Loading document...
planning and building control bun-troggalys - plannal as gurneil troggal Planning and Building Control Division Murray House Mount Havelock Douglas Isle of Man IM1 25F Tel: (01624) 685950 Fax: (01624) 686443 Email: [email protected] Director of Planning \& Building Control M.I. McCauley, M.R.T.P.I. 13 / 12 / 10 Planning statement on behalf of the Department of Infrastructure in respect of planning for the stabilisation and protection scheme to pier (In association with 10/01579/CON) - 10/01578/GB \& Registered Building consent for a stabilisation and protection scheme to pier (In association with 10/01578/GB) Registered Building Nos. 154 - 10/01579/CON - Queens Pier, Queens Promenade, Ramsey
1.1 The aim of this statement is to provide background information to the planning application and to set out the views of the Planning Division in respect of the proposed development.
2.1 The site represents the curtilage of Queens Pier, Queens Promenade, Ramsey, which is located on the eastern side of Ramsey Promenade. The Pier is the 6th longest Pier in the United Kingdom, which is constructed with a braced frame structure and comprises timber decking. The Pier has an approximate length of 667 metres in an easterly direction from Queens Promenade. 2.2 The original Pier timber framed Roll Huts remain, and the relatively new entrance which is a flat roofed single storey building with rendered masonry walls built directly on the promenade behind the sea defence wall which is constructed behind the sea defence wall. Both structures are located to the eastern end of the Pier and serve as an entrance/exit.
3.1 The application proposes the stabilisation and protection scheme to pier. The submission indicates that in January 2010 a report in respect of the 'Refurbishment of Queen's Pier, Ramsey' was submitted to Tynwald. This set out possible options ranging from a full refurbishment to a De Minimis option. 3.2 Tynwald gave approval for the De Minimis option scheme which is now referred to as the 'Stabilisation and Protection Scheme'.
3.3 The 'Stabilisation and Protection Scheme' to the pier which will involve the removal of damaged areas of the timber decking, timber fascia and waling boards, cast iron ballustrading, seating and lamp posts. The Tool Booths toward the landward side and the seaward Shelter are to be dismantled and the Entrance Building is to be made weather-tight and boarded up. 3.4 It is proposed all items which are possible to retained, due to their condition, will be carefully removed from the Pier are to be recorded, tagged and secured in good quality shipping containers off site, in a location in Jurby.
4.1 In terms of the current Development Plan, the application site is not zoned as being in a particular use class either under the 1982 Development Plan or the Ramsey Local Plan Order 1998. The site is not within a Conservation Area, but the structure is a Registered building (Nr 154).
4.2 Due to the site location and the type of proposal, the following policies are relevant for consideration:- "Environment Policy 30: There will be a general presumption against demolition of a Registered Building. In considering proposals for demolition or proposed works which would result in substantial demolition of a Registered Building, consideration will be given to:
"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 34: In the maintenance, alteration or extension of pre-1920 buildings, the use of traditional materials will be preferred."
5.1 There are no previous planning applications which are considered relevant to the assessment and determination of this application.
6.1 Department of Infrastructure Highways Division have no objection. 6.2 The Ramsey Commissioners have objected for the following reasons:- "Whilst it is acknowledged that the Planning Statement accompanying this application details works to be undertaken to replace damaged or missing structural components of the Pier, the removal of components such as ballustrading, lighting columns and seating etc. are considered by this Authority to be a demolition by stealth of the Pier structure. The Commissioners contend
that the removal of such items and store off site would eventually result in the ultimate removal of so much of the structure as to make it unviable to restore the Pier to a satisfactory condition." 6.3 Department of the Environment, Food and Agricultural have made the following comments:- "We would like to highlight that the Queen's Pier falls within the proposed Ramsey Bay Marine Nature Reserve. The site was proposed by the Manx Fish Producers' Organisation and an official DEFA consultation will soon begin on how this proposed site can be developed to promote marine conservation and good fisheries management in the Ramsey Bay area. I attach a map of the outline of the proposed Marine Nature Reserve which highlights some of the key areas of habitat that make Ramsey Bay an important area ecologically. Of most relevance to this planning application is the eelgrass meadow to the south of the Queen's Pier, around the Carrick and Port Lewaigue. Eelgrass is a protected species under Manx law and every measure should be taken to avoid impacts such as siltation and burying of this important habitat. Eelgrass may be present at sites closer to Ramsey Pier.
DEFA Marine Biodiversity Officers would be very happy to work with DOI and their contractors to ensure that the works are undertaken in a way which will minimise impacts on the marine environment. Additional surveys will be carried out as part of the Marine Nature Reserve development process and we can provide any additional relevant information about marine habitats around the pier to DOI to assist in minimising the environmental impact of the works.
I have requested bird data, to determine whether any use the pier in a manner that might be affected by the proposed works, so that we can advise on timing/methods if necessary." 6.4 Manx National Heritage make the following comments:- "MNH welcomes this scheme to stabilise the pier structure and protect the decklevel components, whilst preserving the potential for future repair and restoration. In our opinion the replacement of damaged and failing cast iron components forming the pier structure itself using steel is a pragmatic and not unnatural development, and may be considered acceptable from a cost and conservation perspective. We note that this in any case relates to components which are either hidden from view or only capable of observation from a distance, and once covered in protective paint this change in materials will become virtually invisible.
In our view, the most visually obvious examples of Victorian workmanship to previous (and hopefully, future) users of the pier are the toll huts - now altered - and the case iron components above deck level. We therefore believe that it is imperative that care is taken to recover and store for future re-use the greatest possible amount of original materials. This would accord with generally accepted principles of good conservation practice. The removal and storage of balusters, lamp standards, bench seats etc, will however require considerable care and investment if they are to be suitably recorded, inventoried, and preserved for re-use in the future. The iron from which they are cast is liable to be impregnated with sea salt and unless they are suitably prepared or storage, and the storage facility - 'good quality shipping containers' - managed and monitored to appropriate standards, particularly of low relative humidity, is prone to rapid and irreversible damage. MNH conservation staff are available to advise on suitable environmental conditions and the means of achieving them. We would further recommend that a set of paradigm well-preserved cast iron
components are selected for particularly careful preparation and storage also as to act as patterns or templates for any replacement castings which may require to be made in the future. These will obviate the need to produce new patterns from the surviving original design drawings, which appear not to be of sufficient scale to allow easy reproduction." 6.5 The owners/occupiers of Glebe Cottage, Kirk Maughold have concerns with the proposal which can be summarised as; storage of materials is acceptable as long as it is kept in acceptable conditions; and removal of the entrance which is inappropriate would be beneficial and welcome. 6.6 The Planning Authority has received no other privately written representations objecting to the application.
7.1 As the Queen's Pier is Registered Building (RB 154), the content of this application has been considered with particular regard to Policy RB/5 ALTERATIONS AND EXTENSIONS as set out within Planning Policy Statement 1/01- Policy and Guidance Notes for the Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man. 7.2 POLICY RB/5 - ALTERATIONS AND EXTENSIONS states: "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.
Registered building consent is required for the building's alteration in any way which would affect its special architectural or historic character. There will be a general presumption against alteration or extension of registered buildings, except where a convincing case can be made, against the criteria set out in this section, for such proposals.
Applicants for registered building consent for alteration or extension to a registered building must be able to justify their proposals. They will be required to show why the works which would affect the character of the registered building are desirable or necessary and they should provide full information to enable the Department to assess the likely impact of their proposals on the special architectural or historic interest of the building and on its setting. Where registered buildings are the subject of successive applications for alteration or extension, consideration will also be given to the cumulative affect upon the building's special interest as a result of several minor works which may individually seem of little consequence." 7.3 The very construction of the Pier is in many ways, the cause of its problems. The Pier, which closed in 1991, is constructed with a timber deck supported on timber joists set on top of the iron structure. The timber fascia and 'waling beam' at the perimeter of the timber decking that support the ballustrading, lamp posts and seating, is failing due to wet rot, which is causing these items to become loose, unsafe and in danger of falling off the structure to the beach below. In addition, some of the diagonal bracing and horizontal strutting between the pier legs are either missing, or in need of replacement. The Tool Booths and seaward shelter are in the elements and being constructed in timber, have also failed.
7.4 As set out within the Planning Statement, the seaward end café was destroyed by fire in 1991 and replaced by a shelter on a reduced footprint. The historic significance of the shelter is therefore limited. In addition, the two number Toll Booths were modified in 1957, by removing their pyramidal roofs together with the upper sections of the walls and replacement with flat roofs to provide an overhang above the ticket window. The removal of these features, before making good to the Pier and then reinstating them whilst regrettable, is necessary in order to protect them for the future. Accurate recording of these features prior to their removal is vital to ensure their detailing is not lost when it comes to their reinstatement. 7.5 The boarding up of the entrance building and the repair of the roof to make the building weather-tight, is considered acceptable as this preserves this aspect of the Registered Building pending the formulation of plans for the refurbishment of the entire structure. 7.6 The information forming the application package is considered to be comprehensive with perhaps the omission of large scale records of the seating, lamp standards and ballustrading which will be covered in the Conditions. The information indicates that the works necessary to the actual iron structure are relatively minor, with the majority of the repair works necessary to the timber decking structure and its interface with the ferrous structure beneath as set out above. 7.7 In conclusion, these works are understood to be the precursor of future refurbishment works. Initially at least, this will appear to be a retrograde step as parts of the Registered Building are being removed, but is a necessary one in order to progress with the structure's refurbishment. These proposals are considered to be a necessary and practical first step toward that refurbishment and are therefore considered to be acceptable.
8.1 It is considered the proposal is a unique situation, when a large portion of the works proposed are to removal aspects of the pier for storage and to undertaken repairs to the main structure, to ensure the stability of the Pier. There are no specific planning policies which relate to this type of development, in particularly the removal of aspects of the pier for storage. However, the planning policies indicated do need consideration and particularly Environment Policy 32 which indicates that; 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. 8.2 Whilst the works in the short term will affect the character of the historic Pier, the works will ensure the stability of the Pier and ensure the Pier is in place for the next stage of possible full restoration works in the future. Not doing any works would seem to be 8.3 The submission goes into detail showing the various aspects which need repairing, new structural aspects which have been lost being replaced and the aspects removed and stored. These proposals would be appropriate and the reasoning for the scheme would also be acceptable. 8.3 The Conservation Officer has gone into detailing regarding the works which are considered to be appropriate and beneficial for the Piers structure stability, which echoes the views of the Planning Authority as a whole.
8.4 The Commissioners have concerns with the proposal could be considered to be demolition by stealth. This is a reasonable concern; however, on the other hand the works do involve repair works to the main structure of the Pier, to ensure the Pier does not fall into total disrepair. Furthermore, the works will ensure the short term future of the Pier and protect Pier from further significant deterioration and reducing health and safety risks to the public at beach and sea level.
9.1 It is considered that the submitted scheme is acceptable for the reasons indicated and therefore complies with the relevant planning policies within the Isle of Man Strategic Plan and Planning Policy Statement 1/01. Accordingly, it is considered that the 'Stabilisation and Protection Scheme' is acceptable and it is recommended that the application be approved.
Planning Statement: Document PA/statement October 2010 Original Drawings: Document PA/ordrw October 2010-12-06 Record Photographs: Document PA/photo October 2010-12-06 Location and Site Plan ap02 Existing Deck Layout (Sheet 1 of 2) - Planning Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/01 Revision P2 Existing Deck Layout (Sheet 2 of 2) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/02 Existing Pier Sections (Sheet 1 of 2) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/003 Existing Pier Sections (Sheet 2 of 2) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/004 Existing South Elevation (Sheet 1 of 3) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/05 Existing South Elevation (Sheet 2 of 3) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/06 Existing South Elevation (Sheet 3 of 3) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/07 Existing North Elevation (Sheet 1 of 3) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/08 Existing North Elevation (Sheet 2 of 3) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/09 Existing North Elevation (Sheet 3 of 3) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/10 Existing Entrance Building Elevation - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/11 Rev P2 Typical Replacement Cross Brace - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/12 Rev P1 Existing \& Proposed Deck Details - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/13 Rev P1 Proposed Entrance Building Elevation - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/20 Rev P2 Proposed Deck Layout (Sheet 1 of 2) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/21 Rev P2 Proposed Deck Layout (Sheet 2 of 2) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/22
Proposed Pier Sections (Sheet 1 of 2) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/23 Proposed Pier Sections (Sheet 2 of 2) \& End Elevation - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/24 Proposed South Elevation (Sheet 1 of 3) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/25 Proposed South Elevation (Sheet 2 of 3) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/26 Proposed South Elevation (Sheet 3 of 3) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/27 Proposed North Elevation (Sheet 1 of 3) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/28 Proposed North Elevation (Sheet 2 of 3) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/29 Proposed North Elevation (Sheet 3 of 3) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/30 Level 1 Survey (Sheet 2 of 2) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/31 Rev P2 Level 2 Survey (Sheet 1 of 2) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/32 Rev P2 Level 2 Survey (Sheet 2 of 2) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/33 Rev P2 Level 3 Survey (Sheet 1 of 2) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/34 Rev P2 Level 3 Survey (Sheet 2 of 2) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/35 Rev P2 Level 4 Survey (Sheet 1 of 2) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/36 Rev P2 Level 4 Survey (Sheet 2 of 2) - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/37 Rev P2 Pier Head North Elevation Survey - Planning - Drawing Number NTL/213/ST/38 Rev P2
This statement has been prepared by Mr Stephen Moore, R.I.B.A, Conservation Officer and Mr Chris Balmer, MA Hons, MTCP, MRTPI Planning Officer, on behalf of the Planning Division of the Department of Infrastructure.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown