Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
23/00346/B Page 1 of 15
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Application No. : 23/00346/B Applicant : Mr Ian Tuck Proposal : Conversion from existing barn and stables to residential unit Site Address : Ballacallin Beg Cottage Foxdale Road Garth Crosby Isle Of Man IM4 2HN
Planning Officer: Mr Hamish Laird Photo Taken : 20.04.2023 Site Visit : 20.04.2023 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 12.10.2023 __
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. The proposed development is unacceptable because, the principle of development for the conversion from the existing barn and stables to a residential dwelling is not accepted because the site lies within a rural and protected part of the countryside where any development is strictly controlled with the site not being allocated specifically for any development. No personal circumstances have been put forward by the applicant to be considered to warrant a departure from DEFA Planning's policies for the area. In addition, the proposals seek approval for the conversion of part of a stable building that has previously been demolished; and, for the conversion of part of an existing stables which is wholly unsuitable for such a purpose. This would result in more than 75% of the proposed development being a new build structure. As such, the proposal would be contrary to the provisions of Policies STP2, STP10, SP5, General Policy 3a); Housing Policy 4a); Housing Policy 15; and, Environment Policy 1, in the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016). In particular, Environment Policy 1, which seeks to protect the countryside for its own sake and from "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."
R 2. The proposed development is unacceptable because the proposed elements of demolition, in addition to the conversion and extensions would fail to respect and reflect the attractive and characterful nature of the Manx Stone Barn on site which should be protected, and in so doing, would not provide the Barn with a sustainable future use. Overall, the development is considered to be unacceptable in terms of its visual impact on the character of the site and surroundings due to its extent, design, scale and nature. Whilst the proposed
==== PAGE 2 ====
23/00346/B Page 2 of 15
finishes would assist in striking a balance reflective of what Adopted planning policies seek to achieve, on their own these elements do not outweigh the unacceptability of the development as identified. As such, this proposal would have an unacceptable visual impact upon the openness of the countryside reflective of the character of the area contrary to the provisions of General Policy 3a and b); Environment Policy 1; Environment Policy 15; and, Housing Policy 15, in the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016).
R 3. Notwithstanding the above reasons of refusal, in respect of the existing vehicular access serving the site, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that vehicle - vehicle visibility splays can be provided either side of the vehicular access onto the A24 Foxdale Road in accordance with the requirements of the Manual for Manx Roads. Given the lack of such details to demonstrate that safe access and egress can be achieved from the proposed access location, the proposal fails to meet the requirements of Transport Policy 4 in the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016). __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):
Ballacallin Beg Bungalow, as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (July 2018). __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site consists of an existing redundant, old, stone built barn, wooden former stables, and part of the site of wooden former stables which form 3-sides of a square shaped site set amongst a farmyard area containing an existing group of farm buildings a dwelling. Part of the structures on the site of the barn/stables have had elements removed. The site adjoins a group of stables and a manege which are located to the west at Ashdene Livery; whilst to the east is a converted barn containing a farm shop 'Family and the Field' which sells on-line vegetable packages. The site lies in the countryside over 100 metres to the south-east of the A24 Braaid - Foxdale Road; and, to the west of the Garth Road. It is accessible by vehicles from both these roads. A copse of mature trees assists in screening the site from any views from the south. The application buildings are themselves not directly visible form the either road, although the farm holding buildings as a group, are.
1.2 As well as the approved barn conversion permitted with this dwelling in 2018, there is another barn conversion to the west and a modern bungalow nearby.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The full application proposes the "Conversion from existing barn and stables to residential unit". This would involve the creation of a single storey, 4 bedroom dwelling through the conversion, alterations & replacement of sections of the existing group of farm buildings located on part of the existing farmyard. There would be no alterations to the existing vehicular access/entrance to the site.
2.2 The Supporting Statement accompanying the application advises that the proposal is for the: "restoration and conversion of the stone barn and the demolition/ rebuilding of the section where the existing timber stables are to create a new wing to provide a new single storey, 4- bedroomed dwelling with its own enclosed glazed courtyard to take advantage of the thermal
==== PAGE 3 ====
23/00346/B Page 3 of 15
energy created by the light and heat from the sun. This glazed front will also take advantage of the outstanding views to the south and increase light to the property. The installation of energy efficient glass, solar panels and air source heat pump, making the property very energy efficient.
The barn will be finished in a mixture of materials including recycled stone from the existing building, timber cladding, energy efficient glass and cement render. Traditional slate will be used for the roof with traditional roof windows, dark colour grey and aluminium seamless rainwater goods. The existing redundant 1 storey barn will be completely converted with modest extensions and opening alterations to create the dwelling. The dwelling will share the landscaped farmyard and have a private landscaped garden / courtyard and parking for a minimum of 4 vehicles located to south east and south west elevations.
The proposals for the barn/stables will allow for them to be brought back into use as a well- designed modern eco sustainable family home. ... The timber stables on strip foundation and concrete base, have decayed over the span of forty years of use. These would need to be rebuilt using traditional materials of natural stone, timber and render. The choice of these materials will blend well over time with the fabric of existing buildings."
2.3 The application is supported by existing and proposed floor plans and elevations, a Topographical Survey and Topographical Overlay, as well as the above-mentioned Supporting Statement. Subsequently, a Bat Report prepared by the Manx Bat Group dated 5th June was received from the applicants. No structural survey of the barns regarding their condition and suitability/capability for conversion has been provided.
2.4 The converted barn would provide the following living accommodation: Ground floor: entrance porch; hallway and stairs; utility room; snug; kitchen adjoining a new reception room/lounge and 4 No. bedrooms all with en-suite facilities, one being the Master Bedroom with a full-size bathroom and dressing room. The accommodation would be built as one complete unit with no gaps in any outer walls, and would enclose an inner courtyard area. The main materials are proposed to be natural slate for the roof to match the existing barn, external walls to be re-pointed in lime mortar where existing; and, the walls to the extension to be a mixture of Manx stone and timber weather boarding or of a smooth rendered/painted finish.
2.5 The extension would result in a development with a combined floor area of approx. 390.185m2 and would be more than 50% greater than that of the original building which has a Gross External Floor-space area of 149m2. This relates to the actual buildings on site at the time of the Case Officer's site visit on 20/4/23. This would represent would represent an approx. 166% increase in floor area. The submitted existing floorplans show: o The demolished south-west element of the stables measuring approx. 52.8m2 o The south-east side 4 No. stables/stores measuring approx. 49.4m2 o The north-east side Manx Stone/Slate roofed Barn containing 3 No. stores and 1 No. feed store measuring approx. 100.5m2
2.6 This equates to a total floor area of 202.7m2 however, given the fact that the south- west element of the stables has been demolished, the structure of the existing floor area equates to a Gross External Floor-space area of 149m2.
2.7 The proposed floorplans indicate that the total floor arear of the proposed barn conversion would amount to 467.625m2
2.8 Of this, the inner courtyard area is discounted - this equates to a floor arear of 77.44m2
==== PAGE 4 ====
23/00346/B Page 4 of 15
2.9 The new floor area of the development would therefore equate to approx. 390.185m2
2.10 Further information was received by email dated 26th September, 2023, including plans directly from the applicants relating to proposed revisions to the access so that it serve the site from the from the Garth Road to the west, and not the A24 Foxdale Road as originally shown in the application. This was because visibility splays on to the Garth Road from the existing access could not be achieved to meet the requirements of DoI Highways.
2.11 The site edged red was proposed to be changed to show this different access onto the public highway, whereas, as submitted, the access within the red line is shown onto Foxdale Road to the east of the site. The plans also proposed the use of a Field Shelter to the west in a separate field to be used as a cycle store (within the revised site edged red); and, the use of an existing small stables building in a separate field sited to the south west of the barn conversion, to be used as an isolation stable for horses. This is because the existing isolation stable is located within 5.0 metres of the barn conversion site which is too close to them for it to be retained as an isolation unit.
2.12 Officers considered that whilst these proposed alterations may well be acceptable to DoI Highways, they would not be acceptable as an amendment to this application. This is because: i) The amendments proposed a change to the site edged red which had not previously been considered; ii) They included the use of a field shelter within the revised site edged red which did not form part of the original application; In addition, the relocation of the isolation stables to the adjoining field cannot form part of the current planning application because: a) It has not been considered as part of these proposals; and, b) It is not located within either the original site edged red, or the site edged red now proposed.
2.13 The options open to the applicant are to: a) Proceed to determination as submitted with the consideration of the Bat Report received 12/6/23 being taken into account; or, b) Withdraw and re-submit. This would involve a new fee as the site edged red would have completely changed and would need to include the siting of the isolation stable in its new location.
2.14 DEFA Planning has proceeded to consider the application as originally submitted with the addition of the Bat Survey received from the Manx Bat Group because this relates to the barn proposed to be converted to a dwelling.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the East and on the former Town and Country Planning (Development Scheme) Order 1982 as not for a particular purpose / white land or land not zoned for development. The site does not lie within an area of High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance. As such, there is a presumption against development as set out in Environment Policy 1 and General Policy 3 which combine to promote sustainable development and the protection of the countryside for its own sake. The site is not within a Conservation Area.
