121155

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      20/00408/B                                     Page  1  of  5

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 20/00408/B Applicant : Mike & Carol Dee Proposal : Removal of render to front elevation Site Address : 4 The Crofts Castletown Isle Of Man IM9 1LY

Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 30.06.2020 __

Conditions and Notes for Approval

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

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.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. It is considered that the planning application is in accordance with General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, and Policy CA/2.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This decision relates to the Design Statement and Drawing number 1711-122 date stamped and received 13 March 2020.

__

Interested Person Status - Additional Persons

None __

Officer’s Report

THE SITE

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      20/00408/B                                     Page  2  of  5

1.1 The site is the curtilage of an existing dwelling, 4, The Crofts which is half of a pair of semi-detached houses which sit on the north western side of The Crofts, towards its north eastern end. To the south west of the property is a modern, detached dwelling, Garey Voallit and to the north east is the other half of the pair, number 2. To the north east of that is another modern property, Croft Beg.

1.2 The pair of properties, numbers 2 and 4 are different from each other in many ways: number 4 is taller and wider and whilst number 2 is a relatively simple traditional cottage, number 4 has a heavy parapet wall which hides much of the roof, two sets of two storey projecting three sided, angled bays and a painted finish which covers over heavily pointed regular coursed stonework. The front door of the application property is a solid, panelled one with a rectangular fanlight above and shielded by a flat canopy supported by two metal brackets, painted black.

1.3 The application property has two first floor windows in the south western gable which is visible from the street, the gable being finished in unpainted stonework and with a striking profile of the double pitch with a matching chimney breast on each.

1.4 The rear of the property is not publicly visible and is plainer than the front, with two single storey annexes, one being built on the boundary with number 2 and number 2 having a similar annex on the other side of its rear garden.

THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application seeks planning approval for removal of render to front elevation.

2.2 The proposed works will include: i. The removal of the existing paint coating and strap pointing on the front elevation of the property and partial rendering. ii. Re-pointing of the existing stonework on the side elevation of the dwelling. iii. Repainting of the existing bay windows on the front elevation of the dwelling.

2.3 The applicants have provided additional information indicating that reasons for deviating from the originally approved plans under PA 19/00305/B. It was noted that on commencement of work on the front elevation, it was discovered that the original natural stones to the front elevation were attractive and in good condition and as such the applicants have expressed preference for the natural stone to be repointed and left exposed, rather than being covered in render and for only the parapets and bay windows to be rendered. It was also noted that leaving the façade exposed would eliminate certain technical risks associated with rendering the front elevation; thus the current application has been proposed to facilitate this change in approach.

PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South (2013) as Residential and within the town's Conservation Area. As such, the development is expected to comply with the following Strategic Plan policies:

3.2 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:

(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; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      20/00408/B                                     Page  3  of  5

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

3.4 Paragraph 7.29.2 Development proposals within Conservation Areas will be expected either to preserve or enhance their character or appearance. Development proposals should be in accordance with the Department's conservation policies set out in Planning Policy Statement 1/01, "Policy and Guidance Notes for the Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man." There is generally grant assistance available to help in the use of appropriate materials and positive and appropriate development within Conservation Areas.

3.5 Strategic Policy 4 states (in part) that "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;"

3.6 It is also important to consider guidance and policy regarding development in Conservation Areas: Planning Policy Statement 1/01 (Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man) - Policy CA/2, (Conservation Areas): "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."

PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The application site has been the subject of three previous planning applications, one of which is considered to be materially relevant in the assessment of the current application.

4.2 PA 19/00305/B for Rendering works, alteration to front facade parapet and installation of first floor window to rear elevation (with reference to PA 18/00508/B).

4.2.1 The approved works included the rendering of the external walls of the building save the stone faced gable which was later removed, following concerns expressed by interested parties.

4.2.2 The Isle of Man Victorian Society made the following comments regarding the works proposed in the application:

"If you look at PA 18/00675/B Rendering the gable of 28 The Crofts, you will note I say very much the same as Andrew in relation to buildings built in limestone being intended to be rendered at some point. This was usually to the front elevation on account of cost; hence the rears of properties were often left in natural stone as the rear of this property (4 The Crofts). Gables were also often left in stone.

The photograph turned up by Andrew should be shown to the applicant's agent to be used as a model to be followed. There was an application to render the frontage of the property next to the Co-op in The Parade, Castletown. There photographic evidence of the property having previously been rendered was accepted as a precedence which could well apply here.

There is no evidence of the gable ever having been rendered and it certainly doesn't look as if it ever has. In which case this has been a feature of The Crofts for a very long time and should be left as is.

The photograph supplied by Andrew has a deckled edge which was common on prints in the 1930's. It is possible that it was printed from an older negative but they are more likely to have

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      20/00408/B                                     Page  4  of  5

been half or quarter plate and printed at that size rather than reduced to 3"x2" . In showing it to the applicants agent, attention should be drawn to the canopy perhaps with a suggestion that if returning to a rendered front then given evidence is now available as to the original design of the canopy rather than what is there now, it should be replicated. There was a lack of detail on the previous application.

We commented on the canopy on 18/00508/B For this property. The applicant's agent poo pooed this in the same way as he didn't think it mattered if windows had horns or not. He seems to be applying the same 'what does it matter' if it is rendered or not as some houses are and some are not, ignoring the fact that the evolution of a property is revealed in what is evidenced before us.

SO ... Render to the front - yes as evidence exists as to it having been previously rendered. Render to the gable No as it would result in the loss of a traditional wall finish in a conservation area and there is no evidence of a previous render to this prominent elevation".

REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.

5.1 Representation from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division confirms that there is 'No Highway Interest' in a letter dated 13 May 2020.

5.2 There has been no written representation made regarding the current planning application by the Castletown Commissioners at the time of writing this report, although they were consulted on 28 April 2020.

5.3 The Registered Buildings Officer has made the following comments regarding the application (30/06/2020):

Many of the properties in Castletown have lost their historic render treatments some renders were removed due to post war trends and some on a misunderstanding that the stone was the original intended finish. I would actively encourage the restoration of missing render finishes but this cannot be enforced. I do not object to the current proposals as I consider they will be an improvement to how the building was prior to the current series of applications. However I would advise the applicant to reinstate a traditional render treatment to the façade which is the historic and intended finish for this building and not exposed stone.

ASSESSMENT 6.1 The issue is whether the proposed development would preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, whether the development would be visually acceptable from the public domain.

6.2 The removal of the rendering over the stonework would have only a limited impact on the appearance of the property and generally improve the appearance and character of the building. The exposure of the stonework will bring the property in line with other stone-finished dwellings in the streetscene, given that a significant proportion of the properties along The Crofts have stone faced finish. As well, the re-pointing of the existing stonework on the side elevation of the dwelling would improve its appearance and contribute positively to the appearance of the application site and the surrounding area.

6.3 It is also considered that the rendering and painting of the bay window areas and parapet on the front elevation of the dwelling would not be detrimental to the appearance of the property or the street scene given that such contrasts (mix of render and stone work) are not uncommon within the crofts or the Castletown Conservation Area. A clear expression of

==== PAGE 5 ====

                                      20/00408/B                                     Page  5  of  5

such contrasts are Nos. 6 and 8 the Crofts who have painted rendered bay windows and parapets which contrasts with the stone face of the entire front elevations.

CONCLUSION 7.1 Overall, the application would result in an enhancement of the character of both the property and the Conservation Area in which it sits and the application is supported.

INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

(a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

8.2 The decision maker must determine:

o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status __

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 : 01.07.2020

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.