**Document:** Officer Report
**Application:** 15/00410/B — Erection of a detached toilet block to be used in association with the existing Lezayre Church
**Decision:** Permitted
**Decision Date:** 2015-07-14
**Parish:** Lezayre
**Document Type:** report / officer_report
**Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/5943-lezayre-churchtown-ramsey-detached-toilet-block/documents/917323

---

# Officer Report

**Application No.:** 15/00410/B
**Applicant:** Mr Julian Edwards
**Proposal:** Erection of a detached toilet block to be used in association with the existing Lezayre Church
**Site Address:** Field 132150 Churchtown Ramsey Isle Of Man Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley
**Photo Taken:** 07.01.2015
**Site Visit:** 07.01.2015
**Expected Decision Level:** Officer Delegation

## Officer’s Report

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is Field 132150 and some of the land surrounding Kirk Christ Lezayre Parochial Church and due south of Lezayre Road, Churchtown. Lezyare Church is Registered Building No.138. Edged blue on the submitted plan is the field separating the church's immediate grounds and Lezayre Road. - 1.2 The Registration document for Lezayre Church is not immediately clear as to the reason behind its Registration, although it appears to be primarily related to the church's age and interior rather than to its external physical qualities. A copy of the document is within the application file.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the erection of a toilet block within the southwest corner of the application site. The building's footprint would be 7m by 4.25m, with eaves and ridgeline 2.4m and 4.2m above ground level respectively. It would be constructed of blockwork and finished with painted render. Seven windows (none of which would be in the gables) would be formed of glass blocks, while the door would be either timber or uPVC. The roof would be finished in either natural slate or interlocking roof tile. Following concern raised by the Fisheries team (outlined in Section 5 below), the proposed siting of the toilet block was moved roughly 2m east. An amended plan to this end was provided and the application readvertised accordingly.

2.3 A supporting letter has been submitted along with the application, which identifies that the toilet facilities are needed in order to enable events other than worship (such as art exhibitions and music concerts) to take place within the church, the future of which has for some years "been a cause for concern due to a falling congregation and the burdens on a limited number of increasingly elderly people of a large burial ground…and an increasingly onerous quota to pay". The letter also identifies that the capacity of the church is 210 people, with additional space at the rear. This letter is a copy of that submitted to the previous application on the site (see below).

## - 3.0 PLANNING HISTORY

3.1 An almost identical application (PA 14/01404/A), but seeking Approval in Principle, for an identically-sized toilet block in the same location was withdrawn earlier in the year after advice given by officers. All matters save for siting were reserved, but an example floorplan and one example elevation were provided. The intention was for the toilet block to be used in conjunction with the church but since the church was outwith the red line of the application site there did not seem to be any way to ensure the toilet block could be 'tied' to the church without a legal agreement. In view of the site's location within a countryside area, officers advised that the application seeking Approval in Principle should be withdrawn and a full application submitted in its place, either purely for the toilet block or also to include a proposed change of use to the church, which is understood to be a longer-term intention for the applicants / the site. - 3.2 It is perhaps worth noting that a commemorative flagpole was granted approval on the land edged blue under PA 14/00461/B.

## - 4.0 PLANNING POLICY

4.1 The site is situated with an Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance according to the Isle of Man Development Scheme Order 1982. It is also identified as being within Private Woodland. - 4.2 There are no policies that specifically apply to the kind of development proposed and, as such, several policies in the Isle of Man Strategic Plan are considered appropriate to consider. These are set out below. - 4.3 General Policy 1: 'The determination of matters under Part 2 (Development Control) and Part 3 (Special Controls) of the 1999 Town and Country Planning Act shall have regard to the provisions of the Development Plan and all other material considerations.' - 4.4 General Policy 3: 'Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of:

- (a) essential housing for agricultural workers who have to live close to their place of work; (Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10);
- (b) conversion of redundant rural buildings which are of architectural, historic, or social value and interest; (Housing Policy 11);
- (c) previously developed land which contains a significant amount of building; where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environment; and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment;
- (d) the replacement of existing rural dwellings; (Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14);
- (e) location-dependent development in connection with the working of minerals or the provision of necessary services;
- (f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry;
- (g) development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative; and
- (h) buildings or works required for interpretation of the countryside, its wildlife or heritage.'

4.4 Environment Policy 1: 'The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. For the purposes of this policy, the countryside comprises all land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 at A.3.6 or which is not designated for future development

on an Area Plan. Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative.'

4.6 Environment Policy 2: 'The present system of landscape classification of Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV's) as shown on the 1982 Development Plan and subsequent Local and Area Plans will be used as a basis for development control until such time as it is superseded by a landscape classification which will introduce different categories of landscape and policies and guidance for control therein. Within these areas the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration unless it can be shown that:

- (a) the development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape; or
- (b) the location for the development is essential.'

4.7 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.' It must be noted that the proposed works would be limited to land alongside a Registered Building rather than to a Registered Building. With this in mind, it is also appropriate to be mindful of two specific policies within Planning Policy Statement 1/01 'Conservation of the Historic Environment', which contains policies relating to applications for Registered Building Consent (Policies RB/3 and RB/5). - 4.8 In terms of RB/3, the key extract is as follows: "The issues that are generally relevant to the consideration of all registered building applications are…the building's setting and its contribution to the local scene, which may be very important, e.g. Where it forms an element in a group, park, garden or other townscape or landscape, or where it shares particular architectural forms or details with other buildings nearby (including other registered buildings)." - 4.9 In terms of RB/5, the key extract is as follows: "In considering whether to grant planning approval for development which affects a registered building or its setting and in considering whether to grant registered building consent for any works, the 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."

