Planners have refused permission for three applications that would have completely changed Peel’s seafront.

The planning committee voted down all the applications for the Empire Garage-owned sites while the architect for the plans was warned about his language.

Empire Garage Ltd had applied to demolish its showroom on Marine Parade, the adjacent building at the bottom of Stanley Road and associated buildings on the corner of Stanley Road and Cross Street.

The buildings would have been replaced on the seafront by two commercial units with seven flats above each, terraced housing on Stanley Road and a block of flats with access provided via Cross Street.

During the planning committee meeting yesterday (Monday, August 12), members voted to reject all the applications, including those to demolish the sites which were necessary as they lie within Peel’s conservation area.

Planning officer Sarah Corlett repeated her stance from the previous meeting that there was no reason for a deferment, despite the applicant seeking one, as the issues she highlighted in reports meant the plans needed ’redesign not additional information’.

Miss Corlett’s reports highlighted issues such as lack of parking provision for the flats above the proposed shops, no staff parking for those shops, a reliance on the car park owned by Peel Commissioners - which the board said is meant to be for visitors not residents - and the mass of the buildings compared to the surrounding area.

The Department of Infrastructure’s highways division was also represented.

It criticised the lack of parking, the lack of visibility splays on some of the architect’s designs, the lack of a transport survey and a lack of consultation with the highways division.

Members of the committee spoke out against the plans before voting to reject them.

Ian Cottier described the proposed buildings as ’unneighbourly’ while planning committee chairman Tim Baker MHK said he didn’t feel the plans ’respects people who live around it’.

At one point during the committee meeting, architect Hugh Logan warned members that if they failed to approve plans for development of the site, ’they will become derelict’.

That prompted Mr Baker to lambast Mr Logan for his ’totally inappropriate comment’ while the Miss Corlett ensured him that the local authority has powers to prevent that.