Loading document...
Appeal No: AP11/0046
Application Ref: 10/01800/A
Report into an appeal by Mr & Mrs J MacQuillan made under the written representations procedure against the refusal of planning approval in principle for the replacement of an agricultural shed with a detached dwelling at Robin Hill Farm, Cronk-y-Dhooney, Ballakilpheric, Colby.
The relevant facts and material arguments are summarised as follows:
The Appeal Site and Proposed Development
Planning History
The Case for the Planning Committee
The site is not designated for development and the draft Southern Area Plan suggests that, whereas additional development could be accommodated without significant adverse impact, the area in general is unsustainable and further dwellings are not proposed.
The existing building is unattractive and provision is made within the Strategic Plan for redevelopment of previously developed sites (General Policy 3(c)). Strategic Policy 1(a) encourages the optimum use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and under-used land and buildings. The definition of previously developed land, however, excludes land that is or was occupied by agricultural buildings. Also, there is no presumption that the land that is previously developed is necessarily suitable for housing development. As this is or was an agricultural building the term previously developed land cannot be applied to it. There is some suggestion that a previous owner may have used the barn for car repair but there is no evidence to indicate that the use was authorised.
Whilst the appearance of the land would undoubtedly be improved by the removal of the existing building, this would be contrary to the provisions of both the Strategic Plan and the emerging Southern Area Plan, which describes the location as not sustainable and where further dwellings would not be encouraged. It has been suggested that the redundancy of the building distinguishes it from others in the vicinity but also it may be that the building could be capable of further use for agriculture. Also, there are other buildings in the vicinity, Cronk-y-Dhooney Farm and Ballakilpheric Farm, which could be considered similarly unattractive and whose replacement by a
Application Ref: 10/01800/A
New dwelling would be difficult to resist if the current application were permitted.
Mr and Mrs Pollard reside at Kensa. Although they do not have any strong objections, they are concerned that an approval could set a precedent for similar developments in the area.
Mrs Sewell, who lives at Sunnyside, sympathises with the applicants but agrees with the decision to refuse permission. The barn was used as an agricultural building until 2006 and the proposal could set a precedent.
The shed was built around 1971 and used originally for hay and straw storage. More recently it was used for small timber shed manufacturing and vehicle storage and repair before becoming redundant. It is proposed to replace the shed with a detached dwelling in order to make better use of the site, to improve the architectural merit of the buildings on the site and to enhance the general surroundings by removal of the unsightly building. This will improve significantly the outlook of the nearest properties, Rose Cottage, Kensa and Robin Hill Farm, as well as views from across the valley. Also, a narrow strip of land will be added to the lane to improve vehicular access enabling use of the road by public service vehicles such as refuse lorries, fire engines and delivery vehicles. The proposed dwelling would be of traditional Manx cottage design in keeping with surrounding properties and Planning Circular 3/91.
Robin Hill Farm is around 20 acres most of which is grassland used for grazing the owner's small flock of sheep, other livestock and equestrian activities. The shed is no longer used for agricultural purposes and is too small for use as an indoor exercise area for horses. Feed and equipment storage is catered for in other buildings on site, as is the stabling for horses. Lambing takes place outdoors in late spring. Hence the shed is redundant. Mr MacQuillan suffers from dementia and has been taken into full-time nursing care. Whilst not immediately relevant to the planning process, his deteriorating condition serves to emphasise the redundancy of the building. Renewed use for agriculture would lead to a significant increase in traffic using the narrow lane and adversely affect the amenity of nearby dwellings.
The only obstacle to planning approval is a perceived conflict with the Isle of Man Strategic Plan and the draft Southern Area Plan. Yet the proposal has distinguishing features and individual merits which warrant reconsideration. General Policy 3 states that development will not be permitted outside those areas that are zoned for development on the appropriate area plan but General Policy 3(c) makes an exception for previously developed land where the use is redundant and where redevelopment would improve the landscape or wider environment.
Clearly the land is previously developed and redundant. The definition of "previously developed land" excludes land that has been occupied by agricultural buildings. However, prior to the erection of the shed there was a 19^{\text {th }} century farm workers cottage on the site. Whereas the most recent building was agricultural, the earlier development was residential. The existing shed is an ugly structure that dominates the site, constricts the lane, presents a large gable towards Rose Cottage and restricts the rural aspect of Rose Cottage and Kensa. It is visible from afar and is detrimental to the countryside. The erection of the proposed traditional cottage would have resonance with the original cottage on the site. Therefore the development would result in improvements to the landscape and the wider environment. Furthermore the replacement of the large ugly shed with an attractive traditional cottage would enhance significantly the Area of High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance.
A replacement dwelling on the site would fit in with the existing cluster of traditional stone-built and / or whitewashed slate-roofed buildings within the relatively compact grouping without extending the settlement envelope. The draft Southern Area Plan recognises that "a small number of additional dwellings could be added without visual detriment" to the Cronk-y-Dhooney / Ballakilpheric settlement. It further identifies Cronk-y-Dhooney as being "served by a poor access road". Hence the proposal would improve a recognised deficiency in the local infrastructure. Although the Plan goes on to state that additional dwellings are not proposed for the area, it is arguable that the benefits provided by the proposal to the group and the wider rural setting are sufficient to warrant approval.
As any development in the countryside would be judged on an individual basis, approval of the application would not set any precedent. The shed can be readily separated from the rest of the property. The other large agricultural buildings in the locality at Cronk-y-Dhooney Farm and Ballakilpheric Farm are in active farming use and integral to the workings of the farm. These farms are much more commercial concerns. The large sheds at Ballakilpheric are effectively interconnected and the shed at Cronk-y-Dhooney Farm is intensively used. Unlike the appeal proposal, neither could easily be separated from the rest of the property.
The Rushen Commissioners support the proposal. The permitting of small numbers of sympathetically designed new houses to be built as "infill" in existing country villages and hamlets would go some way to addressing the need for housing and reduce the need for large sprawling housing estates resulting in the extension of town and villages. The quoted concept of sustainability is flawed as it would mean only allowing new dwellings to be built in villages or towns which have shops, etc. Thus a village would soon grow into something no longer like a Manx village. Many people have been brought up in the countryside and aspire to live there.
The widening of the lane would be of great value to the local community but to ensure that the lane is unobstructed it is vital that sufficient parking should be provided within the site. Demolition of the shed should not be an excuse for building another large shed on the holding in the future.
It is most unlikely that a precedent would be set in the case of Ballakilpheric Farm, as it is a viable farm with a young man farming it and all the sheds are in farming use.
Issue (1): Strategic planning policies for the location of housing 18. Since the site lies outside any area zoned for development and within an Area of High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance, General Policy 3, Environmental Policies 1 and 2 and Housing Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 apply. The definition of previously developed land in the Strategic Plan (Appendix 1) excludes land that is occupied by agricultural buildings. This is the situation that applies in this case. Neither the original residential use of the site, nor the use of the shed for unauthorised businesses, can trigger the provisions of General Policy 3 (c). None of the other exceptional circumstances identified in General Policy 3 (a) - (h) and Housing Policy 4 (a) - (c) apply and the proposed development therefore conflicts with the strategic planning policies for housing location on the Island.
Issue (2): Other material considerations 19. Section 8.8 of the Strategic Plan makes provision for groups of dwellings in the countryside but states that such development is to be controlled by the development plan process and the emerging Southern Area Plan describes the Cronk y Dhooney location as not sustainable and where further dwellings would not be encouraged. 20. I cannot agree with the Commissioners' assertion that the planning strategy of steering development into sustainable locations close to work places, shops, schools, and other public services is flawed. The concept of sustainable development is an accepted principle of land use planning both on and off the Island. It is central to the over-arching strategic aim of the Strategic Plan - Towards a Sustainable Island 2007 and contributes to the core purpose of the Government Plan to maintain and build on the high quality of life enjoyed by the Island's community (Strategic Plan para. 2.7).
Appeal No: AP11/0046 Application Ref: 10/01800/A 21. The proposal has the following merits: (a) The proposed replacement of the ugly farm shed with a traditionally designed Manx cottage would enhance the appearance of the AHLVSS and repair the damage to the traditional character of Cronk y Dhooney when the original cottage was removed and the shed was erected. (b) As a compatible land use it would safeguard the residential amenity of the occupiers of the nearby dwellings who could be adversely affected by farming activities and by farm traffic if the agricultural use of the building were to be resumed. (c) The proposed development is sited on a street frontage close to the centre of the small rural settlement and would not extend its footprint. (d) It would remove the dominating gable wall of the shed that currently has an overbearing impact on the outlook of Rose Cottage. (e) It would remove a constriction in the lane and would help to address the problem of poor access affecting Cronk y Dhooney to which there is reference in the emerging area plan. These favourable factors accord with various strategic planning policies including Environmental Policy 2 and carry considerable weight. On balance, however, I judge that the merits are not sufficient to justify a breach of the strategic planning policies for the location of housing on the Island. 22. Given the large numbers of farm sheds close to occupied dwellings in the undefined rural settlements scattered across the Island, it is easy to envisage many similar situations where the same or similar benefits could be cited to justify planning approvals contrary to strategic policy. Therefore, I have an additional concern that approval of the proposed development, which would breach both the Strategic Plan and the emerging plan for the area, could be accorded a significance that may make it difficult for the Department to resist an accumulation of dwellings in unsustainable locations throughout the Island.
Conclusion and Recommendation 23. Bearing in mind the statutory duty to have regard to the development plan and all other material considerations, notwithstanding a variety of factors that point towards approval, I conclude that the crucial and over-riding consideration must be that the proposal would breach the strategic planning policies for the sustainable location of housing at variance with the strategic aim of the development plan. 24. I recommend that the decision to refuse permission should be upheld and that the appeal should be dismissed.
G FARRINGTON Independent Inspector 20th July 2011 5
.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
