191831

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      24/00103/B                                     Page  1  of  4

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Application No. : 24/00103/B Applicant : Mr & Mrs David & Ann Giroux Proposal : Creation of access drive to serve cottage garage (amendments to driveway approved under 22/01296/GB) Site Address : Holly Lodge (Refectory) Bishopscourt Kirk Michael Isle Of Man IM6 2EZ

Technical Officer: Mr Thomas Sinden Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 18.03.2024 __

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. The application is in accordance with section 16 of the Town and Country Act 1999 as the setting of the registered buildings are being preserved. The application is also judged to meet the tests of Planning Policy Statement 1/01 as well as Strategic Policy 4, General Policy 2, Environment Policy 32 and Environment Policy 34 of the IOM Strategic Plan 2016 as the building's setting is being protected and preserved. The application is also judged to be in accordance with Environment Policies 1 and 3, as the countryside and its ecology are being protected, and there would be no unacceptable loss or damage to the woodland area. The application is therefore judged to be acceptable.

Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to drawings 6296 PLR0 rev C and 6296 PLR04 rev F, together with Tree Protection Plan TP-180124 and the other supporting documents submitted on 9th February 2024. __

Interested Person Status - Additional Persons

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      24/00103/B                                     Page  2  of  4

None __

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The site is a portion of the curtilage of Fox Cottage, a registered building (RB 22). The building first appeared in the census of 1851, and is thought to have been built by Bishop Short in the 1840s. The building is noted as a Lodge on the 1860s map, and was historically sited adjacent to the principal gate and drive for Bishopscourt itself (RB 1). When sold off from the main complex as a private dwelling, the property was renamed Fox Cottage, under which name it was registered. The new owners are intending to reinstate the property's name as The Cottage, as they also intend to do with the adjacent Holly Lodge (RB 23), which will return to its form name of the Refectory. The building has a special historic interest with the part it plays in the history of the Bishopscourt complex. The property is not located within a conservation area.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 This application proposes to construct an access road to serve the garage that was approved under 22/01296/GB. The proposed driveway deviates from the driveway approved under the previous application by approximately 2m metres, now proposed to sit further away from the Cottage itself. The proposed amendment is in order to avoid damaging or removing a historic wall that has been found during preparatory groundworks.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY The site is in an area with a high likelihood of surface water flooding.

3.1 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1999 S16 Registered buildings: supplementary provisions (3) In considering - (a) whether to grant planning approval for development which affects a registered building or its setting, or (b) whether to grant registered building consent for any works, the relevant 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.

3.2 National policy: THE ISLE OF MAN STRATEGIC PLAN 2016

General Policy 2 Strategic Policy 4 & 12 Infrastructure Policy 5 Environment Policy 1, 3, 32 & 34 Community Policy 7, 10 & 11.

3.3 Planning Policy Statements: 1/01 Policy and Guidance Notes for the Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man

POLICY RB/3 POLICY RB/5

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 Applications 22/01295/GB, 22/01296/GB, 22/01310/CON and 22/01311/CON approved various alterations and additions to this site, including restoration of the two registered buildings, the construction of the driveway now proposed to be amended, and the construction of a new detached garage.

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      24/00103/B                                     Page  3  of  4

4.2 There are various other historic applications on the site; however these are not judged to be pertinent to the current proposals.

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

5.1 The Department of Infrastructure Highways Division have stated that they find the application to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and/or parking (23.2.2024).

5.2 The DEFA Forestry Officer has not commented formally on the proposals. However, they have met with the applicant's arboricultural representatives on site, and confirmed the following verbally: "I have no objections to the proposal to amend the position of the driveway. The driveway will be closer to retained trees than previously, however, the novel inclusion of permanent ground protection will improve the outcome for trees."

6.0 ASSESSMENT Statutory Test 6.1 The Department has a statutory duty to have "have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting". With this in mind, an assessment needs to be made as to any impact on the setting of Fox Cottage itself (RB 22), as well as adjacent registered buildings Holly Lodge (the Refectory - RB 23) and Bishopscourt (RB 1). This application proposes to amend the approved position of the driveway to the new garage. The proposal is to realign the driveway to be approximately two metres further away from the building itself, so as to avoid a historic wall that has been found during initial preparatory works. The level of the driveway would be 200mm above the existing ground level (as would the approved driveway). This level change is proposed in order to accommodate a layer of protection to the root areas of existing trees. As the proposed driveway within this application would be further away from the registered building (RB 22), it is considered that no harm will result to the building's setting. Furthermore, given the very modest scope of the alterations proposed, it is judged that no harm will result to the settings of Bishopscourt (RB 1) or Holly Lodge (RB 23).

Policy Tests 6.2 As per 6.1 above, the proposed amended position of the driveway is considered to have a lower impact on the nearby heritage assets than the previously approved position. With this in mind, the proposals are considered to be in accordance with strategic policy 4 and environment policy 32 as the registered buildings and their settings are being protected and preserved.

6.3 The DEFA Forestry Officer has met with the applicants on site to discuss these works. The officer has stated that they have no objections to the amended driveway location, as the permanent ground protection proposed would reduce the impact on the existing trees when compared to the previously approved scheme. With this in mind, the proposals are considered to be in accordance with environment policies 1 and 3, as the countryside and its ecology are being protected, and there would be no unacceptable loss or damage to the woodland area.

6.4 Although the site is known to have a high likelihood of surface water flooding, the very modest amendment to the previously approved driveway that is proposed within this application is not judged to impact the site's susceptibility to flooding. The site's flood risk status is therefore not considered to be a matter that would warrant refusal in this instance.

6.5 Given the nature and scale of the proposals, the application is judged to comply with Infrastructure Policy 5 and Community Policies 7, 10 and 11 of the IOM Strategic Plan 2016.

7.0 CONCLUSION

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      24/00103/B                                     Page  4  of  4

7.1 The application is judged to be in accordance with section 16 of the Town and Country Act 1999 as the setting of the registered buildings are being preserved. The application is also judged to meet the tests of planning policy statement 1/01 as well as strategic policy 4, general policy 2, environment policy 32 and environment policy 34 of the IOM Strategic Plan 2016 as the building's setting is being protected and preserved. The application is also judged to be in accordance with environment policies 1 and 3, as the countryside and its ecology are being protected, and there would be no unacceptable loss or damage to the woodland area. It is therefore recommended that the application is approved.

8.0 INTERESTED PERSONS 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 a Principal Planner 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: 21.03.2024

Determining officer

Signed : J SINGLETON

Jason Singleton

Principal Planner

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.