Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
22/01308/B Page 1 of 13
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. 22/01308/B Applicant : Mr & Mrs John & Sonia Kneen Proposal Demolition of existing farmhouse and outbuildings and erection of replacement dwelling Site Address Ballaoates Farm Ballavagher Road St Johns Isle Of Man IM4 3JE
Case Officer :
Mr Toby Cowell Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation 11.05.2023
Conditions and Notes for Approval
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
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 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 2. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no extension, enlargement or other alteration of the dwelling(s) hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, shall be carried out, without the prior written approval of the Department.
Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.
C 3. No development shall commence until a schedule of materials and finishes and samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces, including all hardsurfacing within the site, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.
C 4. No development shall be commenced until a hard and soft landscaping scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. Such a scheme shall include details of all walls, fences, trees, hedgerows and other planting which are to be retained; details of all new walls, fences and other boundary treatment and finished ground levels; a planting specification to include the location of grassed areas details of the hard surface treatment of the open parts of the site and a programme of implementation.
==== PAGE 2 ====
22/01308/B Page 2 of 13
All works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed in writing with the Department. Any trees or plants indicated on the approved scheme which, within a period of five years from the date of planting, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced during the next planting season with other trees or plants of a species and size to be first approved in writing by the Department.
Reason: To ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development.
N 1. FOR YOUR INFORMATION Please be aware that a ban on the installation of fossil fuel heating systems in any new building(s) and or extension(s), will come into force on 1st January 2025.
You therefore are encouraged to ensure that your proposed development includes alternatives to fossil fuel heating systems if you believe that such works will not be completed by that date.
To this end, if you propose an alternative, such as air source or ground source heat pump(s), or any other heating system that would require planning approval, the details of this should be addressed now. This may require you to resubmit your planning application to accommodate the alternative permitted heating system proposed.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The principle of the development is considered to be acceptable, by way of providing a new dwelling of a high design quality replacing a structurally defective property that is deemed beyond the reasonable or practical capability of being faithfully renovated and restored. The proposals would afford future occupants a high standard of living, without detriment to surrounding residential properties, or giving rise to a material impact upon the local highway network. The proposals are therefore deemed compliant with General Policy 2 (b) & (c) General policy 3, and Housing Policies 12 and 14 of the Strategic Plan (2016).
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This approval relates to the following plans and documents referenced; Existing plans and elevations Received 12.10.22
Proposed plans and elevations Received 13.02.23
Location plan Site plan Received 02.03.23
Bat Survey Received 04.03.23 __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the following interest group should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):
Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, 95 Malew Street, Castletown
==== PAGE 3 ====
22/01308/B Page 3 of 13
as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy. __
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE AS THE APPLICANT IS A CLOSE RELATIVE OF AN OFFICER OF THE P&BC DIRECTORATE
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site comprises Ballaoates farmhouse, an early-mid 19th century traditional Manx stone cottage which has been notably extended over the years, including a mono-pitched brick extension to the side (roadside elevation) and cat slide stone extension to the rear. The site further includes a collection of stone outbuildings, the majority of which are effectively conjoined together and physically attached to the side (northern) elevation of the principle dwelling, together with additional minor detached structures including a grain silo.
1.2 The site forms part of the wider agricultural holding of Ballaoates Farm, which includes a collection of more modern agricultural buildings to the north-east of the dwelling, together with additional stone outbuildings to the immediate west adjacent to the highway. Such elements however fall outside of the application site, which is limited to the principle farmhouse itself and its immediate associated curtilage.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Planning permission is sought for the demolition of the existing dwelling and all additional structures within the application site and erection of a replacement farmhouse. The new dwelling would effectively occupy a similar if not marginally reduced footprint relative to the existing dwelling and associated attached outbuildings, and the same orientation. The new dwelling would effectively accord with the design principles of Planning Circular 3/91 in the form of a traditional styled Manx farmhouse, but include the addition of a link element connecting to a more modern gabled 'extension'. The property would be finished in smooth painted render, and a natural slate roof with a combination of timber cladding and re-used Manx stone for the 'extension' element.
2.2 The property would host a total of 4 bedrooms, 2 no. on each floor, with the 'extension' element facilitating an open kitchen/dining/living area. The dwelling would be completed with a gable front porch, sash windows and rooflights, with a small gabled dormer on the rear elevation of the link element to facilitate headroom at the top of the staircase.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 Planning permission was previously sought for a replacement dwelling in 2021 (PA 21/00694/B) for an enlarged dwelling of a more modern and bulkier design. This application was subsequently withdrawn. No further planning history of relevance for the site is noted.
4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 The application site is identified in the 1982 Development Plan as 'white land' within the countryside that is not zoned for development. The site is not within a Conservation Area but falls within an Area of High Landscape Value
4.2 The following policies from the 2016 Strategic Plan are considered pertinent in the assessment of this application;
Strategic Policy 1 Efficient use of land and resources
==== PAGE 4 ====
22/01308/B Page 4 of 13
2 Priority for new development to identified towns and villages 3 To respect the character of our towns and villages 5 Design and visual impact 11 Housing needs
Spatial Policy 5 Development only in countryside in accordance with General Policy 3
General Policy 2 General Development Considerations 3 Exceptions to development in the countryside
Environment Policy 1 Protection of the countryside 2 Protection of Areas of High Landscape Value
Housing Policy 4 Exceptions to allowing new housing in the countryside 12 Replacement dwellings in the countryside 14 Siting, size and design of replacement dwellings in the countryside
Transport Policy 4 Highways safety 7 Parking provision
Infrastructure Policy 5 Water conservation and management
Community Policy 7 Designing out criminal and anti-social behaviour 11 Prevention for the outbreak and spread of fire
4.5 Residential Design Guide (2021) This document provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential properties and sustainable methods of construction.
4.6 Planning Circular 3/91 (1991) This document provides guidance on the design of new residential development in the countryside and remains a material consideration in the determination of applications for dwellings on land not zoned for development (i.e. in the countryside). This document is also specifically referenced throughout the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, including within Housing Policy 14 which specifically relates to the design of replacement dwellings in the countryside.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 German Parish Commissioners - No objection (18.11.22), with no objections to amended plans (13.04.23)
5.2 Highways Services - Development would have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and /or parking. The Applicant is advised to consider installing cycle parking and an electric vehicle charging point (28.10.22)
Highways' position is maintained following the submission of subsequent iterations of amended plans, and continued to not oppose the proposals.
==== PAGE 5 ====
22/01308/B Page 5 of 13
5.3 Forestry Officer - No objection. The trees of concern in the last application at this address have been removed under the TPA due to structural and physiological issues. (07.03.23)
5.4 DEFA Biodiversity - It is generally accepted that bat surveys are only really valid for 12- 18 months because bats readily move into different roosts within and between years. Therefore the Manx Bat Group's Bat Survey Report dated December 2020 for Ballaoates Farm is not valid. We usually request that survey results are submitted prior to determination of applications.
However, in line with industry best practise recommendations, which is referred to in Section 9.2.4 of the British Standard Biodiversity - Code of Best Practise for Planning and Development (BS 42020:2013), we are content in this instance for an updated bat survey to be secured via a condition on approval. The British Standard states as follows (see the section in bold): The presence or absence of protected species, and the extent to which they could be affected by the proposed development, should be established before planning permission is granted; otherwise all material considerations might not have been considered in making the decision. The use of planning conditions to secure ecological surveys after planning permission has been granted should therefore only be applied in exceptional circumstances, such as where original survey work will need to be repeated because the survey data might be out of date before commencement of development, etc.
We therefore request that a condition is secured for no works, including demolition, to take place until a preliminary assessment for bats has been undertaken on the building by a suitably qualified ecological consultant and a report detailing the findings, alongside appropriate avoidance, mitigation and compensation measures, has been submitted to Planning and approved in writing. Should bats or evidence of bats be found during the preliminary assessment then additionally surveys, including emergence surveys will be required. Additionally, it is stated in the Manx Bat Group's report that 'only the farmhouse and adjoining outbuildings were inspected during this survey. Should the outbuilding on the roadside of the property be scheduled for demolition/replacement in the future it is advised that a separate survey be undertaken.' (17.03.23)
The Ecosystem Policy Team can confirm that the Manx Bat Group's bat report dated 28th March 2023 is all in order and that a suitable level of assessment has been undertaken. The Manx Bat Group found no evidence of bats within the buildings and therefore determined that the development could proceed with avoidance or mitigation measures being required. We would however request that the applicants remain vigilant throughout the works and should bats or evidence of bats be found at any point, works must stop and advice be sought from the DEFA Ecosystem Policy Team, or from the Manx Bat Group. (11.04.23)
5.5 Registered Buildings Officer - Recommend refusal. The proposals are for the demolition of the existing farmhouse and outbuildings and replacement with a new dwelling house. Whist I consider the proposed development to be more in keeping with the character, scale and massing of the historic buildings than the previous application 21/00694/B. However, the proposed gable feels unfinished and poorly detailed and should be refined. My comments and objection regarding the loss of the buildings remain as previously stated. I agree with the issues raised by Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society (IOMNHAS) made in their comments of the 30th July and 20th September 2021 (in relation to application 21/00694/B) and raise the following points;
The buildings proposed for demolition appear to be a traditional Manx farmhouse and associated agricultural buildings. The farmhouse's gable end is located to facing the roadside its catslide rear addition also visible. The associated outbuildings are positioned to form a semi enclosed yard with outbuildings shielding the yard from the road. IOMNHAS have identified the building to be in existence since 1840 and are possibly earlier, I have no reason to suggest this is not likely to be the case. Based on the information above I consider that this farmyard
==== PAGE 6 ====
22/01308/B Page 6 of 13
complex including the house is of historic and architectural interest and therefore should be the subject of HP12 and HP11.
The information provided does not demonstrate that the buildings on site cannot be used and form the basis for appropriate development of the site. This should be the first instance required due to HP12. Many old farmhouses and assorted farm building have been restored and converted into residential use and it would appear that this has not been explored in any meaningful way. There are numerous best practice guidance documents about this including Historic England's guidance
https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/adapting-traditionalfarm-buildings/
Evidence is now clearly available that the reuse of existing building is far more environmentally friendly that demolishing and building new, should any claims made that this is case they should also deal with the issue of embodied carbon. Traditional and natural materials also have their part to play in protected the environment and climate change as they are often recyclable and require less carbon in their manufacture. It is possible to make traditional and historic buildings more energy efficient particularly when the extent of refurbishment is high.
I therefore consider that the applicant has failed to address the issues outlined in HP 12, 14 and General Policy 3 and recommend the application is refused.
5.6 Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society - Regret the proposed loss of yet another traditional, possibly Quarterland, farm steading including the farmhouse particularly as it is in a very prominent location, very visible from the much used Ballavargher / Archallagon Road and was always outwardly a well maintained traditionally white washed steading. The lack of internal upkeep appears to be a reflection of the lack of financial resources rather than any deliberate attempt to abandon the farmhouse by the previous owner.
The Society appreciate that the current proposal is a more modest proposal than was originally submitted under PA21/00694/B and that it does fit better to the footprint of the dwelling albeit it still encompasses the adjoining stone outbuildings and thereby is still significantly bigger than the original house and maintains a continuous atypical ridge level.
While the Society appreciates that the roof of the farmhouse in particular needs replacing, they are not convinced that the whole of the characterful house and outbuildings should be demolished without due consideration of how they could be incorporated into a renovated building. As above this aspect of the proposal needs to be properly considered. While there may be benefits from meeting Building Regulations in a new dwelling this is not a requirement of planning policy. Moreover any such assessment should be properly counterbalanced by one for the embodied carbon within the stone buildings and its release by demolition and movement both of materials and vehicles about the site.
The Society notes that together with PA22/01450/B if approved the proposals will result in the almost total demolition of the traditional buildings of this farmstead which until recently had been well looked after and clearly cherished and recognised to be a grouping of architectural or historic and social interest and accordingly objects to the application.
If the design is approved it should be subject to a condition that the front and side elevations visible from the road side, (why are compass directions not given on the elevations?) should be finished in natural stone and if painted should be returned to its traditional white finish. (27.01.23)
Isle of Man Natural History & Antiquarian Society note the revised plans of 13th February 2023. The Society would advise that their views remain unchanged. (09.03.23)
==== PAGE 7 ====
22/01308/B Page 7 of 13
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are as follows:
6.2 PRINCIPLE 6.2.1 The site falls within the open countryside and an area not zoned for development within the 1982 Development Plan. There is a general presumption again development in the countryside with development to be focussed towards defined settlements in accordance with Spatial Policy 5. Development will only be permitted in the countryside in accordance with the exceptions outlined in General Policy 3, one of which includes 'the replacement of existing rural dwellings'.
6.2.2 Environment Policy 1 advises that the countryside will be protected for its own sake, and development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms. Environment Policy 2 adds that when considering development in Areas of High Landscape Value (AHLV's), the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration, unless it can be shown that the development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape, or the location for the development is essential.
6.2.3 The proposals relate to the replacement of an existing dwelling in the countryside, the principle of which is generally supported in accordance with Housing Policy 12 of the Strategic Plan, aside from in the following cases:
(a) the existing building has lost its residential use by abandonment; or (b) the existing dwelling is of architectural or historic interest and is capable of renovation.
6.2.4 The existing building, whilst in a notably poor state of repair and effectively derelict, was noted as having been most recently occupied in 2019, and indeed only recently internally stripped of flooring and internal lime render. The dwelling is consequently not considered to have lost its residential use by abandonment and therefore this stipulation of HP12 does not apply. However, as noted by the Registered Buildings Officer and additional representations received, the existing dwelling is considered to be of a reasonable degree of architectural and historic interest. Therefore, it is necessary to consider whether the dwelling is deemed practically, economically and functionally capable of renovation to a high standard.
6.2.5 The application upon initial submission was supported by a Building Survey Report undertaken by the agent, which was largely a visual inspection of the property prior to the removal of flooring, wallpaper and internal lime mortar. The report concluded that the building was in a severely dilapidated condition and not fit for human habitation. Likewise, the report noted a number of defects and issues for the property, supported by photographic evidence, which included the following:
Timber staircase to the attic unsafe and does not comply with Building Regulations;
==== PAGE 8 ====
22/01308/B Page 8 of 13
- No central heating provision and electrical installation is unsafe posing a fire risk;
6.2.6 The report concluded that the building is considered to be beyond economical repair due to the quantum of significant defects with only feasible option being to rebuild the property.
6.2.7 The above referenced was also supported by a report and subsequent letter from a qualified structural engineer, who reiterated their previous comments made for the withdrawn application that the building is beyond renovation and it's demolition would leave a site that can be used to accommodate a replacement farm house building that could comply with all modern day building regulations and services.
6.2.8 Following concerns raised by the Department over the design and form of the replacement dwelling initially submitted, amended drawings were produced for a dwelling that more closely following the design principles of Planning Circular 3/91. Likewise, in light of comments received from the Registered Buildings Officer, a rebuttal statement was submitted by the applicant together with a more thorough photographic survey of the property, which had by this point been internally stripped.
6.2.9 With respect to the present condition of the building and in response to comments made by the Registered Buildings Officer and the Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, the applicant has provided the following commentary:
"The original application 21/00694 /B provided reports from a builder on the practicality of renovation, a structural engineer and a surveyor. All of which concluded that the structure was incapable of retention. However, following consultation and withdrawal of this application and subsequent resubmission of the current application further investigation works were carried out. This included;
Removal of the rotten damaged floors on all levels."
6.2.10 Subsequent to the abovementioned investigation works, the applicant further noted the following:
There are no formal foundations, including any foundation stones under any part of the existing house. The southern part of the house being on made up ground (likely due to the slope of the site towards the road). There is no evidence of compaction of this ground or any suggestion that the material is suitable of withstanding the works required to renovate the building.
The lime mortar between the stonework has crumbled and sections of wall have begun to come away around the rotten floor joists. This appears to be caused by a mixture of hygroscopic degradation through the lack of damp proof coursing or membrane and penetrating water ingress which has been further exasperated by the poor maintenance or lack of repair along with the evident structural damage to the building.
The southern chimney stack (closest to the road) is leaning out so significantly that the roof fabric is no longer attached to the stonework with daylight clearly visible.
The northern end of the existing house is sat on top of bedrock, meaning any works to excavate and underpin section of the existing house would likely result in significant and substantial vibration resulting in likely further damage of the existing fabric or possible complete or partial collapse.
==== PAGE 9 ====
22/01308/B Page 9 of 13
- The lintels over each of the openings are timber and have rotted and in places have failed resulting in drop in the existing stonework above.
The damage caused by the lightning strike and resulting structural failure of the southern gable end results in the gable leaning towards the road.
The cat slide roof extension appears to be a much later add on, is of poor construction and uses materials not suitable for such purpose. These are highlighted in the photographic survey included but include the use of sections of railway line as lintels, a mixture of Manx stone, Peel brick and random rubble to form structural walls. In addition to this the cat slide addition lacks any form of foundation, damp proof course or any form of waterproofing and the ground level to the rear is at such a level as to be higher than 1/3 of the height of the external walls in places.
The ground levels outside the dwelling to the rear vary significantly. This is due to the existing building being cut into the rock. The existing ground make up is that of a slate which is fragmented and relatively soft to dig. There are no formal foundations to the buildings cluster.
The area to the rear of the house, which sits approximately 2m higher than the floor level of the rear extension and approximately 1.5m away from the rear wall was home to a number of large trees whose roots are clearly visible when looking at the ground and shown in the photographs below. The roots have reached a point where they have blown out of the side of the ground and resulted in collapse of some of the bank along the rear wall. This has left an overhang of material which needs to be removed to make safe the area to carry out any works below. The fallen material would then need to be removed.
The risk of this is that the close proximity to the rear wall which is already in a poor state structurally and is subject to some already questionable repairs with inappropriate materials will likely not withstand such works. The resulting outcome being collapse of the rear extension.
6.2.9 One the basis of the above assessment of the property's condition, and with respect to the concept of retaining the building, the applicant considers that to achieve a suitable base to start from, approximately 75% of the building's existing fabric would need to be demolished and rebuilt. This is considered by the applicant to include but not limited to:
The demolition of the rear cat slide roofed extension and rebuilding on suitable foundations including damp proof coursing.
6.2.10 The applicant considers that the remaining fabric would be of such a minor level that it would render the resultant building of any meaningful historical or architectural important. It is therefore concluded by the applicant, as evidenced by the accompanying photographic survey and additional professional advice, that the building is not practically or financially suitable for renovation.
6.2.11 Notwithstanding commentary provided by the Registered Buildings Officer and the Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, and following a visual internal and external site inspection by officers; it is difficult to find disagreement with the applicant's position as to the present state of the building and it's realistic capability for renovation. Clearly, the renovation and restoration of the building to a high standard, in compliance with modern Building
==== PAGE 10 ====
22/01308/B Page 10 of 13
Regulations that would afford future occupants a high standard of living would be the most preferable option. Indeed, the building is considered to be of sufficient architectural and historic significance to warrant an exploration as to whether it could be faithfully restored.
6.2.12 In this instance, it is considered evident that the applicant has indeed spent a significant amount of time and effort exploring whether the building could be realistically saved, preserved and renovated to provide a dwelling fit for human habitation. However, following the submission of evidence put forward by the applicant and their agent, together with a visual inspection of the property conducted by officers, it is clear that unfortunately the retention, renovation and restoration of the building would not be feasibly or realistically possible.
6.2.13 On balance therefore, it is considered in this instance that the principle of demolition and erection of a replacement dwelling is would not conflict with HP12 and is therefore acceptable, subject to the design, scale and form of the replacement dwelling being of a high standard and in compliance with the criterion put forward within HP14, as assessed in the following section of this report.
6.3 DESIGN AND VISUAL IMPACT 6.3.1 The submitted plans for the proposed replacement dwelling, as noted previously in this report and following discussions with officers, have been revised during the course of the application to more closely follow the design principles of Planning Circular 3/91. This was considered to be the most appropriate design solution for the site, not least due to the requirement of replacement dwellings in the countryside to generally follow this principle in accordance with 3/91, but also due to the design and historic significance of the current dwelling.
6.3.2 The proposed dwelling would largely occupy a similar footprint to the existing dwelling and associated outbuilding, whilst following the same orientation and relationship with the immediate streetscene. Likewise, the scale of the dwelling would mirror that of the existing property, with the massing and form not dissimilar from the existing level of development present on site. The use of painted render and natural slate roof, in combination with reclaimed Manx stone and timber cladding is also considered to be acceptable, subject to further details being submitted to the Department for assessment and approval by way of condition.
