Loading document...
Application No.: 19/00822/GB Applicant: The Friends Of Our Lady Star Of The Sea & St Maughold Proposal: Alterations, demolition of conservatory and WC outbuilding and erection of extension to provide community space (in association with 19/00823/CON) Site Address: Our Lady Star Of The Seas And St Maughold Queens Promenade Ramsey Isle Of Man IM8 1BH Principal Planner: Mr Chris Balmer Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 27.08.2019 _________________________________________________________________
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
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.
This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawings reference numbers 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18 all received on 23rd July 2019.
None _____________________________________________________________________________
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is Our Lady Star of the Seas and St. Maughold Church, Queens Promenade, Ramsey. The site is an impressive church, a Registered Building (Number 080). The building is a Manx stone church of significant design, unique to the Island. - 1.2 The site is on the promenade. It is rectangular in shape with the main entrance and frontage onto the South Promenade. The building extends deep into the site on its southern side. The building is 'L' shaped and comprises both a place of worship and a presbytery. There is a private garden at the rear enclosed by a high stone boundary wall. - 1.3 The south side of the site has a frontage with Dale Street. At the rear is Mona Street. There are neighbouring dwellings siding onto the site to the north. - 1.4 The site is situated within the Ramsey Conservation Area.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The application seeks approval for alterations, demolition of conservatory and WC outbuilding and erection of extension to provide community space (in association with 19/00823/CON).
3.1 Relevant planning history is summarised below. - 3.2 14/01146/CON and 14/01145/GB - Erection of a conservatory to replace existing to rear elevation were both refused on the grounds that:
"R 1 The proposed conservatory, by reason of its size, form and design, would be detrimental to the architectural and historic qualities of the church, a registered building. The conservatory would be of an excessive size which would subsume the rear elevation of the church and would mask and compete with a number of important architectural and historic features. It would incorporate the historic single storey annex to its detriment. The timber clad box element which links the glazed framing with the rear elevation would appear bulky and clumsy. The use of timber cladding would also introduce an unnecessary additional material which would visually compete with the other materials used elsewhere in the scheme and which feature in the existing building. The horizontal off-set framing bars on the side elevation of the conservatory would give the side a cluttered and busy appearance when simple lines would be preferable. There are no details of rainwater goods and there would be a risk of water ingress into the registered building, particularly from the flat roofed box element. Furthermore, there are no details of the floor slabs on which the conservatory would stand. The submitted drawings do not accurately show the detailing and features in the existing building or how the conservatory would impact on them. There is insufficient justification for the design of the conservatory or demonstration that it would respect the architectural and historic qualities of the registered building. Having regard to the above criticisms, the proposal is contrary to Environmental Policy 32 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007; and Policies RB/5 and RB/10 of Planning Policy Statement 1/01."
3.3 13/00641/CON and 13/00640/GB - Erection of a conservatory to rear elevation - were also refused on the grounds similar to that of applications 14/01146/CON and 14/01145/GB.
3.4 12/01346/CON and 12/01345/GB - Erection of a conservatory - were also refused was:
"R 1 The proposed conservatory fails to preserve or enhance the character of the Registered Building or the Conservation Area within which it is located. As such, the proposal fails to accord with the provisions of Environment Policy 32 and 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007. In addition, the proposed use of uPVC is inappropriate and detrimental to the character and appearance of the building, contrary to the provisions of Environment Policy 34 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007. Overall, it is concluded that the proposed development is not suitably justified and that it would have significantly harmful impact upon a Registered Building of considerable note."
3.2 There are various other previous approvals for works to the building, none of which are considered directly relevant to the current application. - 4.0 PLANNING POLICY
4.1 The area is identified as being within the Town Centre (mixed use) by the Ramsey Local Plan 1998.
4.2 The following policies in the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 are considered relevant. - 4.3 Environment Policy 32 states: 'Extensions or alterations to a Registered Building which would affect detrimentally its character as a building of special architectural or historic interest will not be permitted.' - 4.4 Environment Policy 34 states: 'In the maintenance, alteration or extensions of pre-1920 buildings, the use of traditional materials will be preferred.' - 4.5 Planning Policy Statement 1/01 - Policy and Guidance Notes for the Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man, contains four policies that are also considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application: Policy RB/3: General criteria applied in considering Registered Building applications, states:
'The issues that are generally relevant to the consideration of all registered building applications are:
'In considering whether to grant planning approval for development which affects a registered building or its setting and in considering whether to grant registered building consent for any works, the Department shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.
Registered Building consent is required for the building's alteration in any way which would affect its special architectural or historic character. There will be a general presumption against alteration or extension of registered buildings, except where a convincing case can be made, against the criteria set out in this section, for such proposals.
Applicants for registered building consent for alteration or extension to a registered building must be able to justify their proposals. They will be required to show why the works which would affect the character of the registered building are desirable or necessary and they should provide full information to enable the Department to assess the likely impact of their proposals on the special architectural or historic interest of the building and on its setting. Where registered buildings are the subject of successive applications for alteration or extension, consideration will also be given to the cumulative effect upon the building's special interest as a result of several minor works which may individually seem of little consequence.'
Policy RB/10: Ecclesiastical buildings, states:
'The same provisions apply for registered buildings which fall within this category, as apply elsewhere. Contrary to the situation which prevails elsewhere, no exemption exists with respect to ecclesiastical buildings in the Isle of Man.
In considering applications for registered building consent for alteration or extension to buildings in this category, it is acknowledged that factors such as the size and requirements of modern congregations may differ considerably from when the church was originally constructed. Applicants considering carrying out alterations, extensions or improvements to ecclesiastical buildings which are registered, should consider the extent to which their proposals will affect the particular historic merit or architectural character of the building in question. An application is less likely to succeed if either of these qualities is markedly affected.
It must also be remembered that in addition to the requirement for registered building consent, it will usually be necessary to obtain the formal consent of the appropriate church authority: early dialogue can often assist in deciding upon the most appropriate way to progress such works.'
5.1 Ramsey Commissioners indicate no objection (27.08.19). - 6.0 ASSESSMENT
6.1 Historical background The church was designed by Sir Giles Gilbert Scott, the grandson of George Gilbert Scott, who was appointed in 1907 to design a new church and presbytery for Ramsey. The foundation stone was laid on August 3rd 1909 and the church officially opened in August 1910. Sir Giles was born in 1880 and educated at Beaumont College. He is best known for his prize-winning design of 1903 for the new Anglican cathedral in Liverpool. Although consecrated in 1924, the building was not completed until the 1980s. Other designs of Scott's include the new Bodleian Library at Oxford (1936), Bankside Power Station (now the Tate Modern art gallery) the Battersea Power Station (1927), and the new Waterloo Bridge (1939). He was also involved in rebuilding the Palace of Westminster after damage done during World War II and was the designer of the famous British red telephone box, an example of which is located in the rear garden of the church. Background to the application
6.2 The application follows a number of previous refused applications. A substantial amount of pre application meetings have been add with various officers over the years, with the current scheme being the latter of those discussions.
6.3 Pre dating the latest pre-application advice, It is noted that the Former (former) Conservation Officer comment that; "We also strongly advocate a contemporary design; modern, light weight with large areas of glazing. This would clearly read as a light weight and more transparent addition to the main building, and would not compete with the original building in the way that the more robust and sturdy latest design does. We suggest powder coated aluminium or untreated cedar for the framing. The design of the roof will need to be very carefully considered and should not interfere with the first floor windows (the top of the roof should be kept lower than the bottom sills of the first floor windows). The design should ensure no water egress back into the original building and this will need be sufficiently detailed when the plans are taken forward." - 6.4 The proposed scheme now would seem to meet a number of the points suggested by the former Conservation Officer and where discussed during the latest pre-application discussions. Proposed scheme - 6.5 The current proposal is essentially rectangular in form and footprint with a flat roof and made up mainly of aluminium framed glazing, with brick surrounds to match the brickwork found in the main building (around windows). The proposal would involve the remove of an existing lean-to conservatory which is a past additional which has a detrimental impact to the Register Building. Its removal is beneficial. It is also important to note the existing ground floor windows of the rear of the main building would be retained in situ, even though the new extension would essentially enclose them. - 6.6 The form of the building is considered appropriate from two respects. Firstly, it does not become a dominating feature of the rear elevation and would not screen all the rear elevation; for instance a traditional pitched roof would block the majority of the rear elevation when stood in the rear courtyard area. This has been the concerns of previous schemes. This proposal having a flat roof in this respect helps to retain the pleasant enjoyment of the existing rear elevation and its architectural features, being low in height. Secondary, is the proposal would not mask the historic single storey annex at the rear of the church (south), including an ornate arched window, again a concern of previously applications. It is also noted that this single storey annex is also flat roofed in nature and this currently proposal could be said to be a more modern interpretation of this older additional. - 6.7 The finishes of the building would be large glazed windows with brickwork surrounds, will match that of the existing brickworks surrounds. Again the use of the brickwork is a nod to the original building, while the use of larger glazing feature is a more contemporary finish. As mentioned within the former Conservation Officer advice, the design enables the extension to "…read as a light weight and more transparent addition to the main building". Views through the glazing of the existing rear ground floor elevation and rear windows would be possible and with the glazed roof section linking old and new, will also increase light through and again increase the visibility of the existing rear elevation. - 6.8 It should be noted that the area formed to the rear of the Presbytery and the church (where extension is sited within) is a quiet space bounded by a relatively high random rubble, stone wall and fairly private. Access may be gained to the rear of the church onto Mona Street to the rear. Accordingly, the proposed works are not apparent from public views outside the site. - 6.9 Overall, it is considered the proposed application has been well thought through and well designed and will provide the space required by the applicants; whilst also not having a detrimental impact to the register buildings character as a building of special architectural and historic interest and therefore comply with the relevant policies set out in this report.
7.1 The application is recommended for an approval. - 8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS
8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 (Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons:
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.
Decision Made : Permitted Date : 02.09.2019 Determining officer
Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
