Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
22/00580/B Page 1 of 8
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Application No. : 22/00580/B Applicant : BBG Limited Proposal : Alterations and erection of a two storey extension to existing public house to provide restaurant, hotel accommodation and staff manager accommodation with associated alterations to existing car park comprising amendments to PA 21/00336/B Site Address : Shore Hotel Old Laxey Hill Laxey Isle Of Man IM4 7DA
Planning Officer: Miss Lucy Kinrade Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 17.10.2022 __
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.
C 2. Prior to the first coming into use or occupation of the extension hereby approved the parking and turning areas shall be provided in full accordance with the approved drawings and retained as such thereafter.
Reason: in the interest of highway safety in providing off road parking for the site.
C 3. There shall be no external lighting installed at the site.
Reason: for the avoidance of doubt and because the application as submitted does not include any lighting and therefore this has not been considered but also in the interest of protecting the adjacent watercourse and to avoid disturbance or injury to spawning fish, or to the spawn and fry of fish.
N 1. The applicant/land owner is reminded of their separate obligations in the protection of protected species such as fish, bats and birds under the Wildlife Act 1990 and Fisheries Act
==== PAGE 2 ====
22/00580/B Page 2 of 8
2012. The applicant is also reminded that any signage on the barriers must form part of a separate advertisement application.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposed changes beyond the original approval are considered acceptable, having an acceptable visual, neighbouring, environmental and highway safety impact and having an acceptable impact on the Conservation Area and contributing to the overall vitality and viability of Laxey and its local economy. Conditions relating to parking layout and lighting are to be added and the overall application is considered to comply with Strategic Policies 1, 2, 4 and 6, General Policy 2, Environment Policies 10, 13, 35 and 39 and the principles of Community Policy 4 and paragraph 9.11 from the Area Plan for the East 2020.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This approval relates to the following information:
o P-113 Rev A Proposed second floor plan o P-114 Rev A Proposed roof plan o P-304 Rev B Proposed elevations o Covering Letter All date received 07/10/2022
o A letter from the agent dated 19/07/2022
o P-001 Site and location plan o P-002 Parking proximity plan o P-003 Visibility splays o P-004 Existing Site Plan o P-005 Proposed Site Plan o P-111 Proposed Ground Floor Plan o P-303 Existing elevations o P-102 Proposed First Floor Plan o P-103 Existing Second floor plan o P-101 Existing Ground Floor plan o P-102 Existing First Floor plan o P-104 Existing Roof plan o BS 5837:2012 - Arboricultural Impact Assessment o BS 5837:2012 Tree Survey and Report o Drawing numbers TS-150321 and TR-150321 o Flood Risk Assessment dated March 2021 All date received 10/05/2022
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site is the extents of The Shore Hotel, Laxey a two storey property situated at the bottom of Old Laxey Hill and central to Old Laxey. The public house and its car park sit on the south side of the river nearest the bridge crossing over to Glen Road and
==== PAGE 3 ====
22/00580/B Page 3 of 8
Minorca Hill. Running parallel to the river and through the car park is a public footpath linking to the glen running along the river.
1.2 The building has recently been approved under 21/00336/B for the demolition of a number of smaller outbuildings at the rear and the erection of a large replacement two storey extension to provide additional restaurant space at ground floor and hotel bedrooms to first floor. The proposal also included some reconfiguration to the parking areas surrounding the building.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The works under 21/00336/B have commenced on site with the roof of the extension being installed, however the project remains unfinished. Approval is now sought for a number of changes to the original approval summarised below:
2.2 Proposed works (changes beyond extant approval 21/00336/B): o Changes to terracing balustrade from a vertical timber to part masonry/part glazed balustrade o Reduction to rear masonry chimney stack and installation of flue torpedo cowl o Installation of additional solar panels o Installation of a new rear south elevation window o Changes to vent sizes on rear south elevation o Installation of café style barriers along the edge of the car park nearest the river o The original proposal also included the removal of the west gable chimney stack, however this has since been omitted and the stack is to remain.
Agents reasons for proposed works: 2.3 The agent has provided information indicating the need for the works being due to maintenance and management difficulties in cleaning the timber balustrades and that the glazing approach will tie in with the flood defences approved under 21/01102/B. The cowl is required as they have changed to gas cooking and it will discharge at a higher level. The removal of the stack was tie in with the barge details of the rest of the building and the dummy stack would be prone to lichen growth and staining.
2.4 In further supporting information the agent indicates that the proposal now removes the fire escape and satellite dishes from the gable thus enhancing the conservation area and that the original fully visible commercial flue has been removed as have all the external soil pipes. They state that traditional methods have been used in the refurbishment works including replacement windows, render, chimney stacks and slate roof thus preserving and enhancing the existing building in its context.
2.5 The extension is unashamedly modern with several very interesting aspects including modern oak frame, flat and pitched roofs, oak pergola, glazed veranda, modern glazing to bedrooms and large glazed curtain walling all of which are alien in the conservation setting, but through the quality materials specified preserve the conservation area and enhance the existing pub as a building of merit whilst introducing high quality features in the glen setting.
2.6 They indicate that the original barn - now demolished, did not have a chimney on the gable. The original collection of buildings was haphazard, was of varying scales and jumbled in form - the new building is admirable in scale and form and provides much interest.
2.7 The proposed flue is critical to the requirements of environmental health and can be disguised by painting the cowl - it is only slightly visible from the Glen Road and marginally projects above the new ridge line. We do not consider that it is industrial in its appearance and certainly far more in keeping than other approved options in the locality. The design team are reviewing to see if this can be reduced in scale.
==== PAGE 4 ====
22/00580/B Page 4 of 8
2.8 The agent feels that the omission of the chimney stack to the western gable can be argued on the basis that introducing it into the modern element in fact detracts from that part of the project and the modern element should remain as such without being a pastiche to the traditional. There are many examples within the conservation area where new buildings do not have the chimney detail.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 There were a number of historic applications at the site throughout the late 80's, 90's and early 2000's for alterations and modifications to the existing building including internal works, erection of fencing and installation of gas tanks, installation of dormers and roof over rear stairwell and bedroom and porch extensions and the conversion of the existing rear restaurant into a micro-brewery.
3.2 More recently the site has been subject to the following application each considered to be materially relevant: o 21/00336/B - for the large replacement two storey extension at the rear - APPROVED o 22/00228/MCH - changes to 21/00336/B - REFUSED red line changed and nature of proposed works considered to be more than minor o 22/00468/B - replacement windows and front door - APPROVED o 22/00467/D - installation of illuminated signage - APPROVED o 21/01102/B - works to river wall including flood protection - APPROVED
4.0 PLANNING POLICIES 4.1 The application site is within an area zoned as "Mixed Use" on The Area Plan for the East (TAPE), within the Laxey Conservation Area and recognised on recent flood maps as being at high risk of both tidal and river flooding.
4.2 Given the nature of the application it is appropriate to first consider the principle of the works against Strategic Policies 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6, Community Policy 4 as well as Section 9.11 from TAPE written statement, following which General Policy 2, Environment Policies 34, 35 and 39 of the Strategic Plan and PPS 101 on Heritage shall determine the amenity and visual impacts of the proposal on the immediate neighbours and particularly on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, and Environment Policies 10 and 13 will cover matters in respect of flood risk.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 Garff Commissioners - comments (23/08/2022) - they support the need to enhance the Laxey Conservation Area when opportunity arises. Note that the new building replaces a building that comprised several 'ad-hoc' extensions with a building that they feel will greatly improve the area. They recognise that the flue is a necessary addition for the operation of the public house/hotel facility and note that the architect has provided information that indicates that the design of the flue will have the minimum impact on the character of the area. They do not feel that the omission of the chimney stack on the western gable will seriously affect the form of the new building; neither will there be a loss to the amenity of the conservation area as a result. They believe that the renovation of the Shore Hotel will provide a facility that will prove to be of great benefit to Laxey as a tourist/visitor destination.
5.2 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services - Do not oppose subject to conditions (26/05/2022 and 10/08/2022) no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and /or parking. If appropriate, please repeat condition 2 parking and turning of PA21/00336/B with the approved plan updated to P-005. Additionally, details for cycle parking are necessary to be submitted, approved and agreed as well as for the installation any electric vehicle charging points.
==== PAGE 5 ====
22/00580/B Page 5 of 8
5.3 DEFA Fisheries representative - (28/06/2022) No objections provided that there is no adverse effect on the adjacent watercourse. This is due to the nature of both the watercourse and the proposed works. Further comments received 01/09/2022 expand on these comments stating that "although the Shore Hotel development is within 9 metre of a river, the construction itself poses no immediate threat to the river or fishery unless washings of concrete or hazardous substances manage to move from the development, across the car parking area and into the river. If general care is taken on site, this should not pose any threat to the fishery. A site risk assessment to control where hazardous material are stored, how workers clean equipment and safe use of aqua-toxic materials should prove sufficient, which is a requirement via the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and Regulations 2003. A plan for hazardous spills using spill kits along with emergency DEFA contact numbers would be beneficial."
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 Previously approved 21/00336/B remains a material consideration in the assessment of the current application as works may still be carried out in full accordance with that approval. Therefore the key matters to be considered now are the proposed changes beyond that approval and their impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, and whether they preserve or enhance in line with planning policies and PPS 1/01.
6.2 In correspondence and discussions with the agent throughout it has been made clear that the modifications to the terracing balustrade are considered to be acceptable and would visually tie in with those works approved along the river wall and would not be so out of keeping so as to harm the overall character and appearance of the building or conservation area. Similarly the works to the rear south elevation windows and changes to the vent sizes would be acceptable. The three most notable changes requiring a more in depth assessment being those relating to the i) installation of the flue torpedo cowl; ii) the west gable dummy stack; and iii) installation of café style barriers along the car park.
Background to Chimney Stack's 6.3 Both of the approved stacks are referred to in the architect/agent's original supporting design statement which indicates that the integration of these traditional features was part of a specific design approach taken by the agent. Section 6 of their design statement states: "a more contemporary corner window is provided to the northwest corner of the extension which compliments the more traditional gable end appearance to the west with a traditional chimney dominant to this elevation and a reference to the existing barn/stables that are to be replaced" "the first floor steps in plan to allow for the extension to line through with the side wall of the existing pub building, at this step in plan a chimney is provided to house the flue extract from the kitchen. This chimney conceals the flue and terminates above the ridge line allowing for exhaust fumes to be propelled high into the air and away from the building and neighbouring properties. The rear elevation and chimneys take on a more industrial aesthetic akin to the working industrial heritage of Laxey."
6.4 In 6.0 Assessment of the 21/00336/B case officer report it states that: "the main public house building which stands fairly majestically along the roadside and contributes to the Conservation Area both in terms of its architectural, social and historic interest". Paragraph 6.6 of the same report acknowledges that the "proposed extension would be notably larger both in terms of footprint, length, height and depth than the existing rear structure and by reasons of its design incorporating both a traditional feel across its upper levels (through its use of a pitched roof, slate materials, smaller solid to void ratios, painted render and stacks), and by introducing a more contemporary approach across the ground floor (with larger glazing, flat roof overhang and timber supports) seeks to present a scheme that addresses the historic qualities of the site, acknowledging its position alongside the glen while not hiding the fact that it is a more recent and modern addition to the existing building".
==== PAGE 6 ====
22/00580/B Page 6 of 8
6.5 Given the above, it seems clear that the inclusion of these traditional features was an important part of the overall scheme and that although undeniably newer and a contemporary addition its design, including the stacks, respected the heritage aspects of the site and historic qualities of the surrounding Conservation Area.
6.6 In this application the original submission sought to change both, one modified to accommodate the torpedo cowl and one completely removed.
i) Installation of the flue torpedo cowl; 6.7 It is indicated that the restaurant cooking facilities were originally anticipated to be electric but are now changing to gas, and this change requires the modifications to the extraction system as a necessity to properly accommodate this change. This stack and cowl will be visible in parts, the top of the cowl only will likely be seen above the roof of the extension when looking from across the river along Glen Road, and both the stack and cowl will be seen through the gap along the side of the building from Old Laxey Hill and Tent Road. From a visual perspective these types of cowls are not typical of a heritage or conservation area and should be avoided or their visual impact minimised through suitable mitigation. In this case the original design sought to encase the entire flue, but changes to the cooking systems has resulted in the need for a bigger cowl. This cowl will help to expel cooked smells and fumes further into the air and away from neighbouring properties, while there will be some views achievable these will likely mostly be fleeting and only between gaps in the building. The majority of the flue will still be encased within the masonry stack and minded that without this cowl there could be issues in the operation of the wider restaurant facility that on balance the improvements to neighbouring amenity and its purpose to support the needs of the restaurant operation would be sufficient enough as to outweigh the accepted visual impacts although these views are considered to have limited visual prominence from public view and on the wider Conservation Area as a whole.
ii) retention of west gable dummy stack; 6.8 The original scheme sought to remove the west gable stack completely and re-roof over. Concern was expressed to the agent in the loss of this stack particularly minded of its positive contribution to the overall design intention of the building and being respectful to the character and appearance of the wider Conservation Area. In response to these concerns the agent has sought to retain the stack as part of the buildings design. For this reason the retained stack and the overall building design is considered to remain acceptable and not to result in any adverse harm to the Conservation Area.
iii) installation of café style barriers along the car park. 6.9 The proposed barriers will define the external seating area and will be visible from public roads passing the site and from the public footpath running through the site. The nature of these barriers is somewhat temporary and they are not of such a size or scale as to be overbearing, their position along the car park edge and by the river limits their prominence and fall into a subservient role and not considered to result in any significant negative or adverse visual or amenity impacts on the area. The barriers are likely to be read in conjunction with the overall commercial operation of the wider site and are not expected to restrict use of the car park and their position away from the public footpath ensures no obstruction to the public.
6.10 The detail for the barriers provided appears to include some signage, however this detail would need to be part of a separate advertisement application. A suitably worded note will be added to this application to remind the agent/applicant of this.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 For the above reasons the proposal is considered to comply with Strategic Policies 1, 2, 4 and 6, General Policy 2, Environment Policies 10, 13, 35 and 39 and the principles of Community Policy 4 and paragraph 9.11 from the Area Plan for the East. Conditions in respect
==== PAGE 7 ====
22/00580/B Page 7 of 8
of car parking being provided prior to occupation of the extension is necessary to be duplicated and notes added in respect of the Wildlife Act 1990 and the need for a separate Advertisement application for any signage as the site.
7.2 The original approval also included a condition relating to fish and the need for details for a scheme to avoid harmful materials entering the watercourse was necessary prior to any works being under taken, including clearance works. This condition was never complied with, and it is clear from the progress on site that the majority of works has already been undertaken. This condition has become now somewhat redundant. On discussion with Fisheries they indicate in an email that although the development is within 9m, the construction itself poses no immediate threat unless washings move across the car park and into the river. They state that there is separate legislation which would cover where hazardous materials are to be stored and how equipment would be cleaned. A site risk assessment is a requirement of via the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and Regulation 2003. They state that advice and involvement from Fisheries is therefore unnecessary at this time. For this reason it is not felt that the condition relating to fish needs to be duplicated on this approval.
8.0 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
8.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot 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: 20.10.2022
Determining officer
Signed : C BALMER
Chris Balmer
Principal Planner
==== PAGE 8 ====
22/00580/B Page 8 of 8
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