6.3.3 Overall, the proposals are considered to constitute a high standard of design which take note of and respect the character and built vernacular of the existing dwelling, whilst allowing for enhanced residential accommodation delivered to modern building standards. Whilst comments from the Registered Buildings Officer in relation to the southern facing gable end are noted, it is considered that the absence of further detail or relief in this elevation are largely typical for traditional dwellings of this nature and indeed reflect the detailing (or lack thereof) of the existing property. In any case, the application site is largely isolated, with only glancing views of the resultant property available within the adjacent streetscene. Indeed, the resultant dwelling would not be particularly if at all visible from more long distance views, particularly due to the presence of mature vegetation surrounding the site and the presence of the existing farm buildings to the north-east.
6.3.4 In light of the above therefore, the proposals are considered to be acceptable from a design and visual impact perspective, in compliance with General Policy 2 (b) & (c), and Housing Policy 14 of the Strategic Plan.
6.4 RESIDENTIAL AMENITY 6.4.1 The proposed dwelling would clearly afford future residents a high-standard of living, with a proportionate garden area commensurate with the size of the resultant dwelling. Due to the site's isolated nature, the proposed replacement dwelling would pose no material impact upon the neighbouring residential amenity.
==== PAGE 11 ====
22/01308/B Page 11 of 13
6.6 HIGHWAYS SAFETY AND PARKING 6.6.1 No objections have been raised by Highways Services over the current application, with no changes proposed to the existing site access. Sufficient space would also be evident within the site for in excess of 2 vehicles, in accordance with the adopted parking standards. The proposals are therefore compliant with Transport Policies 4 and 7. The proposals are therefore compliant with General Policy 2 (g) and (h).
6.7 OTHER MATTERS 6.7.1 No concerns are raised in relation to the design and layout from the perspective of criminal activity or the spread of fire. Whilst the development includes the creation of a new dwelling at the site, it is not expected that the water usage associated with the development will be significant, and therefore there are no new issues in this respect. With respect to drainage, it has been indicated that surface water run-off would be managed via a soakaways. Likewise, foul sewerage is noted on the application form as being disposed of as existing via the mains, which is considered acceptable.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 The principle of the development is considered to be acceptable, by way of providing a new dwelling of a high design quality replacing a structurally defective property that is deemed beyond the reasonable or practical capability of being faithfully renovated and restored. The proposals would afford future occupants a high standard of living, without detriment to surrounding residential properties, or giving rise to a material impact upon the local highway network. The proposals are therefore deemed compliant with General Policy 2 (b) & (c) General policy 3, and Housing Policies 12 and 14 of the Strategic Plan (2016).
7.3 The proposals are therefore recommended for approval.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.
8.2 The decision maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status
8.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given Interested Person Status. __
==== PAGE 12 ====
22/01308/B Page 12 of 13
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to the it by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.
Decision Made : Permitted
Committee Meeting Date: 22/5/23
Signed : J SINGLETON Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See below
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.
==== PAGE 13 ====
22/01308/B Page 13 of 13
PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION
Application No 22/01308/B Applicant Mr & Mrs John & Sonia Kneen Proposal Demolition of existing farmhouse and outbuildings and erection of replacement dwelling Site Address Ballaoates Farm Ballavagher Road St Johns Isle Of Man IM4 3JE Planning Officer Mr Toby Cowell Presenting Officer Mr Jason Singleton Addendum to the Officer Report
At the Planning Committee meeting of the 22nd May 2023, the Members requested that a further condition (c5) be added in that a photographic survey be carried out and submitted prior to any development commencing. The case officer agreed to amend their recommendation in compliance with this request.
"5. Development shall not commence until a programme of historic building recording of the buildings affected by the development has been undertaken and submitted to and agreed in writing by the Department. The programme of building recording must be undertaken in accordance with Level Two as set out in Understanding Historic Buildings: A guide to good recording practice
Reason: To ensure and safeguard the recording and inspection of matters of archaeological/historical importance associated with the building/site that will be lost in the course of works."
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal