34077

==== PAGE 1 ====

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Application No. : Applicant: Proposal: 14/01389/B Mr Mark & Mrs Julie Walker Construction of a timber stable block and yard and erection of timber access gates Field 430240 Corlea Road Baliasalla Isle Of Man Site Address: Case Officer: Photo Taken : Site Visit: Expected Decision Level: Miss S E Corlett 15.01.2015 15.01.2015 Planning Committee Officer's Report THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THE DEVELOPMENT IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THE SITE 1.1 The site is a piece of land, part of a field which lies to the south of the Corlea Road (B39). The land has basic dimensions of 33m by between 60m and 69m with a frontage to the Corlea Road of 60m. TTiere are no buildings currently on the site which slopes downward from north to south by around 4m over a distance of around 35m. The roadside boundary presently comprises an existing grassed and bramble hedge which is around 1- 1,5m high and has a grass verge separating it from the carriageway, 1.2 The site defined in blue which represents land which is currently within the ownership and control of the applicants, forms part of a wider land holding which is currently managed from Corlea Farm which accommodates two dwellings and a range of farm and out buildings. Corlea Bungalow lies approximately 30m from the highway and lower than the road, together with the access from this property to the highway, and more land which lies to the west. The access road continues past Coriea Bungalow to Corlea Farm house and a range of outbuildings to the east. 1.3 The Corlea Road accommodates a number of houses, most of which are on the southern side of the road and many are close to the road - such as Moaney Mooar Farmhouse, Cronk ny Geayee, and Ecklands, Corlea Bungalow and Corlea Farm and Ballaglea House, slightly further away from the road. Croit Vane is an extended dwelling with ancillary buildings which lies on the northern, higher side of the road. There is a gap of around 250m between the entrance to Corlea Farm and the nearest dwelling to the west which is Moaney Mooar House. 1.4 The history of the area edged in blue is relevant to the consideration of the current application. Corlea Bungalow was approved under IDO 24999 in 1968. The application was submitted by the then Isle of Man Local Government Board. A condition was attached to the approval which required that the dwelling should be occupied by a farm worker or person connected with agriculture to the satisfaction of the Planning Committee. A letter was sent to the owner in 1969 indicating that it had been reported that the property had been sold and 14/01389/B Page 1 of 6

==== PAGE 2 ====

was not being occupied in accordance with the condition. No further correspondence was received or issued according to the file. 1.5. In 1973 planning permission was sought and granted for the extension of the property by the erection of an attached garage and the conversion of the existing garage to additional living accommodation together with the erection of a greenhouse (IDO 34506). 1.6 At the time of that application, no questions were asked about the occupation of the dwelling and no condition was attached to confirm the agricultural worker's occupancy requirement. The property was described in the application form as "domestic". 1.7 A certificate of lawful use of the property was granted under PA 12/00603 which acknowledged that the property had been occupied as a private dwelling for a period of ten years or more up to the time of the certificate, in contravention of the original occupancy condition, thus rendering the occupancy immune from enforcement at that time. 1.8 Corlea Bungalow Is a modern single storey property with a shallow pitched roof which faces south west. It has a brown tiles roof and rendered and boarded elevations and a small chimney in the centre of the pitch, The dwelling is surrounded by low banks with planting within it and it sits just below the junction of two lanes, one of which leads past the bungalow to the farmhouse and the other behind the bungalow to the farm buildings. The bungalow has a floor area of around 146 sq m and a curtilage of around 868 sq m. This has approval for replacement under PA 13/91094/A, The siting of the new dwelling was not on the footprint of the existing dwelling but was some 60m from the existing site. The application included an illustration of how a dwelling could fit onto the site. The proposed residential curtilage was shown as some 3,000 sq m which the applicant described as "commensurate with the dwelling" and the floor area of the proposed dwelling was shown as around 360 sq m (illustration only). The proposal thus represented an increase in curtilage of around 168% and an increase in floor area of around 245%. A detached garage was also shown, with a footprint of 6m by 12m. This application was refused under delegated powers and the decision appealed by the applicant. The inspector recommended that the development would result in a "materially adverse effect on the character and appearance of the countryside, contrary to the objectives of Housing Policy 14 and Environment Policy 1 of the loMSP" (her paragraph 19), 1.9 The acting Minister however found the decision to be finely balanced and concluded that "the proposed siting of the replacement dwelling towards the north-west corner of the 'application field' when set against the mature screening that is afforded to the field in general and to the north-west corner, in particular, is sufficient to overcome any concerns in respect to the visual impact of the proposal which, in Minister Crookall's opinion, is the clear product of its large floor area." In reaching this decision, he was of the view that "if a landscaping scheme was to be submitted which proposes that the current 'gaps' which exist in the landscape frontage along Corlea Road are closed by the addition of ’mature' (as opposed to semi-mature) trees and that the existing western landscaping/tree belt is also enhanced/strengthened by the addition of further 'mature' trees, this will assist to provide comprehensive screening to the proposed replacement dwelling such that its impact within the visual resource will be mitigated against." He was also of the view that the existing bungalow, by reason of its orientation ro the Corlea Road, will have a greater visual impact in the local visual resource than that which may arise from the siting/orientation of the new replacement dwelling to the Corlea Road, irrespective of the direction of travel to the application site along Corlea Road". He also noted that whilst the new dwelling was larger in mass, it had a similar footprint to the existing bungalow. The acting Minister approved the application. PLANNING POLICY 14/01389/B Page 2 of 6

==== PAGE 3 ====

2.1 The site lies within an area of open space on the APS. As such, the provisions of Generai Poiicy 3, Environment Poiicy 1 and Housing Poiicies 12 and 14 are appiicabie in this case. 2.2 Generai Policy 3: Development wiii not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Pian with the exception of: a) essentiai housing for agricuiturai workers who have to iive ciose to their place of work (Housing Poiicies 7, 8, 9 and 10) b) conversion of redundant rural buildings which are of architectural, historical, or social value and interest (Housing Policy 11) c) previously developed land which contains a significant amount of buildings where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environmental and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment d) the replacement of existing rural dwellings (Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14) e) location-dependant development in connection with the working of minerals or the provision of necessary services; f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry g) development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative and h) buildings or works required for interpretation of the countryside, its wildlife or heritage". 2.3 Environment Policy 1: '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." 2.4 The Strategic Plan does, however contain policies which allow for the development of buildings associated with the keeping of horses. Environment Policy 19 states: "Development of equestrian activities and buildings will only be accepted in the countryside where there will be as a result of such development no loss in local amenity, no loss of high quality agricuiturai land (Classes 1 and 2) and where the local highway network can satisfactorily accommodate any increase in traffic (see Environment Poiicy 14 for interpretation of Class 1 and 2)." Environment Policy 20 states: "There will be a presumption against large scale equestrian developments, which includes new buildings and external arenas, in areas of an Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance unless there are exceptional circumstances to override such a policy." Environment Policy 21 states: "Buildings for the stabling, shelter or care of horses or other animals will not be permitted in the countryside if they would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the countryside in terms of siting, design, size or finish. Any new buildings must be designed in form and materials to reflect their specific purpose; in particular cavity- wall construction should not be used." 2.5 The site also lies within an area of Incised Slopes on the draft Landscape Character Appraisal Assessment. This is a large area which stretches from the west coast to the north of Port Erin to the east coast at Santon and separates the Lowland Plain from the Uplands. 14/01389/B Page 3 of 6

==== PAGE 4 ====

There are no specific policies within the Southern Area Plan as it applies to this class of landscape which are considered relevant in the consideration of this application, 2.6 Energy Policy 2 states: "Land within 9m either side of an overhead High Tension power cable will be safeguarded from development." THE PROPOSAL 3.1 Proposed is the erection of a stable building with hard standing between the road and the building and the creation of a new access onto the Corlea Road together with an access through to the field to the east where planning approval has been granted for the new dwelling (PA 13/91094/A). 3.2 The stable building 21m long and 9m wide at the widest point. It will be built and finished in timber and will accommodate six stables, a feed store and tack room, The building will be 4.4m high to the ridge. The building will be partly cut into the site and part built up to take account of the slope of the site. The ridge of the building will be around 1.4m higher than the Corlea Road: the existing roadside hedge will be increased to improve the screening of the building. PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The application site has not been the subject of any applications. The application for approval of the reserved matters from PA 13/91094/A has now been received (PA 14/0i385/REM). REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Malew Parish Commissioners indicate that they do not object to the application (08.12.14). 5.2 MUA (Electricity) comment that the development is dose to an electricity supply and that the applicant should consult MUA in this respect. ASSESSMENT 6.1 The issues in this case are whether the proposal complies with the requirements and provisions of EPs 19, 20 and 21. There is no requirement in these policies for equestrian- related development to be justified in the same way that agriculturally-supported development is in EP 15 and HP7. However, if the development were not to be found to comply with the Environmental Policies it is relevant to consider whether there are things which may be taken into account which justify setting aside these policies in part or in total, 6.2 The proposal should be considered in respect of Environment Policies 19, 20 and 21. These require that new equestrian related buildings are sited such that they do not have an adverse impact on local amenity, can be accommodated by the local highway network and where there is no loss of high quality agricultural land (EP19). In terms of the last element, the land in this area is generally Class 3 which is not considered of particularly high agricultural value. In terms of highway safety, there is an existing access which can be used by those wishing to access and egress from the field. Due to the set back of the gate and roadside fence from the carriageway, there is the opportunity for good visibility to the south west. Visibility to the north east is limited by the alignment of the highway. Visibility of around 40m is shown on the drawing. The application includes reference to the lowering of hedges where required for enhanced visibility as well as the roadside hedge being increased in height to aid screening. It can't be both and the reduction in the height of the hedge will increase the visibility of the buildings and structures on site. No specific details are shown of any hedge lowering. 14/01389/B Page 4 of 6

==== PAGE 5 ====

6.3 The critical issue in this case is therefore the impact which the development will have on the amenity of the area and whether it is detrimental to the character and appearance of the countryside in terms of siting, design, size or finish. The existing site has no buildings upon it and as such it could be considered that any new building or area of hardstanding is going to have an impact and potentially an adverse impact on the character of the area. The character of Corlea Road is that it is generally open but with short sections of built development with a haphazard array of houses and buildings of different sizes, types and style. As such, the spaces between buildings becomes all the more important. In this case, the introduction of a building is exacerbated as there are no roadside trees to screen the building, the creation of a safe means of access may increase the visibility of the buiiding and the hard standing. 6,4 It is considered that due to the current open nature of the field and the position of the proposed building and size of hard standing, there will be an adverse visual impact from the proposed stables and hard standing. As such, it is relevant to consider whether there are any mitigating circumstances and where there is a more acceptable alternative. It is relevant that the application site which is the subject of this application already has agricultural outbuildings including stables. Whilst it is intended that the proposed stables are intended to complement the replacement dwelling approved under PA 13/91094/A and that house is not yet approved, built or occupied and there is also a significant change in ground level between the site of the proposed dwelling and that of the proposed stables across which a new access is proposed to link the house with the stables. As such, this is not the same as an application for the development of stables in conjunction with a holding which has no stables or agricultural buildings on it. In this respect it is important to bear in mind that it was the applicant's wish to move the replacement of the existing bungalow some distance from the existing agricultural/stable buildings and thus specifically placing this away from the existing outbuildings, 6.5 There would be less visual impact if the stables were located in the same field as the proposed dwelling as this field has the benefit of existing trees between the road and the field, one of the reasons why the Minister determined that the impact of the new dwelling would be acceptable. This would also have the benefit of compacting the impact of the new buildings in a shorter area, resulting in a reduced visual impact. The supporting information does not indicate that any other positions for the stables have been considered. 6,6 In summary, it is considered that the proposed stables and area of hardstanding, by virtue of their position in an open field would have a detrimental Impact on the openness and character of the locality and would therefore not comply with all parts of Environment Policies 19 and 21 and it is not felt that there are reasons why these concerns should be set aside in this case. 6.7 The overhead electricity supply runs through the site of the stables. This is shown as being retained as part of the proposal and as such is in contravention of Energy Policy 2. PARTY STATUS 7.1 The local authority is, 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 MUA refer to a material consideration in their response and as such should be considered an interested person. 14/01389/B Page 5 of 6

==== PAGE 6 ====

Recom mendation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 19.01.2015 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 R 1. The proposed stables and area of hardstanding, by virtue of their position in an open field would have a detrimental impact on the openness and character of the locality and would therefore not comply with all parts of Environment Policies 19 and 21 and it is not felt that there are reasons why these concerns should be set aside in this case. R2. The proposed stables would be constructed underneath the route of an overhead high tension electricity supply. As such the proposal would be contrary to Energy Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan. 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: Committee Meeting Date: Signed ... Presenting Officer Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason is required, signing officer Co delete as appropriate YES/NO 14/01389/B Page 6 of 6