**Document:** Ballaveare Farm Planning Statement **Application:** 16/00128/B — Demolition of existing piggery and erection of tourist accommodation **Decision:** Permitted **Decision Date:** 2016-06-23 **Parish:** Douglas **Document Type:** report / planning_statement **Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/21382-douglas-ballaveare-farm-demolition/documents/1320896 --- # Ballaveare Farm Planning Statement that of a small isolated structure of traditional construction set within the grounds of Ballaveare Farm. 5.18 The proposed cottage is not considerably larger than the piggery, and its location is not significantly different. It is not therefore considered that the visual impact of the proposals would be overly large when viewed from the road or within the site, nor would it have the effect of an intrusion into open countryside. It is considered that the development would not adversely affect the countryside or harm the character or quality of the landscape. ## 5.19 Housing Policy 11 (HP11) Although the proposals are not for the conversion of a rural building, the following part of HP11 needs to be addressed: "Permission will not be given for the rebuilding of ruins or the erection of replacement buildings of similar, or even identical, form." 5.20 It is accepted that in seeking to demolish the existing piggery and erect a new building the proposals deviate from the planning policy. However, as explained previously, this is due to the applicant's desire to maximize the potential of the site. It is considered that this should be taken into account and that the proposals should be assessed on the basis of their impact of the countryside, which is not considered to be adverse as explained previously. #### 5.21 Housing Policy 14 (HP14) Although the proposals are not for a replacement dwelling, HP14 is considered relevant in terms of the design and siting of the cottage. The policy states: "Where a replacement dwelling is permitted, it must not be substantially different to the existing in terms of siting and size, unless changes of siting or size would result in an overall environmental improvement; the new building should therefore generally be sited on the "footprint" of the existing, and should have a floor area, which is not more than $50 \%$ greater than that of the original building (floor areas should be measured externally and should not include attic space or outbuildings). Generally, the design of the new building should be in accordance with Policies 2-7 of the present Planning Circular 3/91, (which will be revised and issued as a Planning Policy Statement). Exceptionally, permission may be granted for buildings of innovative, modern design where this is of high quality and would not result in adverse visual impact; designs should incorporate the re-use of such stone and slate as are still in place on the site, and in general, new fabric should be finished to match the materials of the original building." 5.22 The location of the proposed building has been determined in order to maximize the view and make full use of the potential of the site, resulting in a deviation from HP11 as explained previously. The cottage is not substantially relocated in relation to the piggery, and as such is in accordance with HP14. The proposed increase in building footprint area is less than $50 \%$ of the exiting, also in accordance with the Policy. 5.23 It is also considered that locating the cottage away from the driveway would provide a pleasing arrangement as the gable of the new building would be set comfortably back from the drive and the new screening planting would continue the planting line set up by the tree line. 5.24 The policies of Planning Circular 3/91 have informed the design of the building in terms of its form and materials, although the proposed building is more in the spirit of a farm outbuilding (i.e. the existing piggery) rather than a traditional cottage. The materials of the primary elements are traditional and in keeping with the spirit of the original. The design of the windows and doors is modern and deviates from the policies of the Planning Circular. Again, this has been done to take full advantage of the view and is an attempt to create something exceptional, incorporating innovative modern design of high quality. 5.25 A traditional chimney stack on the gables as per the guidance of the Planning Circular is not considered to be in the spirit of the existing building, and the exposed flue projecting from the roof is considered to be more appropriate in terms of the overall design aesthetic. 5.26 Business Policy 11 (BP11) The relevant part of the policy states: "Tourism development must be in accordance with the sustainable development objectives of this plan; policies and designations which seek to protect the countryside from development will be applied to tourist development with as much weight as they are to other types of development." 5.27 As explained previously, the proposed development, while in a relatively isolated rural location, is small in size and it is not considered that it would necessitate a large number of additional car journeys or be heavily dependent on outside services, and would not undermine the sustainable development objectives of the Strategic Plan. The rural location, coupled with the site's natural beauty and nearby natural amenities, is part of the unique opportunity to create an exceptional tourist accommodation business in this particular instance. As such it is considered that granting these proposals approval would not set a precedent for unsustainable development. 5.28 It is considered that development in the countryside would not be detrimental in this case, as explained previously. ## 6.0 Summary \& Conclusion 6.1 The applicant needs to generate an income for her family and to enable the continued up keep and maintenance of Ballaveare Farm. 6.2 The applicant's aspiration is to create high end tourist accommodation offering an exceptional visitor experience, utilizing modern innovative design of high quality, and the site and its location offer a unique opportunity to achieve this. It would enable enjoyment of the Island's natural attraction as per SP8. 6.3 Although the exception criteria for development under GP3 are not met it is considered that the proposed development would not adversely affect the countryside, nor would it harm the character and quality of the landscape. 6.4 In order to take full advantage of the view it is proposed to demolish the existing piggery and erect the new building close by. This will create an exceptional effect that could not be achieved by re using the piggery. It is accepted that this deviates from policy HP11 but it is considered that this is justified in light of what the applicant is trying to achieve. The location of the new building will create a pleasing arrangement in itself. 6.5 The development is of small size and has access to many local natural amenities. It is not considered that it would have a significant impact in terms of generating additional traffic or highway safety, nor would it undermine the sustainable objectives of the Strategic Plan or set a precedent for unsustainable development. --- *Data sourced from the Isle of Man public planning register under the [Isle of Man Open Government Licence](https://www.gov.im/about-this-site/open-government-licence/).* *Canonical page: https://planningportal.im/a/21382-douglas-ballaveare-farm-demolition/documents/1320896*