Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
19/00245/B Page 1 of 6
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 19/00245/B Applicant : Mr & Mrs Ben Eyres Proposal : Alterations and extension to existing agricultural building including additional use as residential accommodation. Site Address : Kerrowmoar Farm Jurby East Road Kerrowmoar Andreas Isle Of Man IM7 3HE
Principal Planner: Mr Chris Balmer Photo Taken : 12.06.2019 Site Visit : 12.06.2019 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 08.07.2019 __
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 extension, enlargement or other alteration of the dwelling(s) hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, shall be carried out, without the prior written approval of the Department.
Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.
C 3. The conversion of the barn hereby approved may be used only in association with the main dwelling house "Kerrowmoar Farm" and for purposes incidental to the use of main dwelling house "Kerrowmoar Farm" as a single dwelling, and may not be occupied, rented or sold off separately and may only be used in accordance with the internal layout shown on proposed floor plan (18 1294 03 REV A) received on the 2nd July 2019.
Reason: The dwelling is within a single residential plot. The application does not propose to create separate units of accommodation within the site and the application has been judged on
==== PAGE 2 ====
19/00245/B Page 2 of 6
this basis of the unit being uses as ancillary/incidental accommodation and not as a separate dwelling.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawings reference numbers 181294 01, 181294 02 and 181294 03 REV A received on 4th March 2019 and 2nd July 2019.
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
THE PLANNING APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS IT COULD BE CONSIDERED CONTRARY TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN BUT RECOMMENDED FOR AN APPROVAL
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is Kerrowmoar Farm, Jurby East Road, Kerrowmoar, Andreas which is located to the southern side of Jurby East Road and southwest of Andreas Village. Within the site is a two storey traditional farm house with detached garage and three attached agricultural buildings, the centre one (of interest in this application) is a traditional brick build agricultural barn which is flanked either side by more modern portal framed agricultural barns.
1.2 The site is accessed via a private farm lane which runs from the Jurby East Road to the north.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the alterations and extension to existing agricultural building including additional use as residential accommodation ancillary to Kerrowmoar Farmhouse. The main works involve:
a) Raising the roof ridge and eves of the barn by 250mm; b) Rear single and two storey extension to rear; c) Installation of dormer window to rear; and d) The installation of a two storey gable end window within the west elevation of the barn.
2.2 The applicant's statement indicates that: "The existing barn building is of solid brick construction in good order throughout with plumb walls and a stable roof structure and no evidence of any movement or subsidence.
Alongside the conversion of the redundant barn, it is proposed to extend the barn to the south with a slightly contemporary extension infilling an area between the two more recent barn buildings. To minimise impact, part of the proposal (plant/utility) falls within part pf the more recent barn building."
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The site has been the subject of a number of previous planning applications; however, none are considered of material relevance to the determination of the current application.
==== PAGE 3 ====
19/00245/B Page 3 of 6
4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 The application site is not designated under the IOM Development Plan Order 1982 and therefore no designated for development. The site is not within a Conservation Area, nor within an area zoned as High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance.
4.2 The following policies are taken from the IOM Strategic Plan 2016 and are relevant for consideration:
4.3 Environment Policy 1 states: "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".
4.4 Housing Policy 11 states: "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."
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS AND CONSULTATIONS 5.1 Andreas Commissioners have no objection (30.04.2019).
5.2 At the time of writing this report thee application had be re-advertised (amended design) with the consultation date expiring on the 12th July 2019. Should any additional comments be received, these will be orally updated at the Planning Committee meeting on the 15th July 2019.
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The starting point for a proposal to convert an existing building/s in the countryside to a dwelling/ancillary accommodation would be Housing Policy 11. It should be noted that the proposed conversion of the barn has been proposed by the applicants for ancillary accommodation to the main dwelling house; rather than a separate dwelling. There is no specific policy which relates to the conversion of barns into "ancillary" accommodation; however, it is considered the most relevant would be Housing Policy 11. There are a number of criteria indicated within this policy, with which any proposed development must comply.
==== PAGE 4 ====
19/00245/B Page 4 of 6
6.2 With regard to paragraph (a) of Housing policy 11, the barn is not used in relation to agriculture (i.e. its original use) and therefore it is clearly redundant. Furthermore, from comments received previously from the DEFA (Former Agricultural Advisor) this type of barn/s can no longer be used for modern agricultural farming either for storage of equipment or keeping of animals (animal welfare standards). It is therefore considered that redundancy has been established and the proposal conforms to Housing Policy 11 in this respect.
6.3 With regard to paragraph (b), this deals with whether the building is substantially intact and structurally capable of renovation. The applicants agent confirms; "The existing barn building is of solid brick construction in good order throughout with plumb walls and a stable roof structure and no evidence of any movement or subsidence."
6.4 With regard to paragraph (c) of Housing policy 11, the existing barn is brick in construction with a white washed walls and a slate roof. The main elevation (front to the north) includes a large arched access with brick detailing above and two doorways and two three small windows. While the proposal is not of a Manx stone in construction/finish; it is considered the appearance, age and character has an overall architectural interest to warrant its retention and therefore complies with this aspect of Housing Policy 11. Within the north of the Island there are examples of brick constructed barns, rather than Manx stone and/or beach stone.
6.5 With regard to paragraph (d) of Housing policy 11 this policy states that the building should be 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. This is perhaps the main issue with the proposals. It should be noted that the main front elevation (north) which would be the elevation seen by the majority of visitors to the site and is the only elevation which is partially apparent from distant public views (to the northwest along Jurby East Road) remain in the main unaltered. The scheme reuses existing openings and windows, and does not propose to create new openings for windows or doors. This elevation is arguable the most important to retain its character, and the proposal would achieve this.
6.6 The rear elevation is the aspect which could raise the most concern with the application. The proposed extension is very contemporary in design and the question is whether the proposals would "not affect adversely the character or interest of the building". It should be noted the initial scheme did raise concern and following discussions with the applicants and the Department an amended scheme has been provided. The larger extension while not having a large footprint is a two storey flat roofed with full height glazing (timber windows painted dark grey) from ground floor to first floor ceiling level. Further the extension is finished in a Metseam Samsung copper dark brown metallic coloured cladding. This extension only has a projection of 0.5m from the existing rear elevation of the barn so in terms of floor area it does not result in a sizeable extension. However, its height enables the use of the upper floor/roof space as a master bedroom as in effect it creates more 'useable headroom'. 6.7 The proposal also includes a lean-to dormer window styled extension which would be finished in brickwork painted in white wash. The roof would be finished in a dark grey corrugated metal/fibre cement roof sheeting. This extension does not increase the footprint of the building (being a dormer) but enables the roof space of the barn being useable for a second bedroom and bathroom.
6.8 The final extension, which has the largest footprint of all the works (sqm 7.5sqm); albeit, still modest in size, is a single storey lean-to porch which would be finished in brickwork painted in white wash the same roof finish as the dormer (dark grey corrugated metal). This extension raises no concern.
==== PAGE 5 ====
19/00245/B Page 5 of 6
6.9 The submission also includes a two storey floor to ceiling height gable end window to obtain views in a westerly direction. It is considered this would be acceptable and fit well.
6.10 Without doubt the proposed works to the rear elevation (south) would alter the "character" of the existing southern elevation of the barn which currently is simple in form and appearance (blank brick wall with slate roof). It is acknowledged that this elevation is not apparent from public views and is also well screened within the site, only apparent when immediately stood adjacent to it. However, the fact an extension can't be seen from public views is not a reason to automatic approve it. However, in this case it is considered the proposed extension in terms of their proportion, form, design, size and finish would be acceptable and arguably would increase the architectural interest. All other works, including the small increase of roof ridge/eves level and the installation of the gable end window are considered acceptable also.
6.11 Paragraph (e), questions whether the use would be compatible with adjoining established uses. The proposal is not for a separate dwelling but ancillary accommodation in associated with the main dwelling house. It would utilise the same, access, driveway and parking area as the main dwelling (Kerrowmoar Farm) and would have views over these shared areas.
6.12 The scheme would result in a two bedroom unit with its own facilities, including a kitchen/living rooms and external patio. It is certainly of a size which could be used independent of the main dwelling house.
6.13 There can be concerns of such accommodation being used as a self-contained unit, totally independent from the main house for any provisions and could not be considered to be ancillary accommodation as proposed. If a building, or part of a building, contains sufficient facilities to be used in a self-contained manner then they are generally considered to be a separate planning unit, whether or not they are occupied by a relative of occupants of the primary property, or used by guests.
6.14 There is some case law that has accepted fully self-contained accommodation as being ancillary to the principal residence, i.e. when they have been occupied by a dependant relative, or even for staff, and certainly who pays the bills is a factor. However, in most cases the test of whether it is a separate planning unit rests upon its severability i.e. if the alleged ancillary use could practically and viably operate on its own were the primary use of the premises cease or cease to be in the ownership of the same person.
6.15 As mention in terms of the physical size of the unit and the accommodation contained within it could be used independently. However, its position to the main dwelling house and overlooking of the main driveway/garden areas does result in a greater chance of the occupiers of the main dwelling house wishing to retain such accommodation for ancillary purposes. Further, the barn which is flanked either side by agricultural barns also increase the chances of person/s using these, wanting them to be retained as ancillary accommodation; to ensure there isn't a conflict in use in the future. The applicant's agent has confirmed that:
"With regard to the who is using the building, it is for the applicants mother and father, with the idea being the applicants live in the farmhouse and the parents live in the barn."
6.16 Accordingly, in this case, while the internal accommodation associated with the proposal is large enough to be occupiers as a separate unit; given its location/proximity to the main dwelling house; it requires the sharing of the existing access/driveway/parking and adjoining to agricultural barns, all associated with the main dwelling house it is considered the use of the barn as ancillary accommodation is acceptable.
==== PAGE 6 ====
19/00245/B Page 6 of 6
6.17 If it was proposed to use the unit as a separate dwelling/tourist accommodation, an new application would need to be submitted and it would be required to provide how the use of the adjoin barns would be compatible with a separate dwelling; that shared parking, access & driveway arrangement would be appropriate and impacts upon the residential amenities (overlooking/general disturbances) of Kerrowmoar Farm would not be impacted.
6.18 Housing Policy 11 requires that the building is or can be provided with satisfactory services without unreasonable public expenditure. The barn is adjacent to the main dwelling house which has all the necessary services; it is considered such provision can be made at the applicant's cost. Therefore the proposal complies with this aspect of Housing Policy 11.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 The application is recommended for an approval.
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 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:...15.07.2019
Signed :...C BALMER... 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 below
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