APL Planning Statement

Planning Statement In Support Of The Demolition Of Former Eastfield Care Home And Its Replacement With 5 Dwellings And Associated Garages With Alterations To Access And Drainage, Eastfield, Douglas Im1 4Au

A photograph showing a large, cream-colored two-story building with a glass conservatory extension and a paved driveway. The property is surrounded by mature trees and vegetation, representing the existing structure t... — A photograph showing a large, cream-colored two-story building with a glass conservatory extension and a paved driveway. The property is surrounded by mature trees and vegetation, representing the existing structure to be demolished.

Sarah Corlett Town Planning Consultancy Ltd Registered address: Ballachrink Croft, Ballacorey Road, Bride, Isle of Man IM7 4AW t: 07624 485517 e: [email protected] w: www.sarahcorlett.com Directors: Sarah Elizabeth Corlett Nicola Jane Corlett

Company Registration 134325C

1.0 Introduction
1.1 The site is approximately 1400 sq m of land which occupies the north western corner of Eastfield, a form of urban square formed on two sides by Eastfield and the other two by Brighton Terrace to the south east and Mount Bradda to the north east with allotment gardens in the centre.
1.2 Eastfield is open to two way vehicular traffic with on street parking in front of the properties which sit to the north and west. The properties forming the north western side of the square are relatively uniform, level and all two storey with a variety of dormers serving additional accommodation in the roofspaces. These properties have small front gardens with railings and some of the dwellings have lean-to pitched front open porches. More modern dwellings were inserted at the south western end which were significantly altered very recently (see Planning History).
1.3 The junction of the north western terrace with the south western side of the square was marked by Eastfield Mansion House - a large building which in its later life from the mid 1980s provided a care home for the elderly but most recently had permission for conversion back to a single dwelling. This building had a significant garden to the south.
1.4 The terrace of dwellings to the south west of the square are quite different to those on the other sides of the square, with a stepped arrangement, painted decorations on the projecting two storey gables and a pebble dashed finish with a modern garage attached to the highest dwelling next to Eastfield Mansion House.

Company Registration 134325C

A photograph of a large, cream-colored building with a conservatory extension, likely the former nursing home proposed for demolition.

A photograph of a large, cream-colored detached building with a conservatory extension and balcony, likely the former nursing home to be demolished.

1.5 The buildings on the other sides of the square are different again with Brighton Terrace having three storey dwellings with pitched roofed gable features on the front elevations and part of the terrace having simple angled bays with slated roofs with painted bands around the windows whilst the other part closer to Rosemount, having castellated topped single storey, angled bay windows and concrete mouldings around the windows.
1.6 Mount Bradda has a variety of buildings with Rose Lodge and more modern garages on its south eastern corner with a terrace of partly stepped houses with concrete mouldings, den tilled cornicing and pitched roofed dormers with the single storey angled bays found on Brighton Terrace.

Company Registration 134325C

A photograph showing the side exterior of a building with an external metal staircase, a green waste bin, and a paved yard area bordered by a wooden fence.

A photograph showing the existing white building and attached single-story outbuilding with an external metal staircase, which are the subject of the demolition application.

This photograph shows the existing site conditions, featuring an overgrown grassy area in the foreground, a stone boundary wall on the left, and existing white buildings with chimneys in the background.

A street-level photograph showing mature trees, hedges, and a road, likely depicting the site's surroundings or boundary.

A street-level photograph taken from a vehicle showing a row of large, white, multi-story residential buildings with cars parked along the curb.

A photograph taken from inside a vehicle looking out at a residential street with large houses and a white wall.

1.7 The site itself is presently unoccupied. The dwelling occupies some of the site with a hard surfaced area at the side and rear and lawned and treed garden in front.
1.8 There is a rear lane which exits onto Mount Bradda.
1.9 The existing building is 7m high to the eaves and 10.8m to the ridge and has a basic footprint of approximately 18m by 14m.. The rear elevation has four windows in the second storey serving a stairwell, a hallway, bedroom and en-suite bathroom in the link section; three windows in the first floor serving a bedroom, hall and en-suite bathroom in the link and a bathroom in the original building: there are only four windows in the original Eastfield building.

Company Registration 134325C

A photograph showing a roadside view with dense green hedges and trees on the left and a paved road on the right.

A street-level photograph showing the exterior of a white building on the left with a bay window, surrounded by trees and a paved driveway or road.

A photograph showing the exterior of a white, two-story building identified as a former nursing home, featuring a lower extension with boarded-up windows and a stone wall to the side.

1.10 There are two single-storey properties which are linked by attached garages and which front Hawarden Avenue and which back onto the rear lane at the rear of the site. The existing building is approximately 16.8m from the rear of Emsford and 16m from number 43 (shown as Kione Vradda on the base mapping) although the upper floor windows are further away at approximately 20m.

A photograph of a construction site or yard featuring a cement mixer, building materials, and a concrete block wall with residential houses in the background.

A street-level photograph showing a row of residential houses with pitched roofs and chimneys, partially obscured by hedges and a low wall in the foreground.

Sarah Corlett

Two photographs showing the existing buildings proposed for demolition and the surrounding street context with boundary walls.

Town Planning Consultancy

1.11 The properties in Eastfield which back onto the rear lane have various windows looking directly across the lane (below top) whereas the Hawarden Avenue terraced properties backing onto the lane have their windows in the side of their rear outriggers and blank walls abutting the lane (below bottom).

Sarah Corlett Town Planning Consultancy Ltd Registered address: Ballachrink Croft, Ballacorey Road, Bride, Isle of Man IM7 4AW t:07624 485517 e: [email protected] w: www.sarahcorlett.com Directors: Sarah Elizabeth Corlett, Nicola Jane Corlett Company Registration 134325C

1.12 Number 43 has a garage immediately to the rear of the property and a thick conifer hedge between it and the rear garden of that property. Emsford has no such boundary treatment other than a masonry, dashed wall.

1.13 The building is 20m from the nearest point of the closest property in Westbourne Drive (number 24) and 24m from the main rear elevation of that property. The boundary along the lane is currently a thick conifer hedge supplemented by taller trees.

A photograph showing a row of terraced houses with blue and white facades behind a low brick wall and overgrown vegetation, with a small brick outbuilding in the foreground.

This photograph depicts a narrow, unpaved access lane bordered by a tall, dense evergreen hedge on the left and wooden fencing on the right. It shows the existing site conditions and access route relevant to the propo... — This photograph depicts a narrow, unpaved access lane bordered by a tall, dense evergreen hedge on the left and wooden fencing on the right. It shows the existing site conditions and access route relevant to the proposed development.

1.14 The existing building on the site is visible from Westmoreland Road albeit physically separate from the rest of Eastfield due to the western terrace of the square.

A photograph showing a paved access lane lined with wooden fences and a large pollarded tree against a cloudy sky.

A street-level photograph showing a residential road with parked cars, brick walls, and terraced houses in the background under a cloudy sky.

2.0 Planning policy
2.1 The site is designated on the Area Plan for the East as Predominantly Residential which also includes the allotments. On the Community Constraints Map 1c the care home is identified.
2.2 The site also lies within the Woodbourne Road Conservation Area, adopted in 2003. There is an Appraisal which accompanies this.

Company Registration 134325C

A site location plan showing the proposed development site highlighted in yellow within a residential area.

A map showing a residential area with rows of properties, highlighting a specific site in pink.

2.3 The Appraisal refers to “the vast majority of properties within the Conservation Area benefit from small, private gardens for the full width of their frontage: this serves to provide a sense of separation and privacy from busy thoroughfares.” The Appraisal specifically refers to Eastfield as follows:
3.24 The area of Eastfield, Mount Bradda, Brighton Terrace and Westmount correspond to that shown on a plan dated 1851 prepared by George Raby, Architect and Surveyor and titled ‘Plan of Building Ground situate at Rosemount’. The area was part of the Joyner estate and the plan shows a layout totalling 53 dwellings. Fourteen were built and form what is now known as Eastfield but the remainder were not build in their original form. The 1869 Ordnance Survey Maps shows the present street pattern with central gardens and with Eastfield House and Rose Lodge occupying corner positions at the east and west side of the ‘square’. The terrace known as Eastfield was an early approach to Town Planning in that covenants were incorporated into deed of sale in an endeavour to control the design of properties and the retention of open space. The evolution of the remaining properties fronting onto the gardens happened predominantly in the 1880s and resulted in an interesting and lively mix of architecture. The retention of the private allotment gardens is a survivor of the original plan.”

2.4 The appraisal notes negative features as including reversible features such as plastic framed windows, the removal of railings, application of pebble dash, loss of decorative mouldings and uncomplimentary colour schemes.
2.5 The 1867 Ordnance Survey map shows the area like this:

Company Registration 134325C

A black and white historical site plan showing property boundaries, building footprints, and labels like 'Eastfield' and 'Rose Lodge'.

2.6 Development within a Conservation Area is expected to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area as stated in Strategic Policy 4, Environment Policy 35 and Planning Policy Statement 1/01 - Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man and where the special character of the Area must be taken into account. Demolition of properties within a Conservation Area is presumed against where the building is considered to contribute positively to the character or appearance of the area (Environment Policy 39 and Planning Policy Statement 1/01 Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man). Registered Building consent is required for the demolition of a building within a Conservation Area.
2.7 There is no indication of any part of the site being at risk of flooding on the national flood risk maps.
2.8 There are no Registered Trees or Registered Tree Groups within the site.
2.9 Due to the land use designation of the site, the principle of residential development would be acceptable here, particularly due to its sustainable location close to the town centre, public transport network and employment, shops and services, in accordance with the Strategic Aim, Strategic Policies 2 and 10, Housing Policy 4, Transport Policy 1.
2.10 Car parking must be provided in accordance with the standards in the Strategic Plan (see Appendix One) - one parking space per single bed unit and two spaces for anything larger.
2.11 New development must be of an appropriate style, design and finish (Strategic Policies 3, 4 and 5 and General Policy 2).
2.12 Whilst the full force of the Climate Change Act 2021 has not been brought into effect, development is now expected to demonstrate how it addresses Climate Change (Residential Design Guide and in certain cases, Energy Policy 5) and result in biodiversity net gain. This is particularly important where trees or habitat is being lost as a result of the proposed development. Addressing Climate Change is also dealt with in the increasing standards within the Building Regulations.
2.13 Existing trees and landscape features are expected to be retained where possible (General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 3).

Company Registration 134325C

3.0 Planning History
3.1 The site has been the subject of these applications:

86/00609/A - approval in principle for conversion of premises into residential home for the elderly and incorporation into Eastfield House, 14, Eastfield - permitted
87/00782/B - conversion to residential home for the elderly, extension to kitchen and link corridor, 14, Eastfield and Eastfield House - permitted 06/00605/B - re-roofing of building with slate - permitted 92/00095/B - alterations and extensions and construction of 35 bed nursing wing - refused 92/01197/B - alterations, first floor extension and construction of nursing wing, Eastfield Residential Home - approved on appeal 97/00567/B - erection of replacement porch and installation of uPVC windows, Eastfield Mansion House - permitted 99/01614/A - approval in principle for 4 apartment building - refused at appeal 20/00281/B and 20/00280/CON - conversion of former care home to residential dwelling - permitted

3.2 These applications have been approved for 14, Eastfield:

20/00534/B and 20/00535/CON - conversion of part of former care home to a dwelling - permitted.

3.3 The most recent and significant application for the application site is 22/01326/CON which sought Registered Building Consent for the demolition of all of the buildings on site. This application was refused for the following reasons:

1. The application fails the tests of Section 16 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 as the proposals would fail to preserve the building and the features of special architectural and historic interest which it possesses.
2. The application fails the tests of Section 18 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 by removing a building which makes a positive contribution to the character of the Douglas (Woodbourne Road) Conservation Area, thereby failing to preserve or enhance the conservation area's character.
3. The application fails the tests of Strategic Policy 4 of the IOM Strategic Plan 2016 as the proposals would fail to protect or enhance the fabric of the conservation area.
4. The proposals include removing a building which makes a positive contribution to the character of the area, and therefore the application fails the tests of Environment Policy

Company Registration 134325C

35 of the IOM Strategic Plan 2016 as it would fail to preserve or enhance the character of the conservation area.

The application fails the tests of Environment Policy 39 of the IOM Strategic Plan 2016 as the proposals would not retain a building which makes a positive contribution to the character of the Conservation Area.

3.4 The Planning Officer’s report includes the following at paragraph 6.4:

o Firstly, the condition of the building. A structural report has been submitted with the application. Whilst this notes various issues regarding the condition of the existing structure, the report states that elements require replacement and does not at any point recommend demolition of the building. It is not judged that the building's condition is sufficient reason to justify demolition.
o Secondly, the cost of repairing and maintaining it in relation to its importance. The property had most recently been used as a care home, until 2017. In 2020 approval was granted to return the building to a single dwelling. Some information has been provided within the submitted Built Heritage Statement (on page 31) regarding the cost of various
options for the building and site. Clearly there would be a financial cost to renovating the building. However, given that the building is one of the oldest surviving in the area and is acknowledged to have historic and architectural interest, the cost of repair and maintenance is not judged sufficient in its own right to justify demolition. Clearly, adequate periodic maintenance and repair of the building as required during its lifetime would have resulted in a much reduced cost to any renovation now required.
o Thirdly, the adequacy of efforts to retain the building in use. It is clear from the submitted Structural Report that almost no effort has been made since 2017 to address the issues with the building that now exist. Although approval was granted in 2020 to return Eastfield House to a single dwelling, it appears that very little (if any) of the works approved have been undertaken.
o Finally, the merits of alternative proposals for the site. The Built Heritage Statement submitted with the application describes an alternative proposal to construct five dwellings on the site. However, no application has been submitted to propose the site's redevelopment. This application is solely for the demolition of all the buildings on the site. The merits of any alternative proposals cannot therefore be adequately assessed, as none have been applied for. In terms of applications currently lodged or previously

Company Registration 134325C

approved, all that would result from the demolition of all the buildings on the site is a vacant site in the conservation area.

Company Registration 134325C

4.0 The proposal
4.1 Proposed is the demolition of the existing buildings on site and their replacement with a terrace of five dwellings, associated garaging along with alterations to the access and drainage and new landscaping.
4.2 The proposed building has a basic footprint of 23m by 12.6m with a less deep section adjacent to but not physically linking the proposal to 14, Eastfield. The building will be 16.8m from Emsford and 17m from number 43 (an increase of just over 1m from the existing building) and it will be 12m to the nearest point of 24, Westbourne Drive and almost 17m to the main rear elevation of that property. There are no windows in the side elevation of the proposed building.
4.3 The proposed building will be 8m to the eaves and 10.4m to the ridge. The rear elevation will accommodate three floors of windows with the ground floor having large bifold doors. The floors above will have four sets of three windows serving four bedrooms per floor with the section set back and linking to number 14 Eastfield has two bedroom windows in the first and second floors in the rear elevation and patio doors and windows serving a kitchen and dining room.
4.4 The development will continue the rhythm of the existing terrace to the north west through the incorporation of two storey square bays, rendered walling and vertically proportioned windows. Each dwelling will have private amenity space at the rear and access to the refuse collection area in the adjacent lane so that refused bins may be kept in the rear area. A Design Statement is included with the application which provides further details of the design evolution.
4.5 Parking is to be provided in the form of five garages and with a space in front of each garage and facilities to enable electric vehicle charging to be provided. Cycle storage sheds are to be provided in the rear gardens.
4.6 The access is to be amended to remove the existing pillars which are cracked and failing and introducing a wider entrance and new walling which curves in front of the existing large trees which are to be retained. An arboricultural assessment is included and measures to demonstrate appropriate protection of the trees on site which are to be retained.
4.7 The proposed building will incorporate increased thermal and energy efficiency and details of how this will be achieved are set out in the Design and Access Statement. This includes the installation of solar panels on the front facing roofing which, if it is felt to unacceptably compromise the character and appearance of the Conservation Area could be omitted although this will undermine the energy efficiency and sustainability of the project.

Company Registration 134325C

4.8 As the proposal involves the demolition of a building within a Conservation Area and particularly given the reasons for refusal in the previous application, information has been provided to assess the value of the existing building. The application includes a Built Heritage Statement prepared by Pegasus Group, the same one that was submitted with the previous application. Whilst the author is not a local agency, the writer of the Assessment, Claire Gayle, has previous experience with development in the Island’s historic environment, including both Conservation Areas and Registered Buildings. Successful projects include the appeal for a new sea wall along the Harris Promenade, in the Promenades Conservation Area in Douglas on behalf of Department of Infrastructure, and a representation in respect of the Registering of a historic farmstead in St Mark’s on behalf of the owner.
4.9 The property’s last use was as a care home and the layout reflects this although it is some time since the property was actively used with the fabric showing signs of this recent inactivity and a general lack of maintenance and repair and where there have been modern interventions. Photographs are included in Appendix Three of the existing building.
4.10 The Built Heritage Statement, prepared after a site visit to the property on 7th September, 2022 describes the history of the building, its architecture, condition, layout and assesses the positive and negative aspects of the building as it currently exists. It also comments on the use of the building and the potential impact of redevelopment.

Company Registration 134325C

5.0 Assessment
5.1 There is a presumption against the demolition of any building within a Conservation Area which is considered to contribute positively to the character or appearance of the area. The existing building in its original form would not have been unattractive but it is a matter of fact that it has been altered: there are new additions at the rear as well as the side portico having been altered and the front porch is also a new addition. It is not disputed that the building is one of the oldest in the square and it is fully accepted that there will be an element of negativity in principle from the demolition of this building.
5.2 However we would suggest that the overall impact from the demolition and replacement of the building as proposed would be positive in terms of the visual impact and the energy efficiency of the new building as well as providing high quality living accommodation in the Island’s principal settlement and a highly sustainable location and also that there are critical issues which will prevent the practical retention, re-use and refurbishment of what exists.

Impact of demolition and redevelopment

5.3 The Strategic Plan and Planning Policy Statement policies on demolition within Conservation Areas are clear that buildings of merit should not be lost. The contribution that the existing building makes therefore needs to be considered.
5.4 The modern link between Eastfield and number 14 is not considered to be a positive element. Neither is the later porch/conservatory on the front. The portico on the side has been altered. The rear accommodates a range of extensions, none of which is original or attractive. Whilst these elements are capable of being rectified through alteration or removal, there is a financial cost to that which we believe makes such work unviable and unlikely to be undertaken. Planning approval has been granted for such a scheme although the fact it has not been implemented and the lack of a sale are perhaps testament to the lack of financial viability of that proposal.
5.5 Eastfield was originally a detached building and was never designed to be part of the terrace which arrived later. The link itself is not attractive nor continues the rhythm or features of the buildings on either side. It is not at all likely that anyone would remove that link and lose the resulting floorspace and indeed even the approved scheme reinstates the link albeit at a lower level. The building on this site is therefore destined to remain as part of the longer terrace to the north east. We believe this could be done more sympathetically to the Conservation Area through the removal of what exists and the construction of a terrace which is designed in its entirety to be a continuation of what exists alongside.
5.6 What is proposed will not replicate the existing terrace to the north east but will continue the important rhythm established by it and will introduce a more modern element which is not trying to

Company Registration 134325C

appear as if it were always part of the terrace but is sympathetic to it. The existing building has large areas of hard surfacing which will be transformed into private grassed living space (the rear gardens) and with the introduction of new planting immediately in front of the new building which is the most publicly visible element on the site.

5.7 Whilst the loss of Eastfield will result in the loss of one of the oldest buildings in the square, its character, we would suggest was diminished with the various additions and its link to the rest of the terrace and the overall impact from redevelopment as proposed would be a positive one on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

Justification for the demolition of the building

5.8 Setting aside the above, the building is in a very poor state of repair and has a complicated and dated layout with some of the rooms of insufficient ceiling height for occupation and the stairs of inappropriately steep incline and narrow width to meet modern standards. The lack of maintenance which is criticised in the planning officer’s report into the most recent application is not the fault of the current owner who purchased the site as it currently stands and has had continuing issues of vandalism since the purchase.
5.9 Internally we would suggest that whilst there are some original features, most have been lost or significantly altered and overall does not have sufficient historic or architectural interest to warrant preservation.
5.10 The Built Heritage Statement states that the refurbishment of the property as approved would result in a building which would have an anticipated sale value of £1.75m to £2m and it is our view that this would not be a commercially attractive option in this location. It also explains that conversion of the building to a number of apartments was also considered but the internal layout does not lend itself to such a use without significant alteration and demolition and this too was considered unviable.
5.11 It is our view that the refurbishment of the building is not financially viable and that if proposals for demolition and rebuilding are not accepted that the building will continue to deteriorate, contributing even less to the Conservation Area.
5.12 The Structural Engineer’s report which accompanies this application explains that the condition of the load bearing elements in the existing building is poor and the majority need replacement. The roof, load bearing stud work walls and majority of timber floors require replacement. Retention of the external masonry walls will require propping and temporary works to facilitate their retention. The potential for movement of the retained random rubble masonry walls during the construction period is considered to be hazardous. Remedial works to ensure the future stability of the building would result

Company Registration 134325C

in extensive reconstruction of existing features due to the installation of the temporary supporting features. The retention of the existing masonry walls is not considered to be the safest solution to facilitate the re-use of the site. They conclude that taking all this into account, the retention and reuse of the existing building is not economically viable and that the retention of the existing building would only be possible through the replacement of the majority of the components of the current building and therefore the ‘retained building’ would actually in practice be a new structure.

5.13 Whilst planning approval was granted for the conversion of the building to a dwelling, the permission was not implemented and the site sold, perhaps as a result of the unviability of this proposal and the applicant’s (and others’) unwillingness to carry it through.

Access

5.14 The proposed development will change the nature of the use of the site and in recognition of the limited amount of on street parking and the lack of on site parking for many of the adjacent properties, provision is made within the scheme for parking including garaged spaces for four of the units.
5.15 The proposal retains the frontage trees and boundary treatment which will help to screen the hard surfacing and parked vehicles and reduce the view of the garage although this will not be unattractive. Visibility is available at the entrance in both directions as shown below although there is scope for improvement through the relocation of pillars and widening of it, if required. It should be remembered however that the latest use of the building was as a care home where there were visitors and staff who would be using the entrance and requiring parking spaces within the site.
5.16 Adequate bin storage and access to collection facilities is included for each of the dwellings and the site has available to it all the required services.

Company Registration 134325C

A street-level photograph showing a paved access road leading towards a row of residential buildings, with a white boundary wall in the foreground.

A street-level photograph showing a residential road with parked cars, green hedges, and a row of houses in the background.

Impact on neighbours

5.17 The development will introduce a new, larger building which is slightly further away from the properties on Hawarden Avenue but closer to those in Westbourne Drive although there are to be no windows in the side elevation facing these properties.
5.18 The proposal aims to replicate the mass and form of the terrace alongside which it will sit. Whilst it would be possible to have a replacement building which is lower and smaller, this would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the square which is within a Conservation Area and where development is obliged to preserve or enhance its character and appearance. The most sensitive arrangement for a new building on this site is to follow the position and height of what exists and this is what is proposed. The relationship between the new building and the buildings to the rear is dissimilar to what exists albeit that there are no rear outriggers and the rear elevation takes the line of the existing rear extensions. The rear lane has buildings built up to the carriageway, some with windows and some with windows in the sides of then outriggers giving limited light and outlook. The windows in the side of number 41 look directly over and into the rear garden of number 43 as it illustrated in the photographs above.
5.19 Whilst we are aware that modern standards for outlook and privacy would not result in a development like that of Eastfield and Hawarden Avenue, it exists and illustrates the context of the site and that in built up areas and town and city centres, the relationships of dwellings and their windows and spaces is not the same as those on new development where buildings are further away. If the proposed development is to sit comfortably in this environment, these reduced standards of outlook and privacy are likely to be similar to what exists.

Trees 5.18 The scheme will result in the loss of trees: conifer, Manx palms and cherry. The existing large limes at the entrance are to be retained. Additional trees are to be introduced to mitigate this loss, planted as shown in the submitted drawings and taken from a selection of the following which will are nectar friendly and are good, small garden trees which will add interest and increase biodiversity without becoming large and inappropriate in this urban setting and all of which will be sourced locally:

Malus sylvestris ‘John Downie’ Malus x zumi ‘Golden Hornet’ Malus ‘Butterball’ Prunus x subhirtella ‘Autumnalis’ Prunus x subhirtella ‘Autumnalis Rosea’ Prunus serrulata ‘Pink Perfection’ Prunus serrulata ‘Royal Burgundy’ Prunus ‘Sunset Boulevard’ Prunus ‘Umineko’

Company Registration 134325C

Corylus colurna Acer campestre Sorbus aria Sorbus aucuparia ‘Joseph Rock’ Sorbus aucuparia ‘Cardinal Royal’ Sorbus aucuparia ‘Sheerwater Seedling’

Company Registration 134325C

6.0 Conclusion
6.1 Whilst there is a presumption against the loss of buildings of interest and importance within Conservation Areas, in this case, it is submitted that the existing building is in poor repair and retention and re-use of the existing building is neither economically nor structurally sensible. In any case, the practicality of retaining the existing building would result in significant parts of it being rebuilt and the majority of the existing building would not actually be retained. Internally the building would be difficult to reuse other than for a nursing home but even then where the layout would not likely meet modern standards or expectations for such a facility. Whilst the most recent application for demolition of the building was refused, we fully understand that at least part of that decision was based upon there being no detailed scheme for replacement to enable an assessment to be made of the benefits of the proposed scheme, its acceptability in planning terms and whether it would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Area. This information is now provided.
6.2 Notwithstanding this, the building is not in its original condition, has been physically attached to the terrace to the north east by a modern, unattractive link building and has also had unattractive additions attached to the rear and front. The condition of the building is in no way the fault of the applicant who only recently acquired the property and as such is not responsible for the historical lack of maintenance of the building.
6.3 It is submitted that the overall impact of the proposed development will be an enhancement of the Conservation Area, thus according with CA/2 of Planning Policy Statement 1/01 - Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man and Environment Policy 35 and not in conflict with CA/6 or Environment Policy 39 for the reasons given above.
6.4 The proposed development aims to provide modern standards of living including car parking and energy efficiency whilst at the same time, presenting a traditionally styled building which continues important architectural elements such as height, finish materials, orientation and proportion. The development will provide much needed, sustainable accommodation in the Island’s principal settlement in a form which visually complements the area.

Sarah Corlett 26.04.23

Company Registration 134325C

Appendix One Strategic Plan

Strategic Aim: 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.

Strategic Policy 1: 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, and amenity standards; and (c) being located so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities, and services.
Strategic Policy 2: New development will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions(2) of these towns and villages. Development will be permitted in the countryside only in the exceptional circumstances identified in paragraph 6.3.
Strategic Policy 3: Proposals for development must ensure that the individual character of our towns and villages is protected or enhanced by:

(a) avoiding coalescence and maintaining adequate physical separation between settlements; and
(b) having regard in the design of new development to the use of local materials and character.

Strategic Policy 4: Proposals for development must:

(a) Protect or enhance the fabric and setting of Ancient Monuments, Registered Buildings(1), Conservation Areas(2) , buildings and structures within National Heritage Areas and sites of archaeological interest;
(b) protect or enhance the landscape quality and nature conservation value of urban as well as rural areas but especially in respect to development adjacent to Areas of Special Scientific Interest and other designations; and
(c) not cause or lead to unacceptable environmental pollution or disturbance.

Company Registration 134325C

Strategic Policy 5: New development, including individual buildings, should be designed so as to make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island. In appropriate cases the Department will require planning applications to be supported by a Design Statement which will be required to take account of the Strategic Aim and Policies.

Strategic Policy 10: 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; and
(c) not affect unacceptably highway safety for all users, and
(d) encourage pedestrian movement.

General Policy 2: 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.

Environment Policy 35: 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

Company Registration 134325C

special features contributing to the character and quality are protected against inappropriate development.

Environment Policy 39: The general presumption will be in favour of retaining buildings which make a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the Conservation Area.

Housing Policy 4: 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.

Housing Policy 5: 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.

Recreation Policy 3: 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.

