Cornerstone Architects Planning Statement

1293/04/8.6.3./ALD/dmh

Secretary of the Planning Committee Department of Local Government And the Environment Murray House Mount Havelock DOUGLAS Isle of Man

6 September 2005

Dear Sirs

79 Parliament Street Ramsey Isle of Man IM8 1AQ

Tel 01624 810810 Fax 01624 810811 [email protected] www.cornerstonearchitects.co.uk

RE: PA number 05/00877/B

Proposal: Demolition of existing derelict barn and replacement with extension of similar size comprising garage, reception room and hall at ground floor level; two bedrooms and bathroom at first floor level Address: Hillside Cottage, Main Road, Ballaugh, Isle of Man IM7 5EB Applicant: Mr and Mrs Stock

Further to your correspondence of 12 August 2005 we wish to submit, on behalf of our client, the statement in support of the application. We apologise for the delay in this and advise that our client has been away from the Island for a number of weeks.

At your Committee’s meeting held on 21 July 2005 it determined to refuse the application for the reasons:

1. The proposed extension would be contrary to Planning Circular 3/91 in that the proportion, form and detailing of the proposed extension would be unsympathetic and out of keeping with the building to which it would be attached and would cause demonstrable harm to the visual amenities of the locality; and
2. The decision was made by the Planning Committee constituted in accordance with paragraph 2 of Schedule 1 of the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982.

We submit that extensive consultation took place with the Planning Department prior to the submission of the application. Meetings on site were held with Mr. Anthony Holmes, Planning Officer at the time for the area. We enclose for your attention a copy of recent correspondence sent to Mr. Holmes in this regard and would re-iterate that the existing barn fell into

architects development consultants interior designers project managers planning supervisors

a state of disrepair and part collapse shortly after Mr.& Mrs. Stock purchased Hillside Cottage.

On the advice of the then Planning Officer, Mrs. Diane Brown, it was agreed that the method to conduit planning approval at a future date would be to leave part of the existing barn in-situ to establish the previous use.

It is now with great concern that we are advised of the reason for refusal, despite the consultation with the Department being as cited.

It is clear from the proposals that the accommodation can be adequately provided within a barn of a similar size and shape to that which has been part demolished. The existing building is a fairly traditional farmhouse of traditional proportions and style. There is a rear cat slide providing ancillary accommodation in the form of utility room and kitchen extension. However, the first floor accommodation is extremely confined and restricted for modern family usage.

We submit that the linked extension has arrived at the desired design through consultation with Mr. Holmes who, quite rightly, advised that the link should be at ground floor only in order to break up the elevation and to, where viewed from the highway, appear to be two properties. This is maintained through the proposals and from a visit to the site your Committee would be aware that only a brief glimpse of the extension is visible from the main road, ie. There is no view of the existing farmhouse from the road.

The materials proposed for the construction are similar to those of the original barn and careful consideration has been given to the internal layout in order to achieve the desired living accommodation harmoniously within the fabric proposed.

You will note approval from the Department of Transport relating to the application.

You will note approval from the Ballaugh Parish Commissioners to the proposals (subject to conditions).

Also you will note comments from the Fire Officer relating to the means of escape from the first floor. Clearly there is some confusion in this regard, as there is an alternative escape provided from first floor to the split level at the rear of the property.

We submit that the decision of the Planning Committee is wrong and request an oral hearing to present our statement of case in detail. Failing this, the written submissions contained herein should be taken in tandem

with a site visit by the Committee. This will fully appraise the Committee of the site conditions and we are sure will highlight the exact nature of the application site relative to the surrounding locale.

We recommend that the decision be reversed and approval be granted at review for the proposals as submitted. Yours faithfully Cornerstone Architects

A Lloyd Davies For and on behalf of Cornerstone Architects

Cc: Mr & Mrs S. Stock