Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
24/91316/C Page 1 of 7
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 24/91316/C Applicant : Mrs Susan Knight-Crellin Proposal : Additional use as residential accommodation Site Address : Orrisdale Cottages Aka Bwaane Twoaie, Bwaane Meanagh And Bwaane Jiass Orrisdale Kirk Michael Isle Of Man IM6 2HP
Planning Officer: Lucy Kinrade Photo Taken : 16.01.2025 Site Visit : 16.01.2025 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 07.02.2025 __
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. 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), there shall be no placing, erecting or undertaking of the following works within the curtilage of any tourist or dwelling unit hereby approved, without the prior written approval of the Department: o no garages or other free standing buildings or structures o no extension, enlargement or other alteration of the dwelling(s) o no garden sheds or summerhouses o no greenhouses or polytunnels o no decking or hardstanding
Reason: To control development and culmination of structures in the interests of the visual setting of the site and registered building, with exception to some levels of boundary fencing as shown and assessed as part of this application covered in subsequent condition 3.
C 3. 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 fences, gates, walls or other means of enclosure shall be erected or placed within the curtilage of any tourist or dwelling unit hereby approved other than that
==== PAGE 2 ====
24/91316/C Page 2 of 7
expressly authorised by this approval and as shown on drawing number 1718.4 Rev 1, without the prior written approval of the Department.
Reason: To control development and culmination of structures or boundary treatments in the interests of the visual setting of the site and registered building, with exception to some levels of boundary fencing as shown and assessed as part of this application.
C 4. No approval is granted to any residential use of the outbuilding outlined in blue on drawing number 1718.4 Rev 1.
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt noting the blue line not being included on the existing site plan.
C 5. Approval is granted only for the additional use of the three tourist cottages for up to three residential units only.
Reason: The application has been assessed on this basis only as submitted within the application detail.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The additional use of the cottages for private residential use would be acceptable in this case meeting with the principles of Housing Policy 11 and providing sufficient parking and amenity space for each unit. The proposal would seek to make best use of and ensure continued use of three rural cottages considered to be of sufficient architectural, historic and social interest warranting their retention and without any adverse physical changes. There is some concern in the increased intensity of the proposed use in such a small area particularly on the setting of the adjacent RB. This increased private residential use resulting in potential increased desire and demand for domestic paraphernalia across the site. While some fencing as shown on the plans has been considered acceptable, suitably worded conditions revoking parts of the PD will help to best safeguard the setting of the site and RB in the future. The application is considered to meet with Strategic Policies 1 and 4, Spatial Policy 5, General Policy 3(b), Housing Policy 11, and not to undermine Environment Policies 1, 2, 10, 13, 40 and 42, Transport Policies 4 and 7, and Community Policies 7 and 11 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, and aligning with Section 16 of The Act in protecting the setting of the Registered Building.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the following:
Floor Plans Existing dwg: 1718.1
Floor Plans Proposed dwg: 1718.2
Existing Site Plan dwg: 1718.3
planning statement all date received 19/11/2024
Proposed Site Plan dwg: 1718.4 Rev 1
covering letter both received and dated online 24/01/2025 __
Right to Appeal
It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal: o Department of Infrastructure Highway Services - no objection. __
Officer’s Report
==== PAGE 3 ====
24/91316/C Page 3 of 7
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application relates to three cottages situated along the Orrisdale loop road in Kirk Michael. The cottages sit adjacent to RB 249 Orrisdale House (Rheynn Sloo). The cottages do not form part of the registration.
1.2 The RB file for Orrisdale house includes only one reference to the cottages "there are old cottages located near to the main house which have been renovated and are now used as tourist accommodation and there are also further outbuildings on the site. These buildings were included on the 1869 Ordinance Survey Map."
