Loading document...
Application No.: 17/00239/C Applicant: Mr Egan Loader Proposal: Additional use of approved conversion of outbuilding to a dwelling to provide tourist accommodation Site Address: Upper Garth Garth Road Crosby Isle of Man IM4 2HB Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is irregularly shaped parcel of land that includes a large, detached dwelling of fairly recent construction along with associated farm- and equestrian-related buildings. The site is known as Upper Garth Farm but does not appear to be in active agricultural use. - 1.2 However, the application relates only to a single barn, which is nearing completion for conversion to a single dwelling house under a recent application (PA 16/00133/B).
2.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 2.1 The case officer described the works proposed under the aforementioned planning application as follows, though it should be noted that that application included works other than just to the noted barn conversion:
"Full planning approval is sought for two distinct elements: firstly, approval is sought to convert the upper storey of the southernmost of the barns to a one-bedroom dwelling. Secondly, a small extension is sought to the northernmost of the barns to provide a tack room. This extension would have a stone frontage, pitched roof and single door and window; it would sit roughly 0.2m lower than the roof pitch of the stable to which it would be attached and would measure 5.7m by 3.5m in plan, and would fill the abovementioned area of concrete hardstanding.
"It is understood that the dwelling to be created will in the first instance be used by one of the applicants' children. It will measure just under 50sqm when measured externally. In addition to the internal works, a new decking is proposed to the rear of the barn and would follow the line of the visible connection where the one-time lean-to extension would have sat. This will be 1m wide for the majority of its length with a shorter area of 2m in width; the whole would be constructed of timber and provide for an area of storage below; a steel and glass balustrade would run along the edge.
"No specific garden is shown as being associated with the barn. Cars are shown in the wider area of hardstanding that connects the barn complex with the existing large dwelling. No residential curtilage is shown on the drawings.
"The application as originally submitted sought to replace the existing timber-framed windows with uPVC sliding sash units. The case officer suggested that timber casements would be more
appropriate in a barn conversion, but the amended drawings submitted now show the retention of the existing lights. These drawings were placed online for information.
"Rooflights - three to the eastern roof pitch, four to the western - are also proposed. These would be conservation-style and, other than the fourth on the western roof pitch, which would sit slightly higher, all six follow a consistent line.
"The application has been submitted with a structural report, which concludes that "It is our opinion that the existing outbuilding can accommodate the proposed conversion work." They continue:
'"The structure has been well maintained over its past life and is relatively defect free." '"The stonework is well bonded, the mortar is in good condition and substantial corner stones have been employed at the corners."'
"The Report also notes that the most significant change proposed is that of the double doors: "We are of the opinion that the existing structure can accommodate this door however we would recommend that a steel beam be employed over the opening on the inner portion of the wall".
"Also sought was a bat survey, which was forwarded directly to the Senior Biodiversity Officer for his comments."
3.0 THE PROPOSAL - 3.1 The submitted application seeks approval for the additional use of the barn as tourist accommodation. - 3.2 Were the barn conversion not nearing completion, the application would need to have been amended to also include the physical conversion works as well. However, this is not considered necessary or reasonable in this case given the assurances by the applicant regarding the progress of the works on the submitted application form.
4.0 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - 4.1 The site lies within an area of 'white land' not zoned for any particular kind of development on the 1982 Development Plan. - 4.2 In view of this zoning and the nature of the proposal, a number of policies of the Strategic Plan are considered material to the assessment. - 4.3 Although General Policy 3 does presume against new development in the countryside, exceptions can be made in respect of conversions of existing rural buildings to either tourist or residential use where a number of criteria (as set out in other policies, listed below) are met; GP3 reads in part:
"Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of:
4.4 Environment Policy 1 reads in full:
"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."
4.5 Environment Policy 4 reads in full: "Development will not be permitted which would adversely affect:
"Some areas to which this policy applies are identified as Areas of Ecological Importance or Interest on extant Local or Area Plans, but others, whose importance was not evident at the time of the adoption of the relevant Local or Area Plan, are not, particularly where that plan has been in place for many years. In these circumstances, the Department will seek site specific advice from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry if development proposals are brought forward."
4.6 Environment Policy 34 reads in full:
"In the maintenance, alteration or extension of pre-1920 buildings, the use of traditional materials will be preferred."
4.7 Business Policy 11 reads in full:
"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. Within the rural areas there may be situations where existing rural buildings could be used for tourist use and Environment Policy 16 sets out the circumstances where this may be permitted."
4.8 Business Policy 12 reads in full:
"Permission will generally be given for the conversion of redundant buildings in the countryside to tourist use providing that the development complies with the policies set out in paragraph 8.10. Housing Policy 11."
4.9 Business Policy 13 reads in full:
"Permission will generally be given for the use of private residential properties as tourist accommodation providing that it can be demonstrated that such use would not compromise the amenities of neighbouring residents."
4.10 Business Policy 14 reads in full:
"Tourism development may be permitted in rural areas provided that it complies with the policies in the Plan. Farmhouse accommodation or quality self catering units in barn conversions and making use of rural activities will be encouraged but must comply with General Policy 3 and Business Policies 11 and 12. Other forms of quality accommodation in rural areas will be considered, including the provision of hostels and similar accommodation suitable for walkers but must comply with General Policy 3 and Business Policies 11 and 12."
4.11 As it is referred to in the Business Policies, it is worth noting the wording of Housing Policy 11, which reads in full: "Conversion of existing rural buildings into dwellings may be permitted, but only where:
"Permission will not be given for the rebuilding of ruins or the erection of replacement buildings of similar, or even identical, form.
"Further extension of converted rural buildings will not usually be permitted, since this would lead to loss or reduction of the original interest and character."
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 Marown Parish Commissioners offered no objection to the application in comments received 17th March 2017. - 5.2 Highway Services of the Department of Infrastructure offered no objection to the application on 28th March 2017, noting that while the parking arrangements would not change, no additional parking is required as a result of the proposal. - 5.3 The Environmental Health Manager was contacted in respect of the previous application, given that the other stables here are proposed to remain in use. He advised on 22nd April 2016: "We don't have any standards in relation to distance for dwellings from stables or barns etc. The developer should be encouraged to consider the likelihood of complaints from occupiers of the dwelling to noise (early starts) and odour (mucking out). We may become involved should we receive a complaint regarding either." - 5.4 The Senior Biodiversity Officer was contacted for his views in respect of the previous application on the submitted bat survey, although no concern was raised in this respect. On 29th June 2016 he commented as follows: "Bats present but not roosting. This one is fine to tick off with regard to changes in the buildings."
6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 In the first instance, it is worth noting the case officer's full assessment of the proposed barn conversion scheme under the 2016 planning approval:
"Of key importance is the assessment of the proposal are (1) whether or not the existing building is of sufficient 'interest' to warrant a conversion of the nature proposed, (2) are the changes proposed acceptable, (3) is the access acceptable, (4) is there sufficient amenity provided, and (5) is the access adequate?
"The first issue goes to the heart of the scheme. The existing set of stables is in active use and the Structural Report is clear that they are all in good, working condition. Moreover, they are barns that retain a fairly typical Manx character through the use of traditional materials along with its general form and positioning within a (once) agricultural environment. Parts (a), (b) and (c) of Housing Policy 11 are therefore satisfied.
"The size of the dwelling that can be achieved within the building is sufficient under the Housing (Standards) Regulations 2013 to actually enable two persons to lawfully reside therein, while there is no reason to consider that services could not be provided to the new dwelling given its proximity to an existing dwelling. Parts (d) and (f) of Housing Policy 11 are therefore satisfied.
"Part (e) of Housing Policy 11 causes a little more concern given the view of the Environmental Health Manager. However, it is noted that the intention (at least in the short-term) is for a family member to reside in the property. Any future occupant will of course be aware of the use of the site and so will need to bear this in mind; the stabling is unlikely to cause such a significant nuisance as to warrant the application's refusal, though it would be worth - if the application were to be approved - identifying by way of an advisory note that there is a potential issue here for the applicant should they decide to let or sell off the barn separately from the use in future. (Though it must be said it would be somewhat unlikely that the upper floor of the barn would be occupied independently from the main farm at any point in the future, and extremely unlikely that the upper floor would ever be sold or let separately from the stables themselves.) Part (e) of Housing Policy 11 is therefore satisfied.
"Turning to the changes proposed, these would be really quite small-scale and not inappropriate to a building of this period. The decking relates well to the existing building by reflecting the previous existence of an extension of some form in its location; the use of clean, contemporary materials to this end is welcomed. The installation of French doors is both the most significant intervention and also perhaps the most concerning. HP11 is clear that conversion proposals should not need to rely upon significant alteration in order to provide a satisfactory dwelling. In this case, however, while it is clear that the French doors are the most significant alteration proposed, this of course is a relative term: the existing barn is to be otherwise almost entirely retained in form and appearance. The French doors would provide a neat counterpoint to the other doorway - which itself relates to that now-removed extension and therefore could be said to be inappropriate - and moreover could only be observed from within the site. The impact on the character and appearance of the building from this intervention would therefore be suitably limited.
"Generally speaking, Manx barns have a somewhat random pattern of fenestration; therefore it might generally be preferred if rooflights would be similarly random. However, in this instance, the windows at first floor level in the barn have a clear rhythm and so rooflights to reflect this rhythm are not inappropriate.
"The fact that no changes are now proposed with respect to the windows is interesting. The retention of the original features is to be very much welcomed, and from the site visit they did appear to be in good condition and more than capable of renovation as is now proposed. However, should the current application be approved, this would result in the barn becoming a dwelling and thus benefitting from permitted development rights, which would still enable the windows to be
replaced. This would undermine entirely the benefit accrued from the welcome retention of the existing windows and, while there would be a number of windows that would be appropriate here, it is right and proper that the Department retains control over what windows are fitted. Accordingly, a condition removing permitted development rights with respect to replacement windows and doors is recommended.
"The new dwelling would not have any specifically identified outdoor amenity space. This does not in itself present a problem: most apartments do not benefit from this by their nature, and equally many apartments are (a) smaller and (b) have a less open and attractive outlook compared with the application site. There is the possibility that in future the small grassed area might become associated with the dwelling, while during the period it would be used by an applicant's family member it is highly likely this would occur (if not, there is ample garden space associated with the main dwelling at present in any case).
"The existing access does not provide particularly good visibility, but equally it does not have poor visibility by any means. Highway Services have not objected. There is no reason to object to the proposal on this ground.
"While a condition requiring the bat survey would have sufficed in this instance, it is particularly welcome that this has been provided at the earliest stage. Given the lack of concern raised regarding the proposed works in both the survey itself and by the Senior Biodiversity Officer, it is considered that Environment Policy 4 is met.
"In view of all the above, it is considered that the proposed barn conversion scheme represents a well-judged approach, complies with Housing Policy 11, and is supported as a result."
6.2 Given that similar policies apply to applications seeking approval for the conversion of redundant buildings to both residential and tourist use, and given that the former has been judged acceptable, it also follows that the principle of the use of the building for tourist purposes is also acceptable. This conclusion is reached having regard to the clear guidance as set out in Environment Policy 16 and Business Policies 11, 12 & 14. - 6.3 There have been occasions where it the use of a residential dwelling for occasional tourist use has been the subject of significant objection - usually these cases involve apartment blocks. In this case, the site is sufficiently well-removed from any neighbouring property to conclude that there would be no harmful impacts in this respect, and accordingly the proposal also complies with Business Policy 13.
7.0 RECOMMENDATION - 7.1 In view of the favourable conclusions as outlined above, it is considered that the proposal should be approved. Previously a condition was attached removing permitted development rights with respect to the replacement of windows. This should be attached on this occasion as well, for the avoidance of doubt.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
With effect from 1 June 2015, the Transfer of Planning & Building Control Functions Order 2015 amends the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 to give effect to the meaning of the word 'Department' to be the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture unless otherwise directed by that Order.
Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 04.04.2017 Conditions and Notes for Approval: C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
Reason: To comply with article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
The development hereby approved relates to the Location Plan and to Drawings 1325.P1 and 1325.P2, all of which are date-stamped as having been received 28th February 2017.
I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Senior Planning Officer in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.
Decision Made : Permitted Date: 05.04.2017 Determining officer
Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown