Loading document...
The property The Old Parsonage, St. Judes, is a large two storey detached property which is located on the northern side of the A13 road, and east of the St. Judes Crossroads.
The dwelling has been zoned under the Isle of Man Development Plan Order 1982 as being within an area of 'woodland'; the site is not within a Conservation Area or within an area zoned as high landscape value or costal value and scenic significance.
The application proposes the approval in principle for the conversion of existing barn into a storage and packing facility for a small business.
Andreas Parish Commissioners:- No objection
The Wildlife & Conservation Officer comments on the planning application, which can be summarised as; There is evidence of recent bat occupation and therefore forms a roost, which is protected under the Wildlife Act 1990; I have discussed this with Mrs Smith, who suggested that the barn office space could be positioned downstairs, with file storage upstairs for less regular use; I believe that we could agree a scheme at a later date (a condition) which allows for the operation of this business in a way that also provides for the retention of the bat roost; The downstairs rooms have evidence of nesting swallows; such nests are protected whilst in use but are not protected at other times; And I advise that works in the downstairs rooms should take account of this, by either allowing access or preventing them from entering early in the season if that would affect the operations later in the year.
The owner/occupier of Robins Croft, St Judes, comments on the planning application, which can be summarised as; if approved could the planning committee consider putting restrictions on its use in the form of noise, light and hours worked and if the house is subsequently sold on to another party that any approval for a small business needs to be reapplied for.
Mr Jessopp comments on the planning application, which can be summarised as; it could be argued that there is a material planning reason to object to the proposal as the site is clearly not zoned fro business use; However the proposal is for the conversion of an existing building rather than the construction of a new building and therefore will have little significant visual impact; Internet businesses run from residential premises, provided they do not generate adverse impacts, should not be discouraged as they potentially can provide good employment and revenue opportunities for the Island; I believe that the business use of this site would be self regulated by the size of the premises, if the business expanded such that it out grew the existing barn then it is probably unlikely that permission would be granted for expansion and therefore relocation to other premises would probably be required; And if permission was granted subject to conditions that strictly limited the business use to the barn and not the remainder of the site and excluded retail use then I have no objection.
The Chief Fire Officer makes no comment on the merit of the proposed development but request that an informative note be attached to any approval decision notice.
We have received no privately written representations objecting to the application.
The business according to the applicants is a small family business comprising of Mr and Mrs Smith. The business represents manufactures of precision satellite navigation and survey equipment for the survey, scientific and renewable energy markets. This is a niche specialist market and the equipment is not applicable to the retail market. The business will therefore not generate any traffic from the public or customers. We are not involved in any manufacturing. Sales are conducted by way of phone, internet, through distributors, visits to customers advertising, referrals from manufactures and attending exhibitions. You will see that we are essential involved with admin.
The business would generate one full-time member of staff, working from 9-5.30, to assist with admin. We do not own or store any commercial vehicles. Our imports and exports are carried via air freight and we envisage a (DHL or similar) courier delivery/collection every other day only.
The longer term, we have no need for the business to expand, except at sometime in the future we might wish to hire another administrator to free me from some of the accounts paperwork. This might be a part or full time job.
As indicated within the isle of Man Strategic Plan there are exceptions to the general approach of only allowing new office development outside those area zoned for office use, these include working from home; where this does not result either in staff being employed or in day to day callers, there need be no detriment to the residential area, and there should be less travelling involved; and is also one way of encouraging the formation of new local businesses.
Whilst this proposal does include to employ one staff member who would visit the site daily, I do not consider this would have a detrimental impact upon the residential amenity of any of the neighbouring properties due to the sufficient on site parking and due to the distance between neighbouring properties, the closest being East Craig which is approximately 90 metres away. Added to this the proposal would use an existing building, which is worthy of retention, and does not propose to erected a new build to house the office use, which would be inappropriate and unacceptable.
The business does not require visitors/customers to the site, only a courier delivery/collection every other day would visit the site. I would consider this to be very limited and not really different from the postman delivering post every day.
Regarding the impacts upon the bats, I consider with the conditions indicated by the Wildlife & Conservation Officer, the proposal can take place without any significant harm to the bats/roost.
The barn structurally appears to be appropriate for conversion; however a condition should be included that in any subsequent application a structural report should be carried out and submitted.
On balance I consider the proposal would be appropriate in this location and therefore my recommendation is for an approval.
I consider that the following meet the criteria of Government Circular 1/06 and should be afforded interested party status:
I consider that the following parties that made representations to the planning application do not meet the criteria of Government Circular 1/06 and should not be afforded interested party status:-
Recommended Decision: Permitted
Date of Recommendation: 30.10.2007
C: Conditions for approval N: Notes attached to conditions R: Reasons for refusal O: Notes attached to refusals
C 1. The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
C 2. This approval relates to the submitted documents which are date-stamped 3rd September 2007.
C 3. Prior to a reserved matters application being submitted the applicant is to consult with the Planning Authority regarding the scheme which must be allow for the retention of the bat roost and its use by bats. Handwritten note: 2d 19 11.07
NB: The applicant is advised to discuss the bat protection scheme with the DAFF before submission the Planning Authority.
C 4. No advertisement matter of any description shall be exhibited on these premises without the PRIOR written permission of the Planning Authority.
C 5. The building may be used for storage and packing purposes only and in association with the business operated by Mr A Smith and Mrs L Smith and no others. Handwritten note: persons or company for such time as they are resident at the Old Parsonage
N 1. Prior to commencement of any works the applicant is advised to consult with the Fire Safety Department with regard to the general fire precautions contained within this application.
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: Permitted Date: Handwritten: 14/10/07
Signed : ... M. I. McCauley Director of Planning and Building Control
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown