Officer Report

Application No.: 17/00374/B Applicant: Michael District Commissioners Proposal: Alterations, creation of doorways and access ramp to existing toilets Site Address: Public Conveniences Main Road Kirk Michael Isle Of Man IM6 1ER Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken: 20.04.2017 Site Visit: 20.04.2017 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is a parcel of land within the centre of Kirk Michael, and which includes the settlement's public conveniences. The toilet block is a fairly utilitarian building appearance: set behind a concrete wall and formed of a grey brick with two wings that provide privacy screens, it does not feel like a particularly welcoming building. It has a pitched roof finished with slate, which adds a welcome traditional feature. - 1.2 The site is located within the Kirk Michael Conservation Area.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the provision of a new access ramp, the provision of a roof above the privacy screens, and also for the addition of a translucent flat canopy roof projecting outwards from the central frontage of the building and supported by a single pole that would be fixed into the pavement. The front wall would have a triangular setback to provide the space for this pole to sit. Beneath these would be new entrance doors to the building, while the newly roofed privacy screen areas would become stores. The entire building would be rendered. - 2.2 Also proposed is a fence around the frontage and atop the walls lining the access ramp, which would fully encircle the building - the application includes two drawings showing as options that this fence would either be formed of still columns and cross-members, or of glass panels infilled between steel columns. - 2.3 The application form explains the proposal is intended to make the toilet block accessible for people with disabilities, in line with the Disability Discrimination Act. It also includes a condition report of the existing building, and the conclusion is that the works can be undertaken without affecting its stability.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 Neither the site nor the surrounding land has been subject to applications considered material to the assessment of this proposal.

4.0 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - 4.1 As well as falling within an area zoned as Residential / Retail on the Kirk Michael Local Plan, the site is as noted also within the Conservation Area. The associated Character Appraisal does not make specific reference to the building the subject of this application, while moreover it notes that there is no particular uniformity in building style or finishes, and nor is there a predominant

• boundary finish. While these comments are more related to the residential and commercial buildings, they are judged to also apply to the application site building.
• 4.2 Although the zoning is at odds with the land use, the proposal should still, given its scale and nature, be assessed against General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan, with regard to Environment Policy 35 also essential.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 Highway Services of the DOI stated that they had no objection to the proposal because it would not affect the highway on 20.04.2017. - 5.2 Kirk Michael Commissioners offered no objection to the application in (identical) comments received on 18.04.2017 and 12.05.2017.

6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The proposed works would reinvigorate a tired though somewhat characterful building, and would certainly make it more noticeable to members of the public as well as being more accessible for those with mobility problems and more attractive and inviting for all. The provision of front doors makes the building appear accessible, while the alterations to its frontage in the form of the canopy roof and render finish would bring welcome features of interest. It is therefore concluded that the proposed alterations would bring a clear enhancement to the character of the Conservation Area and, accordingly, the application is recommended for approval. - 6.2 There are two options for the boundary fencing, and neither is considered more appropriate than another. While the Main Road is not characterised by contemporary interventions such as the glazed panelling would provide, it does not follow that these are a less appropriate approach as a result. The steel bars may be seen as more traditional but equally to go a little against the overall design ethos of bringing a certain level of freshness to the building. - 6.3 While neither is considered inappropriate, equally it would be inappropriate for the railings to be erected in a hybrid of the two designs - however, the drawings of each are clear and in the unlikely event that such a hybrid approach was adopted it would be deemed contrary to both the designs approved and, accordingly, would be unlawful. As such, no condition controlling this is considered necessary.

7.0 RECOMMENDATION - 7.1 It is concluded that the proposal is a welcome intervention that would bring a public building into a more attractive and therefore more user-friendly condition and appearance. Accordingly, it is recommended for approval.

8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• o The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent;
• o The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested;
• o Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material;
• o Highway Services of the Department of Infrastructure, and
• o The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted

Date of Recommendation: 22.05.2017 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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

N 1. For the avoidance of doubt, approval is granted to both proposed types of handrail and fencing, either one of which may be constructed as shown in the submitted drawings, but no approval is granted to a combination of the two.

The development hereby approved relates to Drawings PA1, PA2, S2, S3 and Sk3, all date-stamped as having been received 31st March 2017.

I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Senior Planning Officer in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.

Decision Made : Permitted Date: 24.05.2017 Determining officer

Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer

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.