Transport Policy 1: New development should, where possible, be located close to existing public transport facilities and routes, including pedestrian, cycle and rail routes.

Transport Policy 7: The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department’s current standards.

Energy Policy 5: 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 be an Energy Impact Assessment.

Appendix Seven - Car parking standards A.7.1 High levels of car ownership have led to an increase in the level of parking expected for new residential development, and outside of town centre locations these standards should not be relaxed.

Company Registration 134325C

New-built residential development should be provided with two parking spaces per dwelling, at least one of which should be within the curtilage of the dwelling and behind the front of the dwelling, although the amount and location of parking will vary in respect of development such as terracing, apartments, and sheltered housing. In the case of town centre and previously developed sites, the Department will consider reducing this requirement having regard to: (a) the location of the housing relative to public transport, employment, and public amenities; (b) the size of the dwelling; (c) any restriction on the nature of the occupancy (such as sheltered housing); and (d) the impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area.

Where new dwellings are created by the conversion of existing buildings, parking space should be formed by the clearance of outbuildings and low-grade annexes or “outlets” if it is reasonable and practicable so to do; however, in general, the need to find a use for redundant buildings which are in sound condition will outweigh the drawback of any shortfall in parking provision. Typical Residential 2 spaces per unit, at least one of which is retained within the curtilage and behind the front of the dwelling.

Residential Terraces 2 spaces per unit, if not within curtilage then located as close to units as possible without compromising residential amenity. Parking spaces should not be provided in front of the dwellings where this would result in a poor outlook for residents and would detract from the amenity of the area.

Apartments 1 space for 1 bedroom; 2 spaces for 2 or more bedrooms Sheltered Housing 1 space per 3 units. Town centre and brownfield residential development Typical residential standard may be relaxed in accordance with paragraph A.7.1 above.

These standards may be relaxed where development:

(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.

Company Registration 134325C

Appendix Two - Planning Policy Statement 1/01 - Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man

POLICY CA/2 SPECIAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS When considering proposals for the possible development of any land or buildings which fall within the conservation area, the impact of such proposals upon the special character of the area, will be a material consideration when assessing the application. Where a development is proposed for land which, although not within the boundaries of the conservation area, would affect its context or setting, or views into or out of the area; such issues should be given special consideration where the character or appearance of a conservation area may be affected.

POLICY CA/6 DEMOLITION Any building which is located within a conservation area and which is not an exception as provided above, may not be demolished without the consent of the Department. In practice, a planning application for consent to demolish must be lodged with the Department. When considering an application for demolition of a building in a conservation area, the general presumption will be in favour of retaining buildings which make a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the conservation area. Similar criteria will be applied as those outlined in RB/6 above, when assessing the application to demolish the building, but in less clear cut cases, for example, where a building could be said to detract from the special character of the area, it will be essential for the Department to be able to consider the merits of any proposed new development when determining whether consent should be given for the demolition of an unregistered building in a conservation area. Account will be taken of the part played in the architectural or historic interest of the area by the building for which demolition is proposed, and in particular of the wider effects of demolition on the building’s surroundings and on the conservation area as a whole.

Company Registration 134325C

APPENDIX THREE: photographs of the existing

A collage of five interior photographs showing the condition of a former nursing home, including a large hall, staircase, and attic space.

Company Registration 134325C

The image displays two interior photographs of a building, likely the former nursing home mentioned in the application. The left side shows a worn staircase with wooden nosings, while the right side shows a room with... — The image displays two interior photographs of a building, likely the former nursing home mentioned in the application. The left side shows a worn staircase with wooden nosings, while the right side shows a room with a large window overlooking a garden.

Company Registration 134325C

Composite image showing interior views of the former nursing home, featuring a window with stained glass panels and an empty room with wooden floorboards.

Company Registration 134325C

Interior photographs showing a damaged wall with peeling plaster and a staircase fitted with a stairlift.

Company Registration 134325C

Interior photographs of the existing nursing home showing rooms with wooden floorboards and a sink, prior to demolition.

Company Registration 134325C

The image displays interior conditions of a property, likely the former nursing home. It shows a room with exposed plumbing and peeling paint alongside a dated bathroom with brown tiling.

APL Planning Statement

Source & Provenance