Loading document...
Application No.: 23/01387/B Applicant: Neil & Kristin Ward & McCoy Proposal: Demolition of toilet extension, erection of new extension and renovation of the main house. Site Address: Greeba Towers Main Road Greeba Isle Of Man IM4 2DS Planning Officer: Mr Hamish Laird Photo Taken: 28.02.2024 Site Visit: 28.02.2024 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 05.03.2024
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
Reason: To ensure that the development has an acceptable impact on the environment in respect of Bats which are a protected species.
And shall thereafter be retained and maintained in accordance with these details for the lifetime of the development. Reason: To ensure that the development has an acceptable impact on the environment in respect of Bats which are a protected species. This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.
The proposed development is considered to accord with the provisions of Policies STP2, 4b) and 10; SP4; GP2 b, c, d, g, h, i and l; EP1, EP3 and EP4b), EP7 and EP15 contained in the Isle
Plans/Drawings/Information; The development should be carried out strictly in accordance with the submitted plans and details as follows:
Drawing Ex-01 Site Location Plan showing site edged red @ scale 1:1,250 on A4;
Additional Persons
None _____________________________________________________________________________
1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The site comprises the detached Manx Gothic or Manx Baronial style dwelling of Greeba Towers which stands in its own grounds in an elevated position on the north side of the A1 Douglas - Peel Road, served by a winding approach drive form the road. It is located to the east of Greeba Castle, and west of the road frontage dwelling of Pear Tree Cottage. The grounds slope upwards from the road (south to north) and contain a number of significant, mature trees.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The proposal seeks full planning permission for the "Demolition of toilet extension, erection of new extension and renovation of the main house." The application is accompanied by a full set of existing and proposed drawings; Design Statement and Supporting Letter. Following receipt of comments from the Ecosystems Policy Team, a Bat Survey dated 4th
The applicant advises that the proposed internal works will have no impact on the external appearance of the dwelling.
3.00 PLANNING STATUS AND POLICY - 3.1 The land as designated, is not zoned for development and sits within a rural part of the open countryside. The site is not within a Conservation Area. - 3.2 The land is also linked to Map 2 Landscape Assessment Areas; that identifies site is within an area that is broadly classified as 'C Broad Lowland valley' - 3.3 Within the written statement under section 3.0 Landscape Character Area (LCA), page 53, C Broad Lowland Valley: GREEBA VALLEY (C1) notes that the: "The overall strategy for the area should be to conserve and enhance the character, quality and distinctiveness of the valley with its well-treed and enclosed character in the valley bottom, its distinct rectilinear field patterns and small scattered hill farms on the rising valley sides…..
Strategic Policy
Spatial Policy 4 Remaining villages 5 Building in defined settlements or GP3
General Policy
3 Protection of trees and woodland 4 Wildlife and Nature Conservation 7 Protection of existing watercourses
Housing Policy 4b New Housing in the Countryside 11 Conversion of rural buildings to dwellings 15 Extension or alteration to traditional styled properties in the countryside
Transport Policy 4 Highway safety 7 Parking provisions
3.7 Planning Circular 3/91 - Guide to the residential development in the countryside. - 3.8 Residential Design Guide (2021) This document provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential properties and sustainable methods of construction.
Spatial Policy 2 development outside Douglas to be concentrate din Service Centres which includes Ramsey.
General Policy 2 General Development Considerations
Environment Policy 4 Wildlife and Nature Conservation 7 Protection of existing watercourses 10 Flood Risk 22 Impact on neighbours amenities 34 Alterations and extensions to pre-1920 buildings
Housing Policy
Transport Policy 4 Highway safety 7 Parking provisions
3.3 Residential Design Guide (2021) This document provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential properties and sustainable methods of construction.
5.1 Highway Services HDC (15.12.23) comments that it has no interest (NHI) in 23/01387/B - 5.2 Ecosystems Policy Officer (21/12/2023; and 14/2/24);
Greeba Towers is an old 1854 property, with a slate roof, located in the middle of a variety of good bats habitats including broadleaved and conifer woodland, Curragh, dense scrub and marshy grassland - all features which increase the likelihood of roosting bats being present within the property.
The proposed two storey extension is to impact upon the roof of Greeba Towers and therefore could result in the damage or destruction of a protect bat roost, the killing, damage or disturbance of bats within a roost, or the blocking or exclusion of bats from their roost space. Therefore, in order to comply with Environment Policy 4 and 5 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan and the Wildlife Act 1990, The Ecosystem Policy Team strongly recommend that a preliminary assessment for roosting bats is undertaken on the building by a suitably qualified ecological consultancy. A report detailing the findings of the preliminary assessment and any additional surveys, alongside appropriate avoidance and mitigation measures, to ensure that bats are protected during and after development, should be submitted to Planning prior to determination of the application. Preliminary assessments for bats can be undertaken at any time throughout the year. However, if emergence/re-entry surveys to confirm roost presence are required then there are seasonal requirements (they need to be undertaken between May - August).
