as light industrial and has been redeveloped for an alternative purpose, i.e. apartments (02/02498/B). The Independent Inspector stated in this case "Whilst on the development plan the site is zoned for light industrial purposes, it is situated on a principal access route into town and is close to the town centre. Redevelopment for residential purposes in the manner envisaged would certainly bring an uplift to the appearance of the site as compared with the utilitarian and outdated building which currently occupies the site. I consider that it is a location suitable for housing, and in the absence of any positive need to provide for light industry in this locality, the zoning should not stand against the proposal."
Furthermore, the un-adopted written statement to the Douglas Local Plan envisaged that the industrial sites within the central area of the town would be redeveloped. Paragraph 8.14 of the un-adopted written statement states that "Within the central area of the town there exist pockets of industrial use which could well be relocated in order to free up development area with potential for better and more appropriate use, in particular residential. Such existing industrial uses in the central area of the town will therefore be encouraged to relocate". The statement does not preclude these areas being redeveloped for office purposes. It only considers the sites could be developed with a better and more appropriate use. Due to the location of the site near to Douglas Town Centre and nearby residential properties, it is considered the redevelopment of the side for office would be a more appropriate use compared to the former use of the site.
The existing buildings are currently vacant and are unlikely to be used for light industrial purposes in the future. Also an approval in principle has already been granted for the use of the site for residential purposes, but has since expired. It is considered the principle of developing the site for an alternative use, i.e. offices, to be acceptable in this locality; however, there are other material considerations to be taken into account in order to determine whether the proposed development is acceptable.
Highway Issues
Using the indicative plans, the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure considers the visibility from the site is acceptable; however it should be noted that the visibility to the west is provided over land not within the applicant’s control (a wall). The height of the wall is approximately 1.1m in height. The height of the wall cannot be increased under the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2005 as the wall is adjacent to a highway. Any increase in height would impinge on the visibility splay of the proposed access; however, there is no such proposal. Based on the indicative plans and the Highway Divisions views that visibility is acceptable, it is considered the proposal would not have a detrimental effect on highway safety.
In terms of parking, the overall provision for the development can only be assessed at reserved matters stage, when details of the overall floor space will be provided.
Impact On Residential Environment
In respect of the impact on the residential environment of Riverside Apartments, the apartment building is set to the south of the site on the opposite side of Castletown Road. There is a separation distance of approximately 14 m between the site and the windows on the Riverside Apartments building. There is no details of the scale, height and massing of the building within the application. This detail would be provided as part of the reserved matters application.
However, due to the orientation of the site in relation to Riverside Apartments, any redevelopment of the site would not result in overshadowing and loss of light. The issues about scale, height and outlook would need to be considered when the reserved matters application is submitted.
In respect of the impact on the residential environment of Quay West, the application site is set to the south on Quay West on the opposite side of the river. The separation distance between Quay West and the application site is approximately 22m, measured at its nearest point. Due to the application site being set to the South of Quay West, there is the potential that the proposed development may impact on the residential environment of Quay West. A proper assessment can only be carried out when the reserved matters application is submitted. However, due to the separation distance, it is considered the site can be redeveloped in some form for office purposes.
Flooding
The site lies within a Flood Risk Zone. The Water and Sewerage Authority have stated that they “do not object to the In Principle planning application however any detailed application will require an updated flood risk assessment (FRA) considering the impact of removal of the wall on the river side. WSA would object to any basement parking and the level of the proposed parking will have to be checked against the revised FRA at detailed stage. In the emerging flood risk guidance document it is recommended that the flood depth for a car park is no greater that 300mm above the worst case flood level and 600mm for residential. It must be proved that the proposed site will not increase the risk of flooding to others. All levels have to be to Douglas 02.”
The Planning Authority has been in discussion with the Water and Sewerage Authority regarding their comments, as the constraints they were suggesting could make the design of any subsequent building difficult, particularly given the width of the site and its positioning at the back edge of pavement. Without knowing conclusions of a revised FRA may reach, the Planning Authority would not be able to pinpoint a floor level. The Planning Authority would need to be satisfied that a
building could be constructed that would look acceptable in its location and meet the requirements of the Water Authority. Furthermore, the Planning Authority was concerned that the Water Authority may set a floor level that would make the access/parking difficult.
Therefore, the Planning Authority has requested whether they are able to recommend what the floor levels would be for the site? The response of the WSA is that "The existing floor level would be fine it is just looking at the flooding from the displaced water perspective."
It is considered the site is able to be developed without any impact from flooding; however, the issue of displacement would need to be considered at the reserved matters stage, as the detailed design of the building will have been finalised to be able assess the displacement of water from the proposed development along with any mitigation measures.
Other Matters
In respect about the concerns about the design of the development, this cannot be assessed as part of this application and can only be considered at the reserved matters stage.
The Fisheries Division of the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture have requested that a full method statement is forwarded to them for comment and review well in advance of commencing on site. This detail could be submitted as part of any reserved matters application to ensure the method statement is acceptable prior to commencement of any development.
Recommendation
It is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions in the attached schedule.
Party Status
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.
The Highways Division of the Department of Transport is now part of the Department of Infrastructure of which the planning authority is part of. As such, the Highways Division cannot be afforded party status in this instance.
The Isle of Man Water and Sewerage Authority have commented on planning matters and as such should be afforded party status in this instance.
The Fisheries Division of Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture have commented on planning matter and as such should be afforded party status
The Manx Electricity Authority has commented on non-planning matters and as such should not be afforded party status in this instance.
The owners of Apartment 12 and 13 of Riverside Apartments are adjacent to the site and have commented on planning matters. It is considered they should be afforded party status.
The Riverside Apartments Management Company Limited are adjacent to the site and have commented on planning matters. It is considered they should be afforded party status.
The occupier of 16 Leigh Terrace has commented on highway matters and as such be afforded party status.
Recommendation
Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal
C: Conditions for approval N: Notes attached to conditions R: Reasons for refusal O: Notes attached to refusals
C 1. Approval of the details of siting, design, external appearance of the building[s], internal layout, means of access, landscaping of the site (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be obtained from the Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced.
C 2. The application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Planning Authority before the expiration of two years from the date of this permission.
C 3. The development to which this permission relates shall begin within 4 years of the date of this permission or within two years of the final approval of the reserved matters, whichever is the later.
C 4. This approval relates to the application site as defined by the red line on drawing no.APL/110 and APL/111 date stamped 13th April 2011. No consent is granted for the siting of the new office building or for any engineering works shown on these particular drawings.
C 5. The building shall only be used as offices (Class 4, Schedule 4 of the Town and Planning Country (Permitted Development) Order 2005).
C 6. The plans and particulars submitted in accordance with condition 2 above shall include
(a) A Green Travel Plan for the development;
(b) A Flood Risk Assessment
(c) A Design Statement.
(d) A method statement to prevent any run-off and sedimentation from entering the River Douglas.
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
