Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
16/00557/B
Page 1 of 6
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 16/00557/B Applicant : Mr Mark Newey Proposal : Alterations, and conversion of attached barn to provide additional living accommodation Site Address : Vaaish Mooar Farm Staarvey Road Peel Isle of Man IM5 2AJ
Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken : 06.04.2016 Site Visit : 06.04.2016 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE OWING TO THE NATURE OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED.
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage and associated access lane for a rural dwelling with attached barn known collectively as Vaaish Moar Farm.
1.2 The existing arrangement of the built form is extremely unusual. What was once clearly a traditional Manx countryside dwelling sits to one end, complete with cat slide roof to the rear, while an extensive masonry barn extends parallel from this in a southerly direction: the dwelling has a width of 10m, while the barn extends for a further 24m. The building line is consistent for both dwelling and barn, while the barn itself has only a slightly lower ridgeline. The dwelling is stone- faced but the pointing has almost completely taken over and only the occasional element of stone is visible. Moreover, the positioning of its windows and front porch is slightly off-centre, giving the dwelling itself a curiously lop-sided appearance. It does, however, retain its chimneys.
1.3 The barn, meanwhile, is rendered with varied fenestration: windows and doors are positioned and sized in a disorganised but characterful fashion. It is clear from the drawings and from having spoken with the applicant prior to the application's submission that part of the barn has at some point in the future been converted into, and used as, residential accommodation. However, this does not appear to have had planning approval.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the conversion of the barn to additional residential accommodation - it would add to the existing rooms of the dwelling and would comprise neither independent nor ancillary accommodation to the dwelling itself.
2.2 The variety of window and door openings present within the existing building will be retained under the proposals, in terms of both size and position, and including the retention of the few lintels that exist. In some cases, the existing door opening will be retained but replaced with a panel having the appearance of a door with a window set within it. Elsewhere, within the main dwelling, two existing rooflights are proposed to remain while in the barn extension two existing rooflights are to be replaced in different positions: all are to the rear roof pitch. One new rooflight is proposed to the front roof pitch. The new windows would appear to be casement in style, and would all have timber frames.
==== PAGE 2 ====
16/00557/B
Page 2 of 6
2.3 No changes to the finish of the walling are proposed.
2.4 As originally submitted, various changes to the fenestration were proposed, as was a small porch extension, while the red line of the application site was larger and could potentially have resulted in an increase in the property's residential curtilage. There were also some draughting errors. These matters were discussed with the agent, who submitted amended drawings reflected in the description above. Also prepared was a bat and bird survey following a representation made to that effect by the Senior Biodiversity Officer; the additional information and amended drawings were circulated to the interested parties with a view to receiving additional comments in 14 days.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The wider site has been the subject of two applications for agricultural-related buildings (PAs 89/00353/B and 91/01924/B), which were approved. Since then there have been no other applications submitted on this site.
3.2 Coincidentally, there has also been an application submitted seeking approval for a replacement dwelling under PA 16/00556/B on the land immediately south. On 8th August 2016, the Planning Committee approved PA 16/00556/B. The planning history for the area indicates that there may have been a formal / functional relationship between all these buildings as Vaaish Mooar Farm in the past.
4.0 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 4.1 The site falls within an area zoned as being of High Landscape Value and also as 'white land' not zoned for any particular kind of development.
4.2 Normally, applications seeking approval for the conversion of agricultural (or other rural) buildings to residential use seek their use as an independent dwelling, which requires those applications to be considered against Housing Policy 11 of the Strategic Plan. In this case, the barn is proposed to be converted to additional living accommodation. While it is probably not of sufficient architectural, historic or social interest to warrant conversion into an independent dwelling, the barn does meet most of the other criteria of that policy:
"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.
"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."
4.3 Accordingly, this is something of an unusual situation. There are no policies in the Strategic Plan that apply directly to such a proposal as this, but HP11 is certainly the most applicable. Also considered to be of slight relevance are the provisions of Housing Policies 15 and 16, as these
==== PAGE 3 ====
16/00557/B
Page 3 of 6
provide policy steer with respect to the extension of rural dwellings, while the general guidance as set out in General Policy 2 is also worth bearing in mind. However, it must be borne in mind that HPs 15 and 16 both refer to extensions via the creation of new fabric rather than conversion of existing.
4.4 General Policy 2 states in part: "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:
(b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality."
4.5 In view of the nature of the site and also the comments received from the Senior Biodiversity Officer, Environment Policy 4 also applies:
"Development will not be permitted which would adversely affect:
(a) species and habitats of international importance: (i) protected species of international importance or their habitats; or (ii) proposed or designated Ramsar and Emerald Sites or other internationally important sites.
(b) species and habitats of national importance: (i) protected species of national importance or their habitats; (ii) proposed or designated National Nature Reserves, or Areas of Special Scientific Interest; or (iii) Marine Nature Reserves; or (iv) National Trust Land.
(c) species and habitats of local importance such as Wildlife Sites, local nature reserves, priority habitats or species identified in any Manx Biodiversity Action Plan which do not already benefit from statutory protection, Areas of Special Protection and Bird Sanctuaries and landscape features of importance to wild flora and fauna by reason of their continuous nature or function as a corridor between habitats.
"Some areas to which this policy applies are identified as Areas of Ecological Importance or Interest on extant Local or Area Plans, but others, whose importance was not evident at the time of the adoption of the relevant Local or Area Plan, are not, particularly where that plan has been in place for many years. In these circumstances, the Department will seek site specific advice from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry if development proposals are brought forward."
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services of the Department of Infrastructure stated that the proposal had no highway implications on 27.05.2016.
5.2 The Senior Biodiversity Officer of DEFA recommended a bat and bird survey be undertaken on 07.06.2016: "Although the site is very exposed, the buildings appear to be traditional farm buildings and there is valley woodland only a field away, providing foraging bat habitat"; on 22.07.2016 he commented as follows: "I have looked through the reports and I am content that the wildlife issues be dismissed based on the evidence provided".
==== PAGE 4 ====
16/00557/B
Page 4 of 6
5.3 German Parish Commissioners on 27.07.2016 sought a deferral on a decision of the application until after their next meeting on 3rd August 2016. At the time of writing (10th August) no comments have been received, but the Committee will be verbally updated should comments be lodged.
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 It is clear that there are no concerns with respect to the impact of the proposal on protected species, and so the application clearly complies with EP4. Accordingly, what remains for consideration is the acceptability of the proposed conversion works.
6.2 As indicated above, the most relevant policy is Housing Policy 11. However, it does not directly apply since the proposal does not seek to create a new, independent dwelling from the attached barn. This means that, although HP11 is the most relevant, the application now under consideration does not need to fully comply with its provisions in order to be found acceptable: equally, there are no other policies carrying more weight in the assessment of this application.
6.3 The retention of all the existing openings and lack of any extension (in terms of a originally proposed porch) is welcome. This will retain the existing character of the building, albeit that it is not of particularly attractive in itself. The arrangement of the site as a whole, though, has a clear character as defined by the sheer length of the property overall and this would not be undermined by the works proposed. Whether this is a positive character is not necessarily at hand for this application, though cases in favour and against could be made.
6.4 The use of timber casement windows in the barn extension is absolutely correct, though the use of sliding sash windows in the original dwelling would have been a welcome gesture.
6.5 While some form of timber panelling or other over-cladding, or differentiation of walling in some way, would have been welcome, this is not considered to be fatal to the application and nor would it fetter any such alterations in future.
6.6 It is considered that a proposal to convert the barn into an independent dwelling would present more serious concern given the somewhat unprepossessing appearance of the barn extension. Equally, was the barn not present and a proposal to extend the existing house in a way that would replicate the existing barn was submitted, this would almost certainly present insurmountable concern in the context of Housing Policy 15. However, neither of these comprises the proposal at hand. In conclusion, then, with respect to the conversion works proposed, it is considered that an understandable approach has been taken with respect to the fenestration in particular, and moreover this approach is concluded to comply sufficiently with Housing Policy 11 such as to mean that an objection would be difficult to sustain.
6.7 That being said, it would be appropriate to control the future development of the property. Conditions removing permitted development rights with respect to replacement windows are recommended accordingly. No other such restriction is judged necessary, though consideration was also given to removing these rights with respect to the erection of freestanding structures within the curtilage. In view of the fairly well-hidden nature of the site and area, though, such additional paraphernalia would likely be read against the backdrop of the existing built development here. As such, it is considered (on balance) that such a condition might be considered somewhat over- zealous. The barn itself would likely be considered as an extension and so no further control in this respect is necessary.
6.8 The site is far enough away from the only dwelling that could reasonably be affected by the proposal such as to mean that there will be no impact on the living conditions of either property. That there is an extant approval to replace the existing dwelling and move it yet further south, away from Vaaish Moar Farm, provides even greater security in this conclusion should the development undertaken. It is accordingly considered that part (g) of General Policy 2 is met.
==== PAGE 5 ====
16/00557/B
Page 5 of 6
7.0 RECOMMENDATION 7.1 In view of the favourable findings as set out above, it is recommended that the application be approved subject to the discussed conditions.
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 The Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; and o The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
8.2.1 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.
8.2.2 In this instance, it is considered that the following does not have sufficient interest and therefore should not be awarded the status of an Interested Person:
o The Senior Biodiversity Officer, who sits within the same Department as the Planning & Building Control Directorate.
9.0 POST-PLANNING COMMITTEE UPDATE 9.1 The Committee suggested that Condition 3 be worded differently such that it was clearer that the entirety of the building was to be used as a single dwellinghouse. This was understood and accepted by Officers.
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 10.08.2016
Conditions and Notes for Approval: C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
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. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no window or door shall be replaced or altered at any time without the prior written approval of the Department.
Reason: To control future development on the site.
==== PAGE 6 ====
16/00557/B
Page 6 of 6
C 3. The barn conversion hereby approved shall form part of the dwellinghouse known as Vaaish Mooar Farm as shown on the approved plans: the barn conversion hereby approved shall at no time be used as a dwellinghouse independent of Vaaish Mooar Farm.
Reason: To control future use of the site and prevent undesirable fragmentation of the planning unit.
The development hereby approved relates to Drawings 16/12/01 Rev A and 16/12/02 Rev A, both date-stamped as having been received 19th July 2016.
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.
Decision Made : Permitted
Committee Meeting Date: 22.08.2016
Signed : E Riley Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See Paragraph 9.1 above
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