Bat surveys are required to identify the species of bat utilising the property, their abundance and whether they are breeding and this will determine the mitigation required.
Bat surveys should be undertaken in accordance with the Bat Conservation Trusts Bat Surveys for Professional Ecologists - Good Practice Guidelines (3rd Edition 2016).
Survey reports should be submitted prior to determination of this application, in line with best practise, which is referred to in Section 9.2.4 of the British Standard Biodiversity - Code of Best Practise for Planning and Development (BS 42020:2013). Which states: The presence or absence of protected species, and the extent to which they could be affected by the proposed development, should be established before planning permission is granted; otherwise all material considerations might not have been considered in making the decision. The use of planning conditions to secure ecological surveys after planning permission has been granted should therefore only be applied in exceptional circumstances, such as where original survey work will need to be repeated because the survey data might be out of date before commencement of development, etc.
Bats are listed on Schedule 5 of the Wildlife Act 1990; they are protected by law and it is an offence to:
intentionally or recklessly kill, injure or take a bat; intentionally or recklessly damage or destroy, or obstruct access to, any structure or place
which bats use for shelter or protection;
intentionally or recklessly disturbs any bat while it is occupying a structure or place which it uses for that purpose. The maximum penalty that can be imposed is a fine up to 10,000 pounds.
We would just like to reiterate our strong recommendation for a bat assessment prior to determination of this application because of the age and location of the property.
5.4 Subsequent to the receipt of a Bat Survey dated 4/2/24, by The Manx Bat Group, the Ecosystems Policy Team advised in an email dated 14/2/24: "The Ecosystem Policy Team can confirm that the Manx Bat Group's bat survey of Greeba Towers dated February 2024, is all in order and that a suitable level of assessment has been undertaken.
The Manx Bat Group found no evidence bats within the building and so mitigation for bats is not required. However, as per the recommendations section of the report, we would encourage the applicants to consider the installation of bat boxes on the property as an enhancement for bats."
5.5 Registered Buildings Officer (31/1/24) comments as follows:
The site and grounds of the property now called Greeba Towers were historically part of the grounds of the adjacent Greeba Castle property (initially called Ashburn). Deeds records suggest that the owner of Greeba Castle, William Nowell, sold Ashburn in 1854 for £825, and this is when Greeba Towers was built. When initially constructed, Greeba Towers was named Ashburn Tower. Local folklore suggests that when Greeba Castle's owner lost the property in a card game, Greeba Towers was built in order to block the view from the Castle; this story is not supported by the historic deeds record mentioned above.
The building as constructed in the 1850s has been altered and extended over time, with the north-easterly wing approved under planning application number 35191 in 1973. Upper floor alterations are believed to have taken place in the 1990s, although no planning history is forthcoming for these works.
Pre-application emails from the Principal Registered Buildings Officer are included within the application submission. It is apparent that design development has occurred since this advice, and it is my view that the current proposals have a minimal impact on the building's principal elevations (those facing south and east). Having visited the property on two occasions and inspected the building internally, it is apparent that there is almost no historic fabric surviving internally. The current owner has stated an intention to repair and restore the building's
remaining historic fabric, which is clearly a proposal that the Department's building conservation officer(s) would support and assist with where appropriate.
2 historic images are provided -
6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are:
6.2 The starting point here is the land designation, it is clear from the Area Plan for the East that the application site is within a rural and protected part of the countryside where any development is strictly controlled with the site not being allocated specifically for any development. - 6.3 The site sits outside of the 'main settlement boundary' for Peel and St Johns as noted in Policy SP4 and is very much part of the open countryside as previously identified and development would be contrary to those policies in principle. The existing dwelling has not been fully utilised for many years, and shows signs of neglect which the applicant is seeking to rectify. - 6.4 Greeba Towers is a reflection of the heritage and social change across the Island, and the applicant proposes works which are sensitive to its unique design and position as a Manx Gothic or Manx Baronial style dwelling, which in visual terms, would continue to contribute positively to the Islands built heritage. - 6.5 The principle of extensions to the dwelling, and its internal refurbishment in sympathetic materials which would reflect its character and appearance whilst bringing the accommodation it offers up to a 21st century standard is considered to be acceptable in principle. It is noted that these proposals have been the subject of a number of pre-application discussions with DEFA's Conservation Team resulting in the application now being considered. - 6.6 The addition of the 3-storey extension is considered to be acceptable in principle because it respects the scale, design, proportion and form of the existing property and would not amount to an increase in terms of floor space of more than 50% of the original, with minimal visual impact to the wider countryside. - 6.7 The principle of development is considered to be acceptable as an exception to the normal restrictive countryside planning policies.