3.2 It is noted the building and its footprint is not identified as being at flood risk.
3.3 The site is not within a Registered Tree Area.
3.4 The following policies from the 2016 Strategic Plan are considered pertinent in the assessment of this application:
==== PAGE 5 ====
23/00346/B Page 5 of 15
Strategic Policy 2 Priority for new development to identified towns and villages 4(b) Protection of built heritage and landscape conservation 5 Design and visual impact 10 Sustainable transport
Spatial Policy 4 Remaining villages 5 Building in defined settlements or GP3
General Policy 2 General Development Considerations 3 Exceptions to development in the countryside
Environment Policy 1 Protection of the countryside 3 Protection of trees and woodland 4 Wildlife and Nature Conservation 7 Protection of existing watercourses
Housing Policy 4b New Housing in the Countryside 11 Conversion of rural buildings to dwellings 15 Extension or alteration to traditional styled properties in the countryside
Transport Policy 4 Highway safety 7 Parking provisions
3.5 Paragraph 8.10 - Conversion of Rural Buildings to Dwellings
3.6 Paragraph 8.11.1 - Replacement Dwellings in the Countryside
3.7 Planning Circular 3/91 - Guide to the residential development in the countryside.
3.8 Residential Design Guide (2021) This document provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential properties and sustainable methods of construction.
3.9 Of the above Policies, Housing Policy 11: "Conversion of existing rural buildings into dwellings may be permitted, but only where: (a) redundancy for the original use can be established; (b) the building is substantially intact and structurally capable of renovation; (c) the building is of architectural, historic, or social interest; (d) the building is large enough to form a satisfactory dwelling, either as it stands or with modest, subordinate extension which does not affect adversely the character or interest of the building; (e) residential use would not be incompatible with adjoining established uses or, where appropriate, land-use zonings on the area plan; and (f) the building is or can be provided with satisfactory services without unreasonable public expenditure. Such conversion must: (a) where practicable and desirable, re-establish the original appearance of the building; and (b) use the same materials as those in the existing building.
==== PAGE 6 ====
23/00346/B Page 6 of 15
Permission will not be given for the rebuilding of ruins or the erection of replacement buildings of similar, or even identical, form. Further extension of converted rural buildings will not usually be permitted, since this would lead to loss or reduction of the original interest and character."
3.10 There is also a policy which guides the extension of rural dwellings of a traditional character: Housing Policy 15: "The extension or alteration of existing traditionally styled properties in the countryside will normally only be approved where these respect the proportion, form and appearance of the existing property. Only exceptionally will permission be granted for extensions which measure more than 50% of the existing building in terms of floor space (measured externally)."
3.11 There are no policies which promote or support the rebuilding of existing non-residential buildings in the countryside.
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The site, and the adjacent land and buildings have been the subject of a number of applications for equestrian and agricultural structures, none of which is relevant to the current proposal. The building to the rear of the structures which are the subject of the current application, was approved for conversion to living accommodation under IDO 39461 in 1975 whilst the works were not strictly carried out in accordance with that approval.
4.2 85/00098/B - Erection of block of 6 No. loose boxes, Ballacallin Beg, Part of Field No. 1683, Marown - Approved - 01.01.1994
4.3 18/00718/B - In 2018 planning application 18/00718/B - Alterations and extensions to create two dwellings from existing house and barns was approved on 16.11.2018. This permitted the creation of two dwellings, which in a part involved a conversion and part rebuild of the existing structure. A subsequent proposal for minor material amendments to the northernmost of those dwellings was submitted and approved - see below.
4.4 21/00386/B - Amendments to residential property (Dwelling One) of approved PA 18/00718/B, Alterations and extensions to create two dwellings from existing house and barns (retrospective). Approved - 19/12/22.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS (in brief - full reps can be read online) 5.1 Marown Parish Commissioners: (20/4/23): "The Commissioners are concerned that the proposal will result in over-development of the site."
5.2 Highway Services (21/4/23): Highways Comments:
"Yesterday, I had a discussion with Mr Ian Tuck (the applicant) regarding the highways comments on PA 23/00346/B. We have arranged a site visit for week commencing 8th May to address some of these issues in person. Mr Tuck wished for this correspondence to be made known to Planning and the Planning Officer, and if possible uploaded to the planning portal page so that representatives and neighbours viewing the application can see that efforts are being made to progress this application."
Highways Comments (6/4/23):
"The site is dependent upon motorised travel. Bicycle parking is necessary to enhance connectivity by non-car modes. The existing vehicular access to the site from the public highway of Foxdale Road is approximately 2.5m wide and only wide enough for single vehicle usage. It would remain unchanged for the proposal and does not meet the Manual for Manx Roads requirements for a private street given that the lane is unsuitable for road adoption. A
==== PAGE 7 ====
23/00346/B Page 7 of 15
private street from a district road, such as Foxdale Road, requires a 5m approach for a distance of at least 6m from the junction to accommodate two-way traffic and dual pedestrian and vehicle use. A revision is necessary since this proposal increases its usage further. Additionally, concerns about the form and width have been raised previously by Highway Services under 18/00718/B with an extra one dwelling considered acceptable under that proposal only. No visibility splays are indicated at the access junction and these are necessary too. A Stage 1 Road Safety Audit would be required to support the junction modification.
Should planning permission be granted with a revised access junction, the works will require a separate permission from Highways under a s109(A) Highway Agreement after grant of any planning consent. On construction of the vehicular access, the existing road drainage must either be retained or an effective alternative scheme provided at the Applicant's / Developer's expense on a satisfactory arrangement being drawn up and agreed with the Highway Services' Drainage team. Other highway licences and / or temporary traffic management or road closures may be necessary on construction. Works can only be undertaken by a contractor accredited to work on public roads to a Highway Services specification and its satisfaction.
Whilst the lane has good forward visibility a passing place should be provided midway along it to provide greater convenience for users. At the site there is space for parking and turning as well as bin storage. Details of collection arrangement should be confirmed given that the site is more than 25m from the public road. Adequate fire prevention methods should be in place too. The lane is less than the recommended width for fire appliances.
Four car parking spaces are indicated exceeding the IOM Strategic Plan minimum car parking standards of two spaces. This would allow for visitor parking. An electric vehicle charging point should be considered.
Enclosed and secure cycle parking storage is necessary to accommodate one space per bedroom. As proposed, there are issues for road safety and network functionality as well as convenience of users of the lane given that the access junction is substandard and lane too narrow to serve further development contrary to IOM SP General Policy 2 (h) and (i). Further details are necessary to comply with MfMS and satisfy highway and transport requirements:
i. Access junction, including visibility splays. ii. Stage 1 Road Safety Audit iii. Passing place iv. Storage for bicycle parking.
Recommendation: "Additions and revisions" are required.
5.3 Environmental Protection Officer (6/4/23)
"With regard to PA 23/00346/B please can the applicant or agent confirm the discharge route for the septic tank effluent.
If the discharge is connected to a soak-away; percolation tests will need to be carried out in accordance with Building Regulations.
If the effluent is to be discharged into a watercourse or drainage ditch a discharge license will be required. Further information can be found at; https://www.gov.im/about- thegovernment/departments/environment-food-and- agriculture/environmentdirectorate/environmental-protection-unit/river-water- quality/discharge-licenses/
If you require a discharge license please contact the Environmental Protection Unit on 01624 685885 or email [email protected] to discuss the proposal further."
==== PAGE 8 ====
23/00346/B Page 8 of 15
5.4 Ecosystem Policy Team (22/3/23):
"The Ecosystem Policy Team would like to highlight the potential for legally protected roosting bats and nesting birds in the buildings to be converted and the potential for bats and their roost spaces, and birds and their nesting spaces, both of which are protected under the Wildlife Act 1990, to be destroyed by the works.
Unfortunately we are not sure about the age and condition of the buildings, since there are no accompanying photos with the application, and no specific reference to the age. However, the Design and Access Statement leads us to believe that some of the buildings are more modern or already converted, and some are old and as of yet unconverted.
The Design and Access Statement refers to house and barn buildings in a mix of stone and render wall under slate roof finishes, including a farmhouse and 2 storey barn, conversion of the old stone barn/stables, and buildings that are of 'historic nature'. The UK Bat Conservation Trust (BCT) bat survey guidelines (3rd edition) recommend that bat surveys are undertaken prior to the modification or conversion of all pre-1914 buildings with slate roofs regardless of location and all agricultural buildings of traditional brick or stone construction.
Therefore, in order to comply with Environment Policy 4 and 5 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan and the Wildlife Act 1990, the Ecosystem Policy Team request that a preliminary assessment for roosting bats is undertaken on the building by a suitably qualified ecological consultant. If the preliminary assessment identifies the property as suitable, or if evidence of bats is found, then further surveys will be required. The assessment should also take into account nesting birds.
A report detailing the findings of the preliminary assessment and any additional surveys, alongside appropriate avoidance and mitigation measures, to ensure that bats and birds are protected during and after development, should be submitted to Planning prior to determination of the application.
Preliminary assessments for bats can be undertaken at any time throughout the year. However, if emergence/re-entry surveys to confirm roost presence are required then there are seasonal requirements (they need to be undertaken between May - August).
Bat surveys are required to identify the species of bat utilising the property, their abundance and whether they are breeding and this will determine the mitigation required.
Bat surveys should be undertaken in accordance with the Bat Conservation Trusts Bat Surveys for Professional Ecologists - Good Practice Guidelines (3rd Edition 2016).
Survey reports should be submitted prior to determination, in line with best practise, which is referred to in Section 9.2.4 of the British Standard Biodiversity - Code of Best Practise for Planning and Development (BS 42020:2013). Which states:
The presence or absence of protected species, and the extent to which they could be affected by the proposed development, should be established before planning permission is granted; otherwise all material considerations might not have been considered in making the decision. The use of planning conditions to secure ecological surveys after planning permission has been granted should therefore only be applied in exceptional circumstances, such as where original survey work will need to be repeated because the survey data might be out of date before commencement of development, etc.
Bats are listed on Schedule 5 of the Wildlife Act 1990; they are protected by law and it is an offence to:
==== PAGE 9 ====
23/00346/B Page 9 of 15
intentionally or recklessly kill, injure or take a bat intentionally or recklessly damage or destroy, or obstruct access to, any structure or place which bats use for shelter or protection intentionally or recklessly disturbs any bat while it is occupying a structure or place which it uses for that purpose.
The maximum penalty that can be imposed is a fine up to 10,000 pounds.
All birds, their nests, eggs and young are protected and it is an offence to:
intentionally or recklessly kill, injure or take any wild bird; intentionally or recklessly take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird whilst it is in use or being built; intentionally or recklessly take or destroy the egg of any wild bird intentionally or recklessly disturb any wild bird listed on Schedule 1 while it is nest building, or at a nest containing eggs or young, or disturb the dependent young of such a bird.
The maximum penalty that can be imposed - in respect of a single bird, nest or egg - is a fine up to £10,000.
The bird nesting season is usually between late February and late August or late September in the case of swallows or house martins. Additionally, pigeons have been known to nest year- round should conditions be suitable.
Can it be confirmed with the applicant whether the plans include the creation of new areas of sod bank to either side of the new vehicular access road? We request that any new planting, including that done on the new bank, is undertaken with Manx native species. We also request a condition that secures native tree planting in the event that the new access will require the removal of established trees."
5.5 Ecosystem Policy Team (30/6/23) - commented:
The Ecosystem Policy Team can confirm that the Manx Bat Group's Bat Report for Ballacallin Beg dated June 2023, is all in order and that a suitable level of assessment has been undertaken.
The Manx Bat Group concluded that the barn and stables were not being used by roosting bats and therefore no avoidance and mitigation measures are required. We would however, encourage the applicant to consider erecting bat bricks/boxes on the new building or on surrounding trees as an enhancement for wildlife, in line with the recommendations contained in the Manx Bat Group's report.
We also advise the applicant that they should remain vigilant to look out for bats throughout the works, and should bats or evidence of bats (such as bat droppings and accumulations of moth wings) be found then the works must stop and advice be sought from the DEFA Ecosystem Policy Team, or from the Manx Bat Group.
5.6 Manx Utilities Authority - Electricity (Jane Hennedy) - No comments had been received at the Report Drafting stage.
5.7 No comments comprising any third party or neighbour representations had been received by the Report Drafting Stage.
5.8 Ballacallin Beg Cottage (11/04/23; 13/04/23; 02/05/23) raised concerns over traffic implications using a small lane, size of the building in relation to the stone stables, impact on noise, privacy, services, water electricity and drainage to their property; septic tank locations
==== PAGE 10 ====
23/00346/B Page 10 of 15
so close to their property. Commented further - having met the applicant - to confirm the understanding of the application in terms of the septic tank, services, utilities, access and the fencing proposals.
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are; (i) Principle
(STP2, STP10 and SP4 and SP5)
(ii) Exceptional circumstances (SP5, GP3b, HP4b, HP11,) (iii) Visual Impact
(GP2 b, c; EP1, EP15) (iv) Neighbouring amenities (GP2g) (v) Highway Safety
(GP2 h & i; TP 4 & 7)
(vi) Trees and Ecology
(STP4b, EP3, GP2d) (vii) Drainage / flooding (GP2l, Ep7) (viii) Other
(i) Principle 6.2 The starting point here is the land designation, it is clear from the Area Plan for the East that the application site is within a rural and protected part of the countryside where any development is strictly controlled with the site not being allocated specifically for any development.
6.3 The site sits outside of the 'main settlement boundary' serving the nearest settlements which are: Newtown located to the south; Glen Vine to the north; and, Foxdale to the west, and as noted in Policies SP4 and SP5 is very much part of the open countryside as previously identified and development would be contrary to those policies in principle. The existing structure has not been abandoned, but has not been fully utilised for many years, and shows signs of decay. However, the Manx stone elements of the barns housed under a natural slate roof are in reasonable condition. The timber stables attached to the Manx Stone element of the barns are of more rudimentary in their construction being of timber weatherboard walls under a profiled sheeting roof, and elements of the stables have since the submission of the application, been demolished so that only the stables on the south-east side of the existing plans drawing remain. It is also noted that no structural survey of the main stone barns has been provided by the applicant.
6.4 The Manx Stone Barn, nevertheless, is a reflection of the agricultural heritage and social change across the Island, and on its own is of sufficient historic interest to warrant its retention which would require sensitive development in order to convert it to a habitable dwelling, whilst in visual terms, continuing to positively contribute to the Islands built heritage. However, whilst considered to be of historic interest sufficient to warrant its retention, it is not judged to be of sufficient special historic or architectural interest to add the building to the Registered Buildings List.
6.5 The proposals indicate that more than 50% of the development would be new-build structures, and the remaining element of the stables, (which have not been demolished), which are of more rudimentary construction being of timber weatherboard walls under a profiled sheeting roof, are considered to be incapable of conversion to a dwelling whereby they could be incorporated into the fabric of the new dwelling and meet the requirements of the Building Regulations. As submitted, 75% of the development would be new build, and the remaining 25% (the stone barn) would be extended out on the inner courtyard side where any historic elements of the existing the barn would be lost because one of its side walls would have to be removed and rebuilt. This would denude its historic value to an unacceptable degree.
6.6 The principle of the conversion of the Barn to a residential dwelling is considered to be unacceptable. As indicated above, no structural survey of the Manx stone barn on site has been submitted; one of its walls would be removed to facilitate the development; a wing of the stables/stores proposed to be converted has been demolished, and that which remains is
==== PAGE 11 ====
23/00346/B Page 11 of 15
incapable of conversion to meet the requirements of the Building Regulations without having to be rebuilt. The principle of development is therefore, not accepted. As such, the proposal would in principle be contrary to the provisions of Policies STP2, STP10, SP5, GP3 b, c and f), and HP11 (b, d, e, and (a-b)) in the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
(ii) Exceptional circumstances 6.7 In terms of planning policy there is a long established presumption against new residential development in the countryside. General Policy 3(b), and Housing Policy 4(b) both allow for exceptions for the conversion of redundant rural buildings and the sequential test through HP11 subject to various caveats, including that the building is redundant and of architectural, historic or social value. In this instance, it would be prevalent to focus on HP11 for the conversion of the building to residential and the proposed extension (visual impact) against HP15 given the traditional appearance.
6.8 When considering HP11 and the conversion of the building, which precludes the rebuilding of ruins or the erection of a replacement dwelling of similar or even identical form, in this case, whilst there is an existing structure on site, it has not been assessed by a competent structural engineer, and no independent opinion that it can be successfully converted to form a dwelling, has been provided.
6.9 When cross referencing the proposal with HP11 and the sequential test the following is summarised, as noted below: (a) It is clear from the survey and the site visit that the building is redundant from its original use in that it cannot be inhabited and is suffering from a degree of decay. - Pass.
(b) The Manx Stone barn element of the buildings appears to be intact with 4 Manx stone walls standing and clear fenestration detailing around this particular element of the buildings showing existing openings. However, there is no structural survey to confirm whether the existing fabric of the building can be sympathetically restored, or clearly identified how this can be achieved. One of the stone barns walls would be removed to facilitate the development; a wing of the stables/stores proposed to be converted has been demolished, and that which remains is incapable of conversion to meet the requirements of the Building Regulations without having to be rebuilt. - Fail.
(c) The former Barn features a strong degree of architectural, historic and social interest. Its former use as a barn for agricultural purposes, its layout and design with the traditional proportions and limited fenestrations reflect its former use and the utilisation of local stone are all aspects that are worthy of preserving. However, this accounts for only 25% of the buildings on site proposed to be converted/utilised to serve the development. A further 25% of the building is incapable of conversion; and the remaining 25% of what the applicant advised was in situ at the time of submission is missing having previously been demolished. 25 % of the proposed development would be entirely a new built structure. - Fail.
(d) The submitted drawings show that the design of the extensions would not be subordinate in scale, size, and form to that of the existing Manx Stone barn element. A 75% degree of new build elements is considered to be unacceptable as it would adversely affect the character and interest of the existing Barn to an unacceptable degree. It is further noted that the Marown Parish Commissioners (local authority) have objected to the proposed extensions. - Fail.
(e) It is considered that the nature, scale and extent of the proposed extensions is unacceptable for the above stated reasons. However, on their own the use of natural slate roofing and mixture of Manx stone, timber, and painted render wall cladding with composite windows and frames in timber with colour coated metal cladding, with the existing stonework and stone walls to be repointed with lime mortar would be acceptable, and could be conditioned. - Partially Pass.
==== PAGE 12 ====
23/00346/B Page 12 of 15
(f) The application form notes that connections to Electricity, water and telecoms are required. Private drainage via a Klargester Biodisc with run-off in adjacent field owned by the applicant, is proposed. It is noted that, Telecoms can now be derived without the need for a landline connection; and, solar PV panels (not part of this proposal) could be used to supplement the requirement for an electricity grid connection, especially if connected to a battery. However, a minas grid connection would be required. Given the proximity of existing buildings in the immediate vicinity, a grid connection could be possible. This element of the proposals could meet the requirements of Policy HP11 (f) as the applicant to has demonstrated that connections to these services could be made. Pass.
6.10 Such conversion must: (a) Not dominate the original Barn, and it is considered that whilst the outer appearance of the Manx Stone Barn element only may maintain the original appearance of the building, the inner courtyard facing part would not. The proposed alterations and extension would not be sufficiently subservient and the difference in character to lead to an unacceptable loss of the original interest and character of the Barn. The new build extensions would represent a dominant addition to it. As such, the proposed works are viewed as unsympathetic and viewed as inappropriate and unacceptable in this rural setting. - Fail.
(b) The proposal does not seek to utilise the same materials as those on the existing building and proposes in part a contemporary palette of materials and finishes for 75% of the development. - Fail
6.11 Officers consider that these changes are unacceptable. It is noted, however, that the future alteration and design of the existing Manx stone Barn and any future extensions can be further controlled by the application of conditions which suspend the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 in respect of extensions and alterations to the Barn; the erection of any garages, sheds, greenhouses, installation of a swimming pool, the erection of walling, fencing or other means of enclosure to protect the character and setting of the converted Barn.
6.12 On the whole it is considered the proposed interference with the fabric of the building to convert to a dwelling and the proposed extension works would lead to an unacceptable loss of the original character and, overall the development proposed, fails to satisfy the main tests under HP11 (d,e,f (a-b)) for conversion of an existing rural building into a dwelling.
6.13 The design proposed here is judged inappropriate. The Manx Stone Barn on site has a clear character. The remaining stables buildings, which are of rudimentary construction, do not. What is proposed will unacceptably alter the character of the Manx Stone Barn and character of the area. The new extensions, by reason of their size, bulk scale and extent are unacceptable, and the proposed removal/rebuilding of the inner wall of the stone barn facing the proposed courtyard would adversely affect the historic character of the Barn to an unacceptable degree. As such, it is concluded that the conversion would fail to meet the requirements of Housing Policy 11 with regards a design approach for such conversions.
6.14 This element of the proposals fails to accord with the provisions of Policies GP2 b and c), GP3 (f), and HP11 (b, d, e, and (a-b)) in the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
(iii) Visual Impact
6.15 In terms of the proposed extension to the Barn, Policy HP15 applies where extensions to traditional rural properties are generally only permissible when these respect the proportion and form of the existing property and only exceptionally will an increase over 50% being acceptable. However, this is not absolute and more of a guide figure but the key is that it should appear subordinate to the original building (in terms of floor space of no more than 50% of the original) with minimal visual impact to the wider countryside.
==== PAGE 13 ====
23/00346/B Page 13 of 15
6.16 The extension would result in a development with a combined floor area of approx. 390.185m2 and would be greater than 50% greater than that of the original building which has a Gross External Floor-space area of 149m2. This relates to the actual buildings on site at the time of the Case Officer's site visit on 20/4/23. This would represent would represent a 166% increase in floor area. The submitted existing floorplans show: o The demolished south-west element of the stables measuring approx. 52.8m2 o The south-east side 4 No. stables/stores measuring approx. 49.4m2 o The north-east side Manx Stone/Slate roofed Barn containing 3 No. stores and 1 No. feed store measuring approx. 100.5m2 This equates to a total floor area of 202.7m2 however, given the fact that the south-west element of the stables has been demolished, the structure of the existing floor area equates to a Gross External Floor-space area of 149m2.
6.17 The proposed floorplans indicate that the total floor arear of the proposed barn conversion would amount to 467.625m2 Of this, the inner courtyard area is discounted - this equates to a floor arear of 77.44m2. The new floor area of the development would therefore equate to approx. 390.185m2. With the additions as described above, the increased floor area would amount to approx. 166% of the original built structures floor area. This limit is outlined in Policies H13, H14 and H15. Housing Policy 11 does not quantify what "modest" or "subordinate" are although Housing Policy 13 which refers to the renovation of existing residential properties, also refers to "subordinate" and clarifies that this is less than 50% of the original floor space. Housing Policy 15 also refers to 50% increases in floor area, considering this not to be "substantially different to the existing". It is clear that the proposed development would exceed the 50% margin. It is relevant that the extent and scale of new build development including the alterations to the Manx Stone Barn would effectively result in the development being a demolition and rebuilding of the existing structures including a 75% proportion of new build development. Whilst the extension's roof ridge and eaves would be no higher than the roof ridge and eaves of the main building, the scale and extent of the new build elements of the development would not be subservient to the retained Manx Stone Barn which would appear 'lost' in the overall development.
6.18 The conversion and extensions now proposed, would fail to respect and reflect the attractive and characterful nature of the Manx Stone building that should be protected, and in so doing, would not provide the Barn with a sustainable future use. Overall, the development is considered to be unacceptable in terms of its visual impact on the character of the site and surroundings due to its extent, design, scale and nature. Whilst the proposed finishes would assist in striking a balance reflective of what Adopted planning policies seek to achieve, on their own these elements do not outweigh the unacceptability of the development as identified. As such, it is considered that this proposal would have an unacceptable visual impact upon the openness of the countryside reflective of the character of the area which Policies EP1 and HP15 seek to protect.
(iv) Neighbours Amenities 6.19 The site lies in a relatively remote location, although there are neighbouring dwellings located close-by as part of the overall farm and equestrian complex. The comments from Ballacallin Beg Bungalow (para 5.8) are noted and would seem most of their concerns have been allayed following a meeting with the applicant. Nevertheless, the residential amenities enjoyed by occupants of the existing dwellings would be largely unaffected by any movements to and from the converted Barn, and there would be no issues arising in respect of overlooking, loss of privacy, or the new barn conversion and extension being overbearing. In this regard, the proposed development accords with Section (g) of General Policy 2; and, the relevant advice contained in the Residential Design Guide 2021.
(v) Highway Safety 6.20 The application site is served by an existing dedicated access track from Foxdale Road. Highways have commented on the application and do not accept the existing access as being
==== PAGE 14 ====
23/00346/B Page 14 of 15
suitable to serve the site. The existing vehicular access to the site from the public highway of Foxdale Road is approximately 2.5m wide and only wide enough for single vehicle usage. It would remain unchanged for the proposal and does not meet the Manual for Manx Roads requirements for a private street given that the lane is unsuitable for road adoption. A private street from a district road, such as Foxdale Road, requires a 5m approach for a distance of at least 6m from the junction to accommodate two-way traffic and dual pedestrian and vehicle use.
6.21 The applicant has engaged with DoI Highways directly and has sought to overcome these concerns by revising the proposed access arrangements to use the alternative site access onto Garth Road. In so doing the applicant has sought to amend the site edged red to show this different access onto the public highway: use of a Field Shelter to the west in a separate field as a cycle store; and, use an existing small stables building in a separate field sited to the south west of the barns as an isolation stable for horses because the existing isolation stable located within 5.0 metres of the barns to be converted is sited too close to them for it to be retained as an isolation unit.
6.22 Officers have not considered these changes proposed by the applicants' because whilst these proposed alterations may well be acceptable to DoI Highways, they would not be acceptable as an amendment to this application ostensibly because they introduce new elements into the application and amend the site edged red. The reasons for their not being considered are outlined in paragraph 2.7 of this Report, and the application is considered for determination without them.
6.23 The application is considered to be unacceptable on highway safety grounds because it would result in an unsafe access onto the A24 Foxdale Road due to inadequate visibility splays being able to be achieved contrary to the advice in the Manual for Manx Roads relating to the requirements for a private street given that the lane is unsuitable for road adoption. This is contrary to the provisions of Transport Policy 4 in the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
(vi) Ecology 6.24 The Ecosystem Policy Team's (EPT) initial comments noted that no Protected Species survey had been submitted and given the age and nature of the Manx Stone Barn, the presence of Bats could not be confirmed. The application subsequently submitted a Bat Report undertaken by the Manx Bat Group and dated June 2023. It was noted that the Manx Bat Group concluded that the barn and stables were not being used by roosting bats and therefore no avoidance and mitigation measures were required. The Report sought to encourage the applicant to consider erecting bat bricks/boxes on the new building or on surrounding trees as an enhancement for wildlife, and to remain vigilant to possibility of Bats being present during construction works.
6.25 Officers consider that the proposed biodiversity mitigation measures in terms of the impacts of the development on Bats and nesting birds are acceptable, and in the event of an approval being granted, should be conditioned. This would accord with the requirements of the requirements of the Wildlife Act 1990 and EP's 4 and 5 of the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
(vii) Landscaping 6.26 No specific landscaping measures are proposed as part of the application. It is considered that such measures are not required as the site is largely contained amongst and between other farm buildings and associated dwelling and structure on and around the site.
(viii) Drainage / Flooding 6.27 The proposals represent a re-use of previously developed land. The site does not lie within a recognised Floor Risk Area, and as the development would result in less built form and hard surfacing being provided than is presently the case, it is considered that there would be
==== PAGE 15 ====
23/00346/B Page 15 of 15
not additional flood risk to land and properties lying downstream form the site as a result of these proposals. As such, it is considered that there would be no unreasonable risk of flooding or flood risk resulting from the proposed development that could be considered contrary with the provisions of Policies GP2l, Ep7 of the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. In this regard, the proposals are considered to be acceptable.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 The proposed development for the change of use of the stone built agricultural barn to a residential dwelling with conversion of and extensions to the existing (and partly demolished) stable are all unacceptable and would fail to accord with the abovementioned Policies of the Strategic Plan as outlined in this Report. Nor do the proposals meet the tests for exceptional development within the countryside as outlined in Housing Policy 11. It is, therefore, concluded that the planning application should be refused.
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 : Refused Date: 23.10.2023
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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal