227761

==== PAGE 1 ====

2 September 2014 14/00638/B Page 1 of 5 PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 14/00638/B Applicant : Mr Chris Kelly Proposal : Erection of a storage building Site Address : Cronk Breck Bernahara Road Andreas Isle of Man IM7 3HH

Case Officer : Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken : 06.08.2014 Site Visit : 06.08.2014 Expected Decision Level :

Planning Committee

Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO THE PLANNING HISTORY OF THE SITE.

THE SITE 1.1 The site is the residential curtilage of an existing dwelling, Cronk Breck which lies on the eastern side of the Bayr ny Hayrey. Cronk Breck is a new dwelling, built as a replacement for a previous dwelling which was on the site (see Planning History). Currently on the site is the dwelling along with a garage, car port and a helicopter hangar, all within the residential curtilage which was extended following the completion of the dwelling, under PA 12/01374/B and subsequent applications including PA 13/00311.

1.2 The site is well landscaped and many of the buildings screened from complete view from the surrounding roads, the dwelling being visible from some parts of the B7 highway to the south and from some parts of the approach on the B14 from the west. The wind sock and part of the helicopter hangar are visible at a fleeting glance from the B7.

1.3 The part of the site which is proposed for development in this current application is presently a levelled area which accommodates a lawnmower, trailers, containers and a van with trees surrounding it. The trees all have ivy growing on them and are of limited height.

THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the erection of a new building to the east of the existing building group. This will be 41.5m long between 13m and 10m wide and between 4m and 5.3m tall with a shallow pitched roof and clad in olive green cladding which will match the adjacent domed roofed structure (see Planning History).

2.2 The building is proposed for the storage of the applicant's motor vehicles - cars, motorcycles and with an area for a motorhome and for maintenance of the vehicles. The applicant's current car storage facilities were, at the time of the site visit, fully occupied (in the attached, enclosed garage there was a classic Mercedes, classic Jaguar and in the car port were a Land Rover, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Mercedes car, small van and a buggy. The applicant has more vehicles - cars and motorcycles - which are currently in the UK which he would like to bring over to his home. The Winnebago motor home was parked on the driveway outside the house and the hangar accommodated the helicopter. The applicant also has vehicles and equipment associated with the maintenance of the site.

==== PAGE 2 ====

2 September 2014 14/00638/B Page 2 of 5

2.3 The plans have been modified, reducing the height and area of the building. The trees surrounding the building are to be retained although they will be close (the trees to the rear of the car port are even closer but appear to be surviving, despite having been lopped and trimmed).

PLANNING STATUS AND POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area of open space not designated for a particular purpose on the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982.

3.2 As such, there is a presumption against development as set out in Environment Policy 1 of the Strategic Plan:

"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."

3.3 There are no policies which control or direct the erection of new residential buildings although it can be considered reasonable for existing dwellings to be able to have the benefit of additional domestic scale structures such as garaging, garden sheds, greenhouses etc. What is proposed here however is much greater in size and scale than a standard domestic garage. The applicant's collection of motor vehicles and his tractor, flail cutter and gang mower are also perhaps beyond what would be required for a normal domestic curtilage or land associated with a dwelling. The site in total amounts to 2.3ha (5.8 acres).

PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 Planning approval was granted for the replacement of the former dwelling on the site with what is generally on site now, under PA 09/01011/B. This approval was modified by PAs 10/00216/B, 12/01362/B, 12/01363/B, 13/00311/B and a general storage building and landscaping including the extension of the residential curtilage was approved under PA 12/01374/B. A row of car ports was approved in between the house and the approved helicopter hangar.

4.2 Planning approval was denied for the creation of a temporary access track and erection of a temporary general purpose agricultural building to house garden maintenance machinery, vehicles and a helicopter, under PA 12/00582. The reason for refusal of that application was as follows:

"It is not considered that there is sufficient justification for a building of the size and massing proposed within a residential curtilage in an area not designated for development and where the built development on site already represents a significantly larger development than what it replaced. The building is considered to represent over-development of the site and would be contrary to the provisions of Environment Policy 1 and General Policy 2. Whilst the building is stated to be on site for a temporary period, the building and track are by their nature permanent features and the five year period in which the building and track are to be in situ are not considered to be a short term period."

4.3 As can be seen in paragraph 4.1 a further building for the applicant's helicopter and maintenance equipment and machinery and the existing of the residential curtilage and creation of access were subsequently approved under later applications.

REPRESENTATIONS

==== PAGE 3 ====

2 September 2014 14/00638/B Page 3 of 5 5.1 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services indicate that they do not oppose the application.

5.2 Andreas Parish Commissioners also indicate that they have no objection to the application.

5.3 The resident of Ballachurry Farm Cottage, which lies around 160m as the crow flies, to the north east of the proposed building, separated therefrom by Ballachurry Farm house and agricultural building, objects to the application. She suggests that there is no policy basis for the proposed building and whilst the current owner has a need for the buildings to accommodate his vehicles, but that there must surely be a more appropriate location in which to store them, what use may a future owner of the site put these buildings to? She suggests that a building of this size will create a considerable amount of surface water and is surprised that none of the local farmers have expressed concern at having to manage increases of surface water draining onto their land.

ASSESSMENT 6.1 The resident of Ballachurry Farm Cottage is correct in stating that there is no policy provision for the erection of domestic structures or buildings which are not justified by agricultural need. However, there is no policy provision for any of the buildings which are permissible without planning permission under the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 and yet these are considered reasonable and acceptable. It is fully accepted that what is proposed now, and indeed what has already been approved and built on the site, far exceed the size of structures which are usually associated with a dwelling, however not every household has the same needs and provided that the proposed building is not outside of the established and approved residential curtilage, which they are not in this case, the key test should surely be whether there is any material harm in the proposal. It is also relevant to consider the size of the residential curtilage and the character of the site and the buildings upon it.

6.2 In terms of sustainability, which is a key principle of the Strategic Plan, there is an argument that the on-site provision of garaging for the applicant's cars could well reduce the amount of coming and going both in terms of to and from an alternative Manx location and particularly to and from their present location in the UK.

6.3 In terms of material harm, the objector has not demonstrated that there will be any such impact and in view of the existing trees which are to be retained, both within the site and between any public viewpoint and the application site, it is not considered that there will be material harm from the proposal in terms of change to the character and appearance of the countryside.

6.4 The building will not generate any additional surface water. What it will do is perhaps channel the water which does fall onto the site more quickly into the existing ditches which ultimately discharge into water courses. There is no evidence that demonstrates that there is currently or would be an issue in this respect. The applicant has land to the south of the application site which will accommodate the surface water flow from the building. Whilst this is suggested as potentially being an issue, by the owner of Ballachurry Farm Cottages, this is not supported by any other land owners who would be directly affected from such changes in flow or the local authority.

6.5 The test is whether the aims of Environment Policy 1, to protect the countryside for its own sake, would be compromised by the proposal. It is considered that due to the very limited impact of the proposal these aims would not be damaged or compromised and as such the application is recommended for approval.

PARTY STATUS

==== PAGE 4 ====

2 September 2014 14/00638/B Page 4 of 5 7.1 The local authority, Andreas Parish Commissioners are, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, paragraph 6 (4) (e), considered "interested persons" and as such should be afforded party status.

7.2 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services is granted interested party status under the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 paragraph 6 (4) d.

7.3 The owner of Ballachurry Farm Cottage is not directly affected by the proposal or directly alongside the site and as such should not be considered an interested person in this case.

SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT

At the meeting of the Planning Committee held on the 1st September 2014 the Committee asked that a reason for the condition be added to the recommended condition 2.

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted

Date of Recommendation:

21.08.2014

Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal O : Notes attached to refusals

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. The building may be used only for the storage of private motor vehicles and items associated with the maintenance and occupation of the site as a whole, including land in the occupants' ownership.

Reason: to accord with the justification provided by the applicant for the building.

--

This approval relates to drawings reference 01B and 02D both received on 28th July, 2014.

==== PAGE 5 ====

2 September 2014 14/00638/B Page 5 of 5

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 : Approved Committee Meeting Date : 1st September 2014

Signed : Miss S E Corlett Presenting Officer

Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason is required. Signing Officer to delete as appropriate

YES See above