6.8 In terms of the proposed extension to the dwelling, Policy HP15 applies where extensions to traditional rural properties are generally only permissible when these respect the proportion and form of the existing property and only exceptionally will an increase over 50% being acceptable. However, this is not absolute and more of a guide figure but the key is that it should appear subordinate to the original building (in terms of floor space of no more than 50% of the original) with minimal visual impact to the wider countryside. In this case, it is clear from the submitted plans and the Case Officer's site visit that the extensions proposed are
"The new extension requires the demolition of the existing toilet lean-to. The design proposals show stone walls and traditional style painted timber windows with lime render bands to reflect the patterns of the existing windows. Also, painted timber French doors to the ground floor new kitchen area and contemporary sliding/folding painted timber doors in the Master Bedroom on the first floor (with a glass Juliet balcony) to create a better connection with the outdoors.
The architectural language of the main house is the source of the designed elements of architectural treatment of the new extension. The extensions external walls are proposed to be topped with corbelled and castellated battlements forming parapets around a low pitched lead roof. We have shown the battlements as cantilevered off the walls on stone chequer-set corbels. On the north-west corner we have a proposed a corbelled angle round topped with castellations, and proposed a stone pilaster topped with bartizan to the south-western and north-eastern corners."
6.11 It is considered that the proposed materials and finishes to be used for the extensions as indicated above are acceptable. This accords with the provisions of Environment Policy 34 in the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. - 6.12 When considering extending or building onto properties in the countryside, the rationale is that they should ideally follow that of a more traditional vernacular to fit in with the age when general development was emerging on the Island in the 1980's as noted in planning circular 3/91 to ensure any visual impact is appropriate for the countryside. In this case, the proposal should be supported as they accord with the aims and objectives of Policies STP5 and GP2 b & c where the built form of the proposal represents a proportionate and visually acceptable form of development for the site and dwelling while having a positive visual impact through its siting, scale, form and design. It is further considered that this proposal would have an acceptable visual impact upon the openness of the countryside reflective of the character of the area Policy EP1 seeks to protect.
6.13 The site lies in a relatively remote location with some distance to the nearest neighbours at Greeba Castle and Pear Tree Cottage. Owing to the distance between dwellings, the topography of the site and surroundings; and, the presence of mature trees and landscaping, these immediate neighbours are considered to be unaffected by the proposed development. There would be no issues arising in respect of overlooking or loss of privacy; and, the siting of the extension would not appear as an overbearing feature to occupants of either of these adjoining dwellings. In this regard, the proposed development accords with
Section (g) of General Policy 2; and, the relevant advice contained in the Residential Design Guide 2021.
6.14 The Ecosystems Policy Team initially commented that a Bat Survey should be provided given the age of the structure, and the scale and nature of the works proposed. A Bat Survey dated 4th February, 2024, prepared by the Manx Bat Group was submitted. It found that: "No evidence of bat use of the building was found and in particular no use of the roof space within the area of the proposed works. The building has been-occupied and un-heated for some time, further reducing the likelihood of its use by breeding bats." - 6.15 The Survey further advised that: "There will be no impact on bats arising from the proposed works and mitigation is not strictly necessary. However, provision of bat boxes is always welcome to increase bat roosting opportunities.". The provision of Bat Boxes and application of Bat Friendly artificial lighting (as also advised in the Bat Survey Report) can be conditioned. This would accord with the provisions of Policies EP4b) and GP2d); in the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016,
6.16 In respect of other issues that may arise given the nature of the works proposed, it is considered that any impacts on trees; highway safety; flooding and drainage would not arise given the works are proposed to be on the site of the to be demolishes toilet; the same access is to be used onto the A1; and, the existing drainage arrangements serving the property are to be maintained. - 6.17 The proposed development is considered to accord with the provisions of the following policies in the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, in respect of:
7.1 The proposed development for the "Demolition of toilet extension, erection of new extension and renovation of the main house." Is acceptable and accords with the abovementioned Policies of the Strategic Plan as outlined in this Report and meets the tests for development within the countryside. It is, therefore, concluded that the planning application should be approved as it would assist in secure the longevity of an existing notable, historic and architecturally important structure, whilst securing its long term future as a family home. - 8.00 PARTY STATUS
8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
8.2 The decision maker must determine:
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 and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status
Decision Made : Permitted Date : 07.03.2024 Determining officer
Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management
Customer note This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