## - 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 The Drainage Division of the Manx Utilities Authority noted on 30.04.2015 that the proposed structure is close to a culverted watercourse, and requested additional information before issuing a formal comment. They did at that initial stage note that the structure should not be constructed over the culvert and that there should be sufficient space should any repairs be required to the culvert. No further comment was received following the application's re-advertisement.

5.2 Fisheries requested completion of a 'Development within 9m of a watercourse' form and advised on 30.04.2015 that this had been completed to their satisfaction. They later advised that they had no objection to the proposal on 05.06.2015. - 5.3 Lezayre Parish Commissioners offered no objection on both 18.05.2015 and 08.06.2015. - 5.4 The Victorian Society commented on the proposal in comments received 5th May

2015. The offered no objection to the proposal, while also noting that the windows might

have to be shallower and that a louvered panel in both gables to provide ventilation, as such would echo those in the church. They also state that the roof should be finished in natural slate and the door formed of timber; a uPVC alternative would necessitate an upstand and present access problems for the elderly and disabled.

## - 6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 Full planning approval is sought for the erection of a building in an area zoned as Countryside, but also as an area of High Landscape Value.

6.2 The stated need for the toilet facilities relates to the potential diversification of events the church offers and these could in themselves require a change of use planning approval. There is something of a "chicken and egg" issue here in that there could be an argument for objecting to the proposal on grounds of a lack of firmly established need relative to the provisions of the Development Plan, against the possible objection to the change of use of the church to include other, non-worship events. Equally, however, it is also understood that the church currently has no toilet facilities, and this is unusual and unfortunate. - 6.3 It is possible to tie the use of the toilet block to the church itself via Planning condition; any change of use that may be subsequently approved on the site would not conflict with such a condition. - 6.4 While it is evident that the proposal does not fit neatly within any of the exceptions to General Policy 3, it is considered that the harm that would result from the siting proposed would be limited. The site is sheltered from many sides by trees and buildings, and any new building here would only be apparent from Churchtown Road rather than Lezayre Road due to the number of trees surrounding what is a quite secluded and distinctly separate parcel of land from, and adjacent to, the church. - 6.5 It is considered that an objection to this application on these grounds would be inappropriate since the harm that would arise from the erection of a building to provide toilet facilities here would be outweighed by the positive benefit realised by having on-site toilet facilities for this existing community facility, even if it is currently unused and may be subject to a change at some point in the future. It is further considered that the proposed building is well-considered in its design, is appropriately modest in scale and mass and uses appropriate materials. It would therefore not detrimentally affect the setting of the Registered Building, which is as much provided by the land to the north and south than the application site itself. - 6.6 In addition, an extension to the existing church - which, as noted, is Registered - could raise more concern than a new, standalone building simply because of the difficulty that exists in terms of achieving an appropriate design without harming a Registered Building. While there is by no means an in-principle objection to the extension or alteration of Registered Buildings, churches generally take on a specific form and structure such that alterations can be difficult to successfully accommodate, and especially so when the building is Registered, when even internal changes can be challenging. - 6.7 It is noted that the toilet block would sit north of a dwelling and be fairly close to it. However, this has one window directly overlooking it, and at a slight angle, and with the screening around could not be said to result in any undue impact on the living conditions of those living there in terms of how the proposed building would be used. While there would be some additional comings and goings in this area over and above what is currently the case, the size of the church (able to accommodate roughly 210 people, it is understood) is such that these are unlikely to be of a scale or regularity likely to be detrimental to the amenities of the area.

6.8 It is concluded that the principle of the proposal, along with its design and proposed location, is acceptable. The comments received from the Victorian Society are helpful and agreed with. Conditions limited the materials to be used to slate and timber for the roof and door respectively are recommended accordingly. Any changes to the size of windows or the installation of louvered panels could potentially require a new application (depending on the scale of any such differences that may occur) and so further comment on those matters is not necessary at this stage.

## - 7.0 RECOMMENDATION

7.1 It is therefore recommended that the application be approved. 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 (which here includes the Manx Utilities Authority (Drainage Division));
- o The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

8.2 In addition to those above, article 6(3) of the Order requires the Department to decide which persons (if any) who have made representations with respect to the application, should be treated as having sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application.

In this instance, it is recommended that the following persons do not have sufficient interest and should be awarded the status of an Interested Person:

- o The Isle of Man Victorian Society.

Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation:

08.07.2015

Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal

C : Conditions for approval

- N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
- O : Notes attached to refusals

- 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.
- C 2. The toilet block hereby approved shall not be occupied or used at any time other than for purposes incidental to the use of the Kirk Christ Lezayre Parochial Church (Registered Building No.138) as identified on the approved plan. Reason: To ensure proper control of the development site.
- C 3. The roof of the toilet block hereby approved shall be finished in natural slate and retained as such thereafter.

Reason: In the interest of the character and appearance of the building and site in general, acknowledging its proximity to a Registered Building.

- C 4. The door of the toilet block hereby approved shall be constructed of natural timber and retained as such thereafter.

Reason: In the interest of the character and appearance of the building and site in general, acknowledging its proximity to a Registered Building.

The development hereby approved relates to the plan 14 1098 1 Rev A, date-stamped as having been received 29th May 2015.

I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control /Head of Development Management/ Senior Planning Officer.

## Decision Made : Permitted Date : 13.07.2015 Determining officer (delete as appropriate)

Signed :………J CHANCE……….. Jennifer Chance Head of Development Management

---

*Data sourced from the Isle of Man public planning register under the [Isle of Man Open Government Licence](https://www.gov.im/about-this-site/open-government-licence/).*
*Canonical page: https://planningportal.im/a/5943-lezayre-churchtown-ramsey-detached-toilet-block/documents/917323*