Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
19/01241/B Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 19/01241/B Applicant : Mr Timothy Knowles Proposal : Erection of cabin with associated parking and access (retrospective) Site Address : Cloughwilly Cottage Tosaby Road St Marks Ballasalla Isle Of Man IM9 3AN
Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken : 28.11.2019 Site Visit : 28.11.2019 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 02.01.2020 __
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. The cabin represents the erection of a new dwelling in the countryside. Such development is contrary to the presumption against development in the countryside as set out in General Policy 3, Environment Policy 1, the Strategic Aim, Strategic Policies 1 and 2, Spatial Policy 5 and Housing Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
R 2. The building in terms of its size, layout, and location is not sympathetic to the landscape of which it forms a part being in an area not designated for development, in addition to being within a much wider area of ecological interest. Accordingly, it is considered that the building is contrary to the provisions of Environmental Policy 1 and Environmental Policy 3 of the Strategic Plan. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
THE SITE 1.1 The site lies within the curtilage of Cloughwilly Cottage which lies between the B36 to the east and Stoney Mountain Plantation to the west. The site falls into two parts - an open agricultural field to the south which slopes upward from east to west and with a marshy area around 30m from the road and overhead electricity lines running approximately parallel to the road around 20m therefrom. The northern half of the field is planted with a variety of trees
==== PAGE 2 ====
19/01241/B Page 2 of 5
and shrubs and is part of the residential curtilage of an existing modest cottage - Clough Willy Cottage which lies just to the west of the centre of the residential area.
1.2 To the north of the site is another residential property - Clough Willy, a substantial dwelling which sits in its own landscaped grounds complete with tennis court and outbuildings.
1.3 The existing dwelling on the application site is a modest cottage which has been altered over time but remains a low profile property which sits in amongst established trees and shrubs.
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the erection of cabin with associated parking and access. The structure is already in situ. The cabin accommodates three bedrooms, a lounge and a timber framed car port for use by the family. This has a footprint of 13m by 9.2m, an eaves level of 1.9m and a ridge at 3.3m with a flue extending approximately 600mm above this.
2.2 This insulated cabin is placed over 150mm thick concrete slab and all the services come from the main cottage supply. The structure is finished in horizontal timber boarding, while its roof is covered in grey felt tiles. Four parking spaces are provided for the site; two in front (south) and two to the east.
2.3 The applicant explains that the cabin has been built as part of the reconstruction of the main cottage (Clough Willey Cottage). The main cottage is under a total refurbishment because of two family members that now have Huntington's Disease and the family want to make the cottage more usable for them. They further stated that when the main cottage has been refurbished, the cabin will be used by the family members when they visit.
2.4 The cabin is positioned such that it will is visible from the road and is completely concealed by the thick vegetation (conifers) which encloses the entire site area.
PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982 as white land, that is Open Space not designated for development. The site also falls within a much wider area of ecological interest.
3.2 As the site is not within an area zoned for development, the following policy of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan is relevant:
3.2.1 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: (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;
3.3 The IOMSP also includes Environment Policies which are relevant: 3.3.1 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."
3.3.2 Environment Policy 3:
==== PAGE 3 ====
19/01241/B Page 3 of 5
Development will not be permitted where it would result in the unacceptable loss of or damage to woodland areas, especially ancient, natural and semi-natural woodlands, which have public amenity or conservation value.
3.3.3 The presumption against development outside of identified settlements is also referred to in the Strategic Aim, Housing Policy 4, Strategic Policies 1 and 2.
3.4 Although the application site is not zoned for development, it will also be vital to consider GP" in the assessment of the application particularly GP2 b, c, d, f, h and j. As well, Strategic Policy 5 and Paragraph 4.3.8 will be material in the assessment of the application.
3.5 Strategic Policy 5: New development, including individual buildings, should be designed so as to make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island. In appropriate cases the Department will require planning applications to be supported by a Design Statement which will be required to take account of the Strategic Aim and Policies.
3.6 Paragraph 4.3.8 of the Strategic Plan echoes these principles prescribed in SP5 by stating that: "The design of new development can make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the Island. Recent development has often been criticised for its similarity to developments across the Island and elsewhere - "anywhere" architecture. At the same time some criticise current practice to retain traditional or vernacular designs. As is often the case the truth lies somewhere between the two extremes. All too often proposals for new developments have not taken into account a proper analysis of their context in terms of siting, layout, scale, materials and other factors. At the same time a slavish following of past design idioms, evolved for earlier lifestyles can produce buildings which do not reflect twenty first century lifestyles including accessibility and energy conservation. While there is often a consensus about what constitutes good and poor design, it is notoriously difficult to define or prescribe."
3.7 The Area Plan for the South Written Statement 2013 has sections that are relevant to the assessment of the application. Paragraph 3.23 (iv) advocates for Sensitive location of new buildings and the use of screen planting.
PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The application site has been the subject of four previous planning applications none of which is considered to be materially relevant in the assessment of the current application.
REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 Representation from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division confirms that they 'do not oppose' in the letter dated 29 November 2019.
5.2 Malew Parish Commissioners although consulted on 19 November 2019, have not commented on this application at the time of drafting this report.
ASSESSMENT 6.1 The key considerations in the assessment of this application are the principle and need for the proposals, the visual impacts of the driveway and the cabin on the wider landscape, and the impacts on the countryside with regard to the loss of trees in particular.
6.2 Assessment of need for the cabin (Principle)
==== PAGE 4 ====
19/01241/B Page 4 of 5
6.2.1 The proposal should be judged against Environment Policy 1 which does protect the countryside for its own sake but with the knowledge that the site has permission for residential use through the existence of a dwelling. This, however, does not bring any presumption in favour of further dwellings. As detailed in the supporting statement for the application, the applicant has stated that the cabin is for temporary use by some residents (with mobility restrictions) who are currently not able to use the existing cottage on site due to the conditions of the property. This was also witnessed on site during the site visits as the existing cottage in its current state and form would require alterations in order to be suitable for wheelchair users. Whilst the proposed development aims to cater for family members who have mobility restrictions; complying with sections of paragraph 4.3.8 in terms of accessibility for occupants, the development does not sit comfortably with GP3 which provides the framework for permitting developments in the countryside. It is considered that the principle of the development is not acceptable as the cabin does not meet any of the criteria set out in the Strategic Plan for such development in the countryside such as GP3, EP1 and EP3, Housing Policy 2, Strategic Policies 1 and 2 and the Strategic Aim. Besides, the cabin involved the removal of mature trees within the site and as such failed to protect the surrounding countryside which is protected for its own sake, thus failing EP1. As well, its design and size does not suggest that it is a short term solution to cater for these members of the household until the cottage is modified to suit their needs. It is therefore noted that there is insufficient justification for the erection of the cabin in its current form within its current setting.
6.3 Visual Impact of the Driveway and Parking Area
6.3.1 Visually, the site is secluded and sits well within the enclosing woodland which further obscures its visibility; as such, it is difficult to spot the dwelling from other dwellings in the vicinity. The same can be said for the existing driveway, which is not apparent from any nearby roads. However, the new parking arrangements and driveway, although obscured from outside view, would significantly impact on the surrounding landscape due to its location and the presence of a substantial number of young and mature trees and overgrowth on the site impacted by the development.
6.4 Visual Impact of the Cabin
6.4.1 Similarly, the cabin sits into the hillside, slightly positioned on a higher elevation than the existing dwelling and the access lane to the dwelling. Its scale, form and positioning on the landscape surrounded by the existing trees and overgrowth makes it an obtrusive addition to the landscape, even though the surrounding vegetation would obscure its visibility from surrounding highways. When considered in the context of its surrounding landscape, the structure considerably altered the appearance of the lush tree scape which the Departments 2018 Aerial Photography clearly depicts. Based on the foregoing, it is regarded that the development as visually unacceptable.
6.5 Impact on the countryside
6.5.1 This is somewhat linked to the previous paragraphs in that any visual impact is by extension an impact on the countryside. It is also important to establish if any real harm would result with respect to ecological and environmental concerns, particularly as some land would have been cleared and excavation would have been undertaken. These issues are assessed with due regard to the Environment Policies 1 and 3 outlined in Section 3.3 of this report.
6.5.2 With regard to impact on trees, it is understood that the development involved the removal of young and mature trees, as well as shrubs and overgrowth. Granting no comments have been received in relation to ecological concerns, the site visits showed significant changes made to the vegetation in order to accommodate the cabin on its current location. Therefore, it is considered that such impacts are significant, both in the short term and in the long term, as the character of the site has been altered considerably.
==== PAGE 5 ====
19/01241/B Page 5 of 5
6.6 Future use of Cabin 6.6.1 With any countryside development and the erection of a new structure, there is a concern that it may be used to facilitate a future severing of the site and a standalone dwelling. The floor area is large enough to allow for multiple occupant tourist use or use as a detached three bedroom dwelling under the Housing (Standards) Regulations 2017. In this case, the design of the cabin, which would enable it to be used as a separate dwelling and its position within a large land area considerably away from the main dwelling, would facilitate the ease of future severance from the main cottage in the future.
6.7 In summary, whilst the development complies with Paragraph 4.3.8 of the Strategic Plan, the proposal elements for the erection of the cabin in terms of scale, design, siting and form of the building are in conflict with the guidelines stipulated in EP1, EP3 and GP3, HP4, SPs 1 and 2 and the Strategic Aim of the Strategic Plan.
RECOMMENDATION 7.1 For these reasons set out in this report, it is considered the proposal would contravene the relevant policies as indicated within the Isle of Man Strategic Plan and therefore it is recommended that the application be refused.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 (Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; (b) 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; (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
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 in Article 6(4) who should 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.
Decision Made : Refused Date: 02.01.2020
Determining officer
Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett
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