Loading document...
Application No.: | | | :-- | :-- | | Applicant: | Department Of Agriculture Fisheries And Forestry | | Proposal: | Approval in principle for the re-establishment of redundant building to a <br> dwelling | | Site Address: | Mine Captain's House Snaefell Road Agneash Laxey | ### Considerations Case Officer : Sarah Corlett Expected Decision Level: ### Written Representations We have received 20 private representations for this application. ### Consultations Consultee : Highways Division Notes : Consultee : Lonan Parish Commissioners Notes: refused, see comments Consultee : Manx National Heritage Notes: see comments ### Policy
The site represents the footprint of an existing building which sits at the north western end of the Snaefell Mines public footpath. Also indicated in the plan is a red line which marks the route from Ballayolgane Farm although the blue land does not include all of this.
The building in question is what I believe is the former Mine Captain's House and has four walls but no roof. The window openings have for some time been bricked up and there is a two storey lean-to annex on the left hand side as one looks at the front of the building. The building is damp and behind the building is an area of reedy grass onto which water drips incessantly making the risk of damp very high. The landscape around the building is bleak with heaps of material left over from the mining which took place here.
The building is approximately half a mile from the nearest made up road and inhabited building. The roadway varies between stony and grass lane to steep and rocky path which is was difficult to scramble up never mind get a vehicle over. This is described as "a usable means of access": I would dispute this. A four wheeled drive vehicle would struggle and clearly delivery vans bringing post and fuel would be unable to get past the first gate. Also, increased vehicular usage of this lane would not only conflict with the pedestrian use of it but also would increase the wear and tear to an extent that it would become unusable by both pedestrians and vehicles. Access for emergency vehicles would be impossible.
There is no mains water - the application suggests that a private supply could be provided from land within the applicant's ownership. A septic tank would be necessary with soakaways.
The absence of a roof probably means that the building is not substantially intact and therefore does not comply with the requirements of Planning Circular 3/89. However, the building is prominent in the landscape and historically important and this could be judged to over-ride the requirement for the building to be intact. However, the historical association with the area does not necessitate habitation and indeed as the need for the house has disappeared as has the operations which led to its construction, it could be argued that it would be historically inaccurate to re-establish a residential status here.
If the building were occupied, it could not be easily or economically serviced. In addition, the provision of domestic paraphernalia such as car parking, garden, and a connection to the mains electricity supply would all change the appearance and context of the building.
In previous advice I also advised that should an application be submitted for this (and my advice was that such an application would be likely to be unsuccessful) it should be accompanied by a structural survey showing that the building could be renovated without rebuilding. This has not been provided and bearing in mind the lack of roof and the time since the roof has been missing, together with the damp problems, I would not be surprised if the building were not structurally incapable of being renovated.
I suggested that Manx National Heritage may be interested in using the building as some sort of visitor's or information facility or it could be roofed and used as a stone tent.
I understand that choughs and hen harriers have been observed in the area and have spoken with Chris Sharpe of the Manx Bird Atlas who was opposed to the principle of this application and was to write in confirming this. MNH have reiterated this and point out that the applicant is responsibility for the enforcement of the legislation which would protect these species.
Other concerns involve potential pollution from mine material and the Commissioners mention that there are still storage tanks nearby with hazardous materials inside, although these could and should be removed.
Recommendation
Recommended Decision :
Date of Recommendation :
Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal
Whilst the Department has a policy which encourages the renovation and re-use of redundant buildings within the Island's countryside (Planning Circular 3/89), this proposal is not felt to satisfy the requirements of that policy inasmuch as:
Notwithstanding the above, the provision of a satisfactory means of access to service the property, both in terms of the occupants of the property and those visiting for social and delivery purposes, would significantly damage the rural character of the area. In addition, the introduction of additional vehicular traffic such as would be generated by the residential use of the property, onto this public right of way would be detrimental to the enjoyment of the footpath by those rambling and walking in this area. If the provision of a vehicular access to the property would involve only minimal upgrading of the footpath (and it is not accepted that this would provide a satisfactory means of access to the property), the increased usage of this route would downgrade the footpath so as to make it less convenient for walkers to use it.
The works required to the building to bring it to habitable status would destroy the building as a habitat for choughs which are known to use the building for nesting. Choughs are protected by the Wildlife Act 1990. In addition, the area is known to accommodate hen harriers: the domestication of the site and surrounding area would be detrimental to the continued use of this area by this species which is also protected under the Wildlife Act 1990.
The renovation of the building and its occupation for residential purposes would change the character of both the building and the surrounding area. Presently the house and its environs appear as deserted features in a landscape which is dominated by its mining past. An occupied dwelling with its car parking, garden, parked vehicles and domestic paraphernalia would be completely out of place in this landscape which is historically important in reminding visitors to it of its history and purpose.
The Planning Committee would accept that the building, with its bricked up window openings which indicate a past intention by the then owners to abandon the property, has an unattractive air and that
there could be public benefit in some renovation and re-use of this building. However, this would only be compatible with its surroundings if this use was complementary with them, possibly in the form of historical information about the site and its past and the ecology of the area. The applicant is strongly advised to consult Manx National Heritage in this respect.
Committee Meeting Date :
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown