Loading document...
Application No.: 07/01272/A Applicant: Mr M Reubens Proposal: Approval in principle for the erection of a dwelling Site Address: Alder Oaks Field 431505 St Marks Road St Marks Ballasalla Isle Of Man ### Considerations Case Officer: Miss S E Corlett Expected Decision Level: Delegation ### Written Representations ### Consultations Consulttee: Highways Division Notes: Consulttee: Malew Parish Commissioners Notes: Object Consulttee: S.P.M.C. & E. Notes: Comments received Consulttee: IOM Water Authority Notes: Note received
The site represents an elongated field situated on the western side of the A26 opposite its junction with the Mullinaragher Road. The field has an access onto the St. Mark's Road and has a number of structures within it (see below) and is just over an acre in size.
The site is within an area designated on the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982 as "white land", that is, not designated for development.
The following applications have been submitted in respect of this site:
Proposed now is the erection of a dwelling on the site. The applicant has helpfully provided a drawing which shows the position of a possible dwelling which is central on the site, some 8m from the road. The stables and greenhouse are to the north of this.
There are letters from four local residents (three properties) who state that they have no objection to the principle of a dwelling on the site for the applicant's own use and where such a proposal would not be contrary to current planning policies.
However, it should be noted that the development would be contrary to current planning policies and there is no way of ensuring that the dwelling would be for Mr. Reuben's own use. A planning condition controlling occupancy restricted to a particular person should seldom if ever be attached to an application for building works and indeed there is no justification for such a condition in this case.
Malew Parish Commissioners, a resident of Port Soderick and the Society for the Preservation of the Manx Countryside and Environment object to the application on the basis that it is contrary to current planning policy and that there is no justification for it.
Isle of Man Water Authority and Manx Electricity Authority both make comments regarding the supply of services to the development.
The Inspector commenting on PA 01/1526 stated the following regarding the proposed agricultural building: "The general policy on new buildings must be justified on the grounds of need. Whilst Mr Reubens clearly desires some size and type of building in this field, it is my opinion that his rural activities are in the nature of "hobby" farming rather than significant involvement in agricultural activity. Whilst there is a small herd of Loughtan sheep, it is my understanding that these are a remarkably hardy breed and that indoor housing is not necessary even in very severe weather. The 2 vintage tractors are certainly not essential to the working of a holding of this size and a building would not be justified simply to keep them under cover and provide a building for their maintenance. I have not been persuaded that on this small acreage there is an established need for a building,
particularly one of the size proposed in the application". The building proposed in that application was to be 12m by 8m in area.
The site is not designated for development on the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982 and the Strategic Plan makes the following references to such development:
Strategic Policy 1 which states: "Development should make the best use of resources by: a) optimising the use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and under-used land and buildings and re-using scarce, indigenous building materials; b) ensuring efficient use of sites, taking into account the needs for access, landscaping, open space and amenity standards and c) being located so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services".
Strategic Policy 2: "New development will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions of these towns and villages. Development will be permitted in the countryside only in the exceptional circumstances identified in paragraph 6.3".
General Policy 3: Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of:
a) essential housing for agricultural workers who have to live close to their place of work (Housing Policies 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".
Spatial Policy 5: New development will be located within the defined settlements. Development will only be permitted in the countryside in accordance with General Policy 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".
I can see no justification for the proposal in terms of the above policies. The proposal would be contrary to these policies and to the general objective of sustainable development.
The Department of Transport and the local authority are, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (c) and (d), considered "interested persons" and as such should be afforded party status.
The Isle of Man Water Authority and the Manx Electricity Authority both raise issues relating to working practices and the supply of services, neither of which are planning considerations in this instance and as such should not be granted party status in this instance.
The occupants of Ballajerioe, Thie Jeroi and Knock-y-Vriew, whilst close to the site are not directly alongside it and would not be directly affected by the proposed development and regardless of whether they are in support of the application (which they are) or objecting to it, I would recommend that they should not be afforded party status in this instance.
The Society for the Preservation of the Manx Countryside and Environment and the resident of Port Soderick are not directly affected by the proposal and should not be afforded party status in this instance.
Recommended Decision: Refused
Date of Recommendation: 16.08.2007
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
R 1.
The erection of a dwelling on this site would represent an unwarranted development in the Island's countryside and would be contrary to both the land use provisions of the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982 and Strategic Policies 1 and 2, Spatial Policy 5, General Policy 3, Environment Policy 1 and Housing Policy 4 of the Island Strategic Plan.
I confirm that this decision accords with Government Circular Nos 44/05 (Delegation of Functions to Director of Planning and Building Control) and 47/05 (Delegation of Functions to Senior Planning Officer)
Decision Made : Refused Date: 17.08.2007
Signed: M. I. McCauley Director of Planning and Building Control
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown