Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
17/00857/GB Page 1 of 4
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 17/00857/GB Applicant : Manx National Heritage Proposal : Alterations including relocation of visitor shop, relocation and replacement of drawbridge, new ramp and steps to ground floor of keep (in connection with Registered Building Application 17/00858/CON) Site Address : Castle Rushen The Quay Castletown Isle Of Man IM9 1LD
Case Officer : Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken : 07.09.2017 Site Visit : 07.09.2017 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 18.09.2017 __
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.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This approval relates to drawings 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 all received on 10th August, 2017.
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
none __
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO THE HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SITE
==== PAGE 2 ====
17/00857/GB Page 2 of 4
THE SITE 1.1 The site is the curtilage of Castle Rushen, a visually and architecturally dominant feature in the heart of Castletown and an historically important element in the town's evolution and importance. The castle sits to the south of the harbour and forming the vehicular approach to the town centre as Castle Quay, the Quay and Castle Street skirt around the north and eastern sides with the southern side framing Market Square and the western side abutting a number of commercial and residential properties.
1.2 Access is available to the grounds around the castle from Castle Quay and Market Square with the main entrance from the east which leads through an open arched stone doorway which leads along an open corridor between stone walls, which leads to the gift shop and entrance office which are accommodated in a side room. From here, visitors pass back through the main room and through into the grounds and directly opposite is the entrance to the castle itself which is across a timber bridge over the drawbridge pit. One then passes under the portcullis and into the central area from where there are a number of entrances at ground level leading into different rooms where there are exhibits and information as well as two sets of staircases which lead visitors up to higher levels of the castle.
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The proposal aims to make the castle more accessible to those who visit - groups and those with physical disabilities.
2.2 Firstly, it is proposed to relocate the gift shop and ticket office into the main space one encounters after entering the castle from the main eastern entrance. This will involve the laying of a new raised floor to accommodate level access and electrical services and two new sets of doors at the entrance and exit to the area. These doors will be glazed screen doors shaped to fit the rounded topped aperture with two side hung frameless glazed opening doors beneath.
2.3 Secondly, it is proposed to replace the existing steel and timber bridge over the drawbridge incorporating a hardwood deck with integrated non slip stripes with a hardwood timber handrail fixed to steel balusters via a continuous galvanised bar welded to the top of the balusters. Where the timber deck meets the open yard area there will be a steel edging strip. The current bridge has a timber deck and timber horizontal balustrading.
2.4 Within the courtyard there is to be an area of decking to raise the existing level to that of the various entrances to enable level access. Two timber steps will provide access on one site with a ramped approach from the other which has handrails to match those on the bridge.
PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South as a Building for Civic, Cultural or Other Use - Castle within a wider area of Mixed Use. The building is also Registered and within a Conservation Area and the building is Registered (RB 24). As such, the following Strategic Plan policies are applicable, which echo the provisions of Planning Policy Statement 1/01:
Environment Policy 32: 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.
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.
PLANNING HISTORY
==== PAGE 3 ====
17/00857/GB Page 3 of 4
4.1 The Castle has been subject to a number of applications over the years to provide enhanced visitor experiences and to upgrade and renovate the building. None of these is considered relevant to the consideration of the current application.
REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services indicate that they have no interest in the application (15.09.17).
5.2 Castletown Commissioners indicate that they have no objection to the application (18.09.17).
ASSESSMENT 6.1 The issue is whether the works adversely affect the character and interest of the building as one of particular historic and architectural interest and if so, whether there are any factors which would over-ride these concerns to justify the application being approved.
6.2 In the case of buildings which are as historically important as this, it is essential that any changes preserve where possible or sympathetically adjust the building where change or repair is required. This is often a challenge when public access to the building is desirable, particularly where such access is part of the method of funding the upkeep of the building. The compromises which have already been made to provide access to the public are visible in the various gates, doors, hand rails around the building as well as the signage which helps guide the visitor around the site and fully understand what he or she is seeing. The key is to change the building and its character as little as possible and where it is practicable to do so, to ensure the changes do not actually affect the fabric of the building and where possible, are reversible. As such, the laying of flooring, decking and ramps on top of the original surfacing may change the appearance of the area but not the underlying original fabric and where doors are proposed, they are to be frameless glass which will hopefully disappear into the surrounding stonework with the glass fixed into the mortar between the stones rather than damaging the stones themselves. Similarly, the laying of new timber steps and ramps to provide as level areas as are practicable will not try to trick the viewer into thinking that the original layout was like this but will be an obviously new feature.
6.3 The applicants have explained that the new bridge will generally replicate the existing which has outlived its useful life and is currently propped up from beneath. The existing bridge is a relatively modern intervention which has been much repaired and replaced in the past and is not considered to be of any significance to the historical integrity of the building. The pit beneath, however, is of considerable importance and should not be altered. The intention of the design of the bridge is to make the balustrade and handrail visually separate and the timbers will run parallel with the length of the bridge. When one gets to the platform under the portcullis, the timbers will run full width and at right angles to those on the bridge to draw a distinction between the two. This area would previously have had a permanent fixed platform above the moving section of the bridge so there would not have been a continuation of the bridge under the portcullis.
6.4 The existing step at the entrance to the bridge is to be removed to make it accessible for wheelchairs: that at the other end is part of the fabric of the Castle rather than part of the bridge so it cannot and should not be removed. The new railings will comply with reasonable precautions for health and safety whilst not compromising its character.
CONCLUSION 7.1 The works are considered a successful compromise between providing greater accessibility for all to the Castle whilst maintaining its character and the application is recommended for approval.
INTERESTED PERSON STATUS
==== PAGE 4 ====
17/00857/GB Page 4 of 4
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: (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; (b) 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; (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
8.2 The Planning Committee must determine:
__
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.
Decision Made : Permitted
Committee Meeting Date: 02.10.2017
Signed : S BUTLER Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See below
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