208624

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      24/91103/B                                     Page  1  of  5

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 24/91103/B Applicant : Mr Charlie Simpson Proposal : Replace existing Chicken Shed with two Pod structures for Tourist Accommodation Site Address : Kingsley Farm Ballamodha Straight Ballasalla Isle Of Man IM9 3EL

Planning Officer: Graham Northern Photo Taken : Site Visit :

Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 02.12.2024 __

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 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. Prior to the occupation of the tourist pods - the parking as indicated on drawing ' 24/KF/MSP`, shall be completed ready for use and retained thereafter for their particular use.

Reason: To ensure that the car parking are achieved and provided and in the interests of highway safety.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposal will support the Government's Economic and Tourism Strategies with a very limited impact on the character and appearance of the site. As such, whilst the site is not designated for development, we consider on balance the benefits of the proposal in terms of supporting the Government's strategies and the removal of a larger underutilised building overcome the land use policy objection and that the proposal should therefore be recommended for approval.

Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the following drawings and documents received 25.09.24: Drawing number 24/KF/MSP Location Plan Drawing 24/20/01 - Project. Drawing 24/KF/MSP. Applicants Statement.

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      24/91103/B                                     Page  2  of  5

Right to Appeal

It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal:

DOI Highway Services - No Objections Local Authority - No Objection __

Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS IT PROPOSES NEW BUILDINGS ON LAND NOT DESIGNATED FOR DEVELOPMENT, WHICH COULD BE CONSIDERED CONTRARY TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, BUT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.

1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The property consists of the main residence Kingsley farm house, a Manx stone 2 bedroom cottage, detached garage, and 3 large green sheds set in approx. 10 acres on the middle of the Ballamodha Straight.

1.2 The separate cottage gained approval at the end of 2022 for additional use as tourist accommodation on Kingsley Cottage, and has been listed with Island Escapes who manage the bookings.

1.3 The garage has also been recently granted permission for use as tourist accommodation under application reference 24/91102/B but has not been implemented.

1.4 The site subject of this application, relates to one of the chicken sheds. The previous owners of the property used to run and operate a chicken farm for egg production. However they seized operating well over 2 decades ago due to personal reasons.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application seeks approval for the removal of the chicken shed closest too Kingsley Cottage and to replace it with two tourist pods for tourist accommodation (use class 3.6).

2.2 The pods would be of identical design measuring 7.1 metres in length by 5.45 metres in width, with a maximum height of 2.75 metres. A 3 metre decked area is provided to each to give occupants some outdoor space.

2.3 The pods are custom built with Acoya timber cladding walling and roofing.

2.4 A parking space is marked for each of the pods, positioned in the north west of the site.

3.0 Planning History 3.1 The barn was originally approved for conversion in 2003 and subject to amendments in 2004 with the most relevant being 04/02078/B.

3.2 The barn was then given permission to be used as tourist accommodation under application 22/01185/C and is known as Kingsley Cottage.

3.3 The garage has been given consent to be converted into tourism accommodation 24/91103/B.

4.0 Planning Policy Site Specific

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      24/91103/B                                     Page  3  of  5

4.1 The site is not designated for development under the 1982 Plan of the Area Plan for the South 2013. The site is not recognised as being at any flood risk.

Strategic Policy 4.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered materially relevant to the assessment of this current planning application: 5 Design and visual impact 8 Reuse of quality buildings for Tourism General Policy 2 General Development Considerations (a-n) 3 Exceptions to development in the countryside Business Policy 11 Conversion of rural building to tourist use 12 conversion of redundant buildings in the countryside to tourist 14 Tourist development in rural areas Environment Policy 1 Protection of the countryside and its Ecology 16 Use of rural buildings to tourism 4.3 Residential Design Guidance provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONs 5.1 The following representations can be found in full online, below is a short summary;

5.2 LOCAL AUTHORITY

Malew Parish Commissioners 16.10.2024 - No objections

5.3 Statutory Consultations DoI Highway Services 07.10.2024 - finds it to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and/or parking as the existing access and proposed layout is acceptable for the proposals.

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are; (i) Principle (ii) Visual Impact (iii) Neighbouring amenities (iv) Highway Safety

Principle 6.2 The application seeks approval for the removal of the vacant chicken shed which is no longer required for agriculture and the erection of two tourist accommodation pods.

6.3 The site lies outside of any defined settlement boundary and within the surrounding open countryside, and as such, the terms of Environment Policy 1 would apply in this instance. This policy sets out that the countryside will be protected for its own sake unless there is over- riding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas. There is no over-riding national need in land use terms in this case. In addition, the proposals do not fall into any of the exception categories allowed under General Policy 3 of the Strategic Plan, which sets out that development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan. Therefore, at face value, there are inherent conflicts with EP1 and GP3.

6.4 Notwithstanding the above the proposals seek to remove a large agricultural building and replace it with two pods for tourism accommodation which would take up a much smaller

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      24/91103/B                                     Page  4  of  5

building footprint and have as such a lesser degree of built form in the countryside. In addition recent permissions have allowed the barn to be used for tourism and the garage/ outbuilding and thereby the introduction of two additional pods forms a good cluster of tourism related accommodation on the site.

6.5 The proposals are as such considered to present unique and exceptional circumstances that remove a redundant farm building and replace it with two accommodation pods of lesser size which also in use terms fit in better with the permissions for tourism accommodation on the site.

6.6 The Strategic plan and the Government's Economic and Tourism Strategies make a strong case for tourism related development and it is considered that given the other permissions the applicant has sought to create a small cluster of tourism accommodation on the site that aspires to the ambitions of the strategy. Whilst not allocated for development the proposals replace an existing building of larger scale, and are located sensitively so as to not impact on visual amenity or neighbouring properties,. In principle as such the benefits of the proposals are considered to outweigh any harm against the proposals.

Visual Impact 6.7 The two pods would be located in the position of the larger agricultural chicken shed, and additionally would form a cluster of tourist accommodation with the converted barn, recently approved garage to be used as tourist accommodation and the main farm house to the west. As such the proposals would form a close knit cluster of built development for tourism accommodation adjacent the farm house. Given the existing chicken shed it is not considered the proposals would have any greater impact visually and as such it is considered that the proposal would have a neutral visual impact on the area. This aspect is deemed to be an acceptable and a use that complies with those sections of Strategic Policy 8 and General Policy 2(b) & (c).

Neighbouring amenities 6.8 Business Policy 14 indicates that permission will generally be given for tourist accommodation providing that it can be demonstrated that such use would not compromise the amenities of neighbouring residents.

6.9 In this case it is not considered there to be any adverse impact on the neighbouring residential amenity, as such this aspect complies with General Policy 2(g).

Highway Safety 6.10 The site has ample gravel driveway which could accommodate numerous vehicles. The site plan shows one parking space allocated to the proposals and this is considered sufficient given it is unlikely perspective users would travel in separate vehicles. The additional use as tourist use is not considered to significantly increase journeys or parking requirements beyond the provision made, and so the proposal is considered acceptable in these respects to General Policy 2(h&i).

7.0 RECOMMENDATION 7.1 The proposal supports the Government's Tourism Strategy and removes an underutilised building from the site, additionally the proposed built structures are sensitively located so as not to be offensive or harmful to the appearance and character of the area, or to the nearest residents.

7.2 The proposals provide adequate off street parking for the facility in the form of two allocated parking spaces.

7.3 The proposal will support the Government's Economic and Tourism Strategies with a very limited impact on the character and appearance of the site. As such, whilst the site is not

==== PAGE 5 ====

                                      24/91103/B                                     Page  5  of  5

designated for development, we consider on balance the benefits of the proposal in terms of supporting the Government's strategies and the removal of a larger underutilised building overcome the land use policy objection and that the proposal should therefore be recommended for approval.

8.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE 8.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted). 8.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to: o applicant (in all cases); o a Local Authority; Government Department; Manx Utilities; and Manx National Heritage that submit a relevant objection; and o any other person who has made an objection that meets specified criteria. 8.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10. 8.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required): o any appellant or potential appellant (which includes the applicant); o the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, the Department of Infrastructure and the local authority for the area; o any other person who has submitted written representations (this can include other Government Departments and Local Authorities); and o in the case of a petition, a single representative.

8.5 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given the Right to Appeal.

__

I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to that body by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status and/or rights to appeal.

Decision Made : Permitted

Committee Meeting Date: 09.12.2024

Signed : G NORTHERN 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 office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/customers and archive record.