183220

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      19/00643/A                                     Page  1  of  5

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 19/00643/A Applicant : Mr David Peters Proposal : Approval in principle for the erection of a dwelling Site Address : Agricultural Building to rear of Vaaish Mooar Farm Staarvey Road Peel Isle of Man

Principal Planner: Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken : 01.07.2019 Site Visit : 01.07.2019 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Refused Date of Recommendation: 09.07.2019 __

Reasons for Refusal

R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons

R 1. The site is not designated for development and has no residential status. The replacement of agricultural buildings does not comply with the provisions for the redevelopment of previously developed land and the proposal does not otherwise comply with any of the other provisions for the creation of dwellings in the countryside. As such and notwithstanding the fact that the proposed replacement dwelling could have a reduced and more beneficial visual impact on the landscape, the development represents the creation of a dwelling in an unsustainable location, contrary to General Policy 3, Housing Policy 4, the Strategic Aim and Strategic Policies 1 and 2 of the Strategic Plan 2016.

__

Interested Person Status - Additional Persons

none __

Officer’s Report

THE SITE 1.1 The site is a parcel of land which lies on the eastern side of Staarvey Road in amongst a group of other buildings - dwellings and outbuildings and where there are at least four different land owners. The site lies 670m down a lane which serves the site as well as three dwellings - Vaaish Mooar, Vaaish Mooar Bungalow and Vaaish Mooar Farm. No other land is indicated as being owned or controlled by the applicant.

1.2 In addition, there is land to the south west of the application site which is separately owned and for which planning approval has very recently been applied for alterations to an

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      19/00643/A                                     Page  2  of  5

existing stone building for storage 19/00266/B. Vaaish Mooar Bungalow and the property known as Vaaish Mooar Farm (another bungalow) are both owned by the same persons and planning approval was granted under 16/00556/B for the replacement of the bungalow with a new dwelling alongside which is fully constructed externally. Vaaish Mooar is another, separate unit which has permission for conversion of an outbuilding to form additional living accommodation for the existing dwelling on that part of the site - 16/00557/B.

1.3 The unit appears to have been owned and managed as a single operation in the 1990s where there were applications for agricultural buildings - 91/01924/B and 89/00353/B. The buildings have been separated and sold separately at some point thereafter.

1.4 At the time of the site visit the building had various sheets missing from the roof and sides and there were two containers and various piles of builder's materials and metal. There were three vehicles on the site and various pieces of equipment. There was no evidence of the site being used for any agricultural or domestic purpose.

THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the demolition of the existing agricultural building and its replacement with a dwelling. Planning approval is not required for the demolition under Part 2, Section 6(2)e of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999. The application shows an image of the building to be demolished - a portal frame structure in poor conditions with a number of cladding sheets missing, together with an image of the sort of dwelling which the applicant has in mind for this site: this is a stone clad dormer bungalow.

2.2 The applicant says in the application that the applicant is a UK mainland resident who has owned this site for approximately 7 years leaving personal possessions and a vehicle within the existing warehouse for use during frequent visits to the Island using a motor home as accommodation. He would like to move to the Island in the near future as a permanent resident and would like to clean up the untidy wind damaged site and erect a small bungalow as his permanent home.

2.3 No policies or planning considerations are referred to.

PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated as of High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance on The Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982. As such, there is a presumption against development per se as set out in General Policy 3. This includes a number of exceptions, including the following:

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:

(a) essential housing for agricultural workers who have to live close to their place of work; (Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10); (b) conversion of redundant rural buildings which are of architectural, historic, or social value and interest; (Housing Policy 11); (c) previously developed land(1) 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; (f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry and (g) development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative".

Previously Developed Land is defined as follows:

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      19/00643/A                                     Page  3  of  5

"Previously-developed land is that which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated fixed surface infrastructure. The definition includes defence buildings, but excludes: Land that is or has been occupied by agricultural or forestry buildings. Land that has been developed for minerals extraction or waste disposal by landfill purposes where provision for restoration has been made through development control procedures. Land in built-up areas such as parks, recreation grounds and allotments, which, although it may feature paths, pavilions and other buildings, has not been previously developed. Land that was previously-developed but where the remains of the permanent structure or fixed surface structure have blended into the landscape in the process of time (to the extent that it can reasonably be considered as part of the natural surroundings).

There is no presumption that land that is previously-developed is necessarily suitable for housing development nor that the whole of the curtilage should be developed."

3.2 The Strategic Plan protects the countryside for its own sake in Environment Policies 1 and 2 and Housing Policy 4, the Strategic Aim and Strategic Policies 1 and 2 promote sustainable development within existing settlements.

PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The most relevant applications for the immediate area are referred to in paragraphs 1.2 and 1.3 above. In terms of the building itself, it was first approved in 1977 as an agricultural building (IDO 43531) and an application was submitted to extend it (48529) where the building was annotated as being cow kennels and a hay store.

REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 German Parish Commissioners have no objection to the application provided that the building is on the same footprint as the existing building and that it remains a single storey building (19.06.19).

ASSESSMENT 6.1 The site is not designated for development so the erection of a dwelling here would only be permitted if it were demonstrated that there is evidence of agricultural need, if there were a building here which could be converted and which satisfies the tests of Housing Policy 11 or if there is a building which is not an agricultural building which is redundant and where the development would refuse the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environment and where the development would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment.

6.2 The building appears on the plans submitted in 1989 and was clearly erected for agricultural purposes in the late 1970s. The applicant's evidence suggests that the building has been used intermittently for storage for 7 years which does not bestow any residential status on the building or the site. At the time of the site visit, there was no evidence that the building was used for anything, with a single vehicle within it and it is assumed, given the condition of the building, that any residential use of the site is limited to the use of the containers for storage. The site therefore has no authorised use for residential purposes and as the building was approved for agricultural purposes with no lawful intervening or alternative use, there is no justification for its replacement under GP3c.

6.3 The building can be seen from the Staarvey Road and it is currently unsightly given its missing external fabric and generally abandoned appearance and condition. This visual impact is not a positive one but the building is not particularly prominent, being within a group of existing buildings and vegetation, although the application building sits higher than these and slightly to one side. The building cannot be seen from the A3 due to intervening topography.

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      19/00643/A                                     Page  4  of  5

6.4 There is no doubt that the replacement of the building with something lower and smaller and better designed would have a beneficial impact on the environment. There is also no doubt that the same environment would be improved by the demolition of the existing building and there would not appear to be any agricultural need for it, given the very limited associated land area. However, the same could be said for almost any large agricultural building in the countryside and the appearance is only one consideration. The Strategic Plan has at its core, the principle of sustainability and added to this, the Government's commitment to address climate change and reduce carbon emissions is embodied in various documents including Policy on Sustainable Development and Mitigating Climate Challenges - A Report by the Council of Ministers (May 2015) and Greater efficiency Cleaner energy Resilient economy - A climate challenge mitigation strategy for the Isle of Man 2016 - 2020 (June 2016). A key factor in promoting sustainable development is locating development where it can involve active travel and sustainable transport to and from key amenities and services such as shops, schools and work. In this case, the site is remote from all of these and from a public transport system. It would not be a location where new residential development would be considered acceptable. There are existing dwellings nearby and there is provision for the creation of dwellings in the countryside in the Strategic Plan, however, this is only where there is either demonstrable agricultural need or where there is an existing building which is either suitable for conversion to residential use because it is redundant and worthy of retention, or where there is an existing residential property which can be replaced. None of these apply to the current application.

CONCLUSION 7.1 The replacement of what was approved as an agricultural building with a dwelling would represent unsustainable development which is not justified through agricultural need or the redevelopment of previously developed land in accordance with the definition of such and the application is not supported.

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: 10.07.2019

Determining officer

Signed : C BALMER

Chris Balmer

Principal Planner

==== PAGE 5 ====

                                      19/00643/A                                     Page  5  of  5

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.