1.3 The cottages were approved for three tourist units under PA 84/00257/B.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed now is the additional use of the three tourist units as residential accommodation.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The site has been subject to three previous applications considered relevant: o 84/00257/B - Alterations, conversion & modernisation of 3 disused cottages to form 3 holiday Cottage o 86/01259/B - Alterations to existing barn to form utility, store and gallery over o 94/01493/B - Alterations, including re-roofing, to shed
4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 Site Specific 4.1.1 The site is designated within an area of woodland, AHLV and within zoning of an ancient monument on the 1982 development plan. The site is within registered tree area RA1317, is not within any conservation area, but the garden and driveway areas are recognised as being at some surface water risk.
4.2 Relevant policies of Strategic Plan.
Strategic Policy 1 Efficient use of land and resources 2 Priority for new development to identified towns and villages 4 Development must ensure suitable protection of fabric and setting of Registered Buildings and Ancient Monuments 5 Development to make positive contribution 10 New development located to make best use of existing infrastructure
Spatial Policy 5 Development in the countryside only in line with GP3
General Policy 2 General Development Considerations 3 Exceptions to development in the countryside including (b) conversions of rural buildings into residential subject to HP11
Environment Policy 1 Protection of countryside for its own sake 2 Protection of AHLV 10 Flood risk assessment 13 Flood risk on or off site 40 Development should not impact ancient monuments 42 Designed to respect the character and identity of the locality
==== PAGE 4 ====
24/91316/C Page 4 of 7
Housing Policy 4 New housing locations 11 Conversion of rural buildings into dwellings criteria
Transport Policy 4 Highway safety 7 Parking
Community Policy 7 Designing out crime 11 Prevention of outbreak and spread of fire
4.3 Reference any relevant PPS or NPD 4.3.1 None
5.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 Legislation o Section 68 of the Flood Risk Management Act (2013) indicates that any published Flood Risk Management Plan and the extent to which the proposed development creates an additional flood risk are material considerations.
o Section 16(3) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999) states, "In considering - (a) whether to grant planning approval for development which affects a registered building or its setting, or (b) whether to grant registered building consent for any works, the relevant Department shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses".
5.2 Policy/Strategy/Guidance o Manual for Manx Roads o Residential Design Guide - boundary treatments
6.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.
6.1 DEFA Registered Buildings Officer - do not oppose subject to condition (17/12/2024). The proposed additional use as three independent dwellings does have the potential to harm the setting of the registered building with the creation of independent dwellings likely increasing private demand for ancillary structures within their grounds such as a desire and want for domestic fencing, outbuildings and also leading to the potential for unsympathetic parking arrangements. Although many of the potential impacts noted above are not proposed within this application, they request that all relevant permitted development rights are removed for these dwellings in order to prevent harm to the setting of RB249.
6.2 DOI Highway services - no objection (03/12/2024) no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and/or parking as the existing access and layout is acceptable for the proposals. The Applicant should consider EV charging and cycle parking facilities for residents to aid Net Zero ambitions.
6.3 The following were consulted but not response received at the time of writing the report 05/02/2024: o Kirk Michael Commissioners o Manx Utilities o DEFA Forestry
7.0 ASSESSMENT
==== PAGE 5 ====
24/91316/C Page 5 of 7
Principle and Initial Concerns 7.1 Housing Policy 11 supports there reuse of rural buildings for residential purposes. This proposal seeks to re-use existing cottages considered of historic, social and architectural interest and also without any alteration or extension to their original form. Initial concerns was expressed about the intensification of private residential use, including what appeared to be parking on top of the existing vegetation and tree lined boundary which currently buffers and separates the site from Orrisdale House, as well as the potential for increased demand for and spread of private domestic paraphernalia impacting the setting of the site and RB. Concern also expressed for an outbuilding included within the extent of the red line for which no information was provided.
Setting of RB and Site Area 7.2 The large open front garden, sweeping driveway and tree-lined boundaries contribute significantly to the setting of the main house. The arrangement and relationship of the house with its outbuildings also forming and important part of its setting and history. The cottages sit at right angle to the main house and with an open yard area across their frontages. Although trees and open areas create buffers between the two, the main house and its outbuildings (including the cottages) are still very much visually connected and associated with one another forming the Orrisdale House cluster.
Parking and Outbuilding 7.3 The agent sought to have the drawings updated pulling the parking area for the cottages away from the boundary between the site and RB. The outbuilding was also removed from the red line. These changes help to address two of the issues raised initially.
7.4 Strategic Plan parking standards require two spaces per dwelling. The open yard is sizeable enough to accommodate two cars for each dwelling. There is some concern that this increase parking for independent dwellings may impact on the overall character of the cluster. The small scale nature of each unit not accommodating large numbers is likely to self-regulate vehicle numbers at the site, also factoring in the coming and goings of vehicles not being permanent features unlike boundary treatments, sheds, greenhouses etc.
7.5 The site is not within a settlement, nor located directly on a bus route. Demand for private vehicle is expected to be fairly high for both tourist and residential use alike. The site is approx. 1.5miles from Kirk Michael and 1.5miles from Ballaugh. The nearest bus stop is along the main A3 approx. 0.4miles away. While the short distance to the villages and bus stop may promote some active travel, the location is still unsustainable. Nevertheless, conversion into residential use here is considered an exception to development in the countryside being a building of sufficient interest warranting such (GP3, HP11).
Subdivision and Boundary Treatments 7.5 It was accepted that the current tourist use could erect fencing under Class 38 of the Permitted Development, but that the likely demand for such boundary treatment for or by tourists being considerably less likely than any future permanent residents looking to established their private curtilage.
7.6 The garden area to the rear of the cottages is more secluded from the main Orrisdale House being physically and visually separated by the cottages themselves. The updated drawings sought to include information as to how the rear gardens could be subdivided in providing private amenity space for each, this includes detail for rear boundary fencing. Minded of the position of the fencing at the rear of the cottages, it height not being so tall as to take away or block views across the rear of the cottages and being of fairly ordinary style and design, that the fencing works are considered to be acceptable and not having any significant or adverse impact on the setting of the RB. Suitably worded conditions will be added revoking PD with exception to those fencing works shown as part of this application.
==== PAGE 6 ====
24/91316/C Page 6 of 7
Other Matters
Ancient Monument 7.7 From review of historic mapping, the ancient monuments are considered sufficient distance from the house as to not be adversely impacted as a result of the additional use application here.
Flood Risk - Surface Water 7.8 The flood risk shown on the maps relates to surface water and to areas surrounding the building. The cottages are currently in tourist use and permanent residential is not expected to make worse or result in any new or increased flood risk impact beyond the existing situation. It might be that permanent resident will become more familiar with areas of surface water flooding and be more prepared compared to unfamiliar visiting tourists.
Registered Trees 7.9 The application does not include any trees removal. The parking area has been adjusted to pull this away from the trees and no adverse or unacceptable impacts are expected.
8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 The additional use of the cottages for private residential use would be acceptable in this case meeting with the principles of Housing Policy 11 and providing sufficient parking and amenity space for each unit. The proposal would seek to make best use of and ensure continued use of three rural cottages considered to be of sufficient architectural, historic and social interest warranting their retention and without any adverse physical changes. There is some concern in the increased intensity of the proposed use in such a small area particularly on the setting of the adjacent RB. This increased private residential use resulting in potential increased desire and demand for domestic paraphernalia across the site. While some fencing as shown on the plans has been considered acceptable, suitably worded conditions revoking parts of the PD will help to best safeguard the setting of the site and RB in the future. The application is considered to meet with Strategic Policies 1 and 4, Spatial Policy 5, General Policy 3(b), Housing Policy 11, and not to undermine Environment Policies 1, 2, 10, 13, 40 and 42, Transport Policies 4 and 7, and Community Policies 7 and 11 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. Subject to conditions the setting of the site and adjacent registered building are to be suitably protected from harm aligning with Section 16 of The Act.
9.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE 9.1 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).
9.2 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.
9.3 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.
9.4 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;
==== PAGE 7 ====
24/91316/C Page 7 of 7
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.
9.5 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 can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status, and/or rights to appeal.
Decision Made : Permitted Date : 07.02.2025
Determining Officer Signed : S BUTLER
Stephen Butler
Head of Development Management
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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal