DEC Officer Report

Application No.: 19/00015/B Applicant: Mr & Mrs Timothy Johnston Proposal: Proposed conversion of workshop/playroom to create self- contained ancillary living accommodation Site Address: Staward Farm House Sulby Isle of Man IM7 2BA Senior Planning Officer: Mr Thomas O'Connor Photo Taken: 06.03.2019 Site Visit: 06.03.2019 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 20.03.2019 _________________________________________________________________ Reasons for Refusal R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons R 1. The proposal would create a self-contained dwelling unit within an area not designated for such purposes. General Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 lays down a general presumption against development within the open countryside without justification and Housing Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 requires that new housing be located primarily within existing towns and villages unless it is to provide for essential housing for agricultural workers and conversion of redundant rural buildings in accordance with Housing Policy 11. The building of which the application site forms a part is of recent construction and is not of any historic or architectural interest that would justify such a conversion. As such, the proposal would not comply with an essential criterion (c) contained within Housing Policy 11 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 in respect of conversion of buildings located within the countryside. The proposal would therefore fail the requirements of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 in respect of conversion of buildings within the countryside for residential use.

_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The site is a group of buildings consisting of the main two storey farmhouse and, to the north of this situated on two sides of a small green, a pair of holiday cottages to the east of the green and the application building located directly to the north. Both the holiday cottages and

• the application building are similar in design and appearance being mainly single storey structures with upper storey dormer accommodation in triangular dormers.
• 1.2 Thearage block with workshop and playroom was approved in 2001 (01/01468/B) and the works were started but never fully completed The approved plans show that the roof material is to match that of the adjacent outbuilding (slate), have hardwood timber doors and windows and showed the dormer on the north east elevation.
• 1.3 The location is within an area recognised as being an area of 'Open Space', under the Sulby Local Plan Order 1998 and is within an area zoned as High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 It is proposed to convert the existing workshop area (6.5 x 8.9m) and upper storey playroom with front facing dormer into ancillary accommodation linked to the occupation of the main dwelling positioned some 30 metres to the south across the green. - 2.2 Main accommodation would consist of a kitchen/diner & lounge area on the ground floor with two bedroom and shower located within the upper dormer roof-space. Access would be from a porch (2.5m wide by 1.68m deep to be erected on the front elevation, providing the main entrance to the accommodation and access to the stairwell. The existing entrance and small casement window on the front elevation would be replaced with a triple casement window. Storage, WC and a utility room would be provided just within the existing garage area and linked to the accommodation with the remainder of the double door garage (11.5 x 8.9m deep) being retained for the parking of motor vehicles. - 2.3 An lean-to extension located on the north west elevation of this building has already been removed and it is proposed to erect in its place a gable roof sun room (Dims 4.7 x 3.6m deep) to serve the accommodation.

2.5 External finishes to the building would consist of

• o A smooth dark grey rendered finish to the walls;
• o Sun room and porch to be finished in traditional Manx stonework;
• o Windows and doors to be dark grey aluminium/uPVC framed double glazed units with
• opening lights
• o Dark grey aluminium uPVC gutters and rainwater goods
• o Roofing materials to be dark blue/grey natural roof slates to match existing with barge boards and soffits finished in dark grey aluminium uPVC; the flat roof to the porch would be finished in a dark grey fibreglass membrane, again with barge boards and soffits finished in dark grey aluminium uPVC;
• o Rooflights to be fitted over the sunroom and the rear bedroom would be 780 x 1400mm central pivot type and with the two rooflights over the stairwell with dimensions of 660 x 980mm

- 3.0 PLANNING HISTORY

• o 16/01379/B - Replacement of windows, doors and roof covering, Courtyard Cottage, PCO
• o 98/00436/B - Kitchen extension to dwelling, Staward Old Farmhouse - PERMITTED
• o 93/00474/B - Renovation of existing dwelling, Staward Old Farmhouse - PERMITTED
• o 01/01180/B - Conversion of existing outbuilding to create two tourist dwellings
• o 01/001486/B - Erection of garage block with workshop and playroom
• o 16/01377/B - Alterations to approved garage block including dormer position and materials for roof covering, doors windows and fascia boards (retrospective).

- 4.0 PLANNING POLICY

4.1 Due to the zoning of the site, and the nature of the proposed development, the following policies from the Strategic Plan 2016 are relevant in the consideration of the application:- - 4.2 Environment Policy 2: The present system of landscape classification of Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV's) as shown on the 1982 Development Plan and subsequent Local and Area Plans will be used as a basis for development control until such time as it is superseded by a landscape classification which will introduce different categories of landscape and policies and guidance for control therein. Within these areas the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration unless it can be shown that:

• (a) the development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape; or
• (b) the location for the development is essential.

4.3 General Policy 3, which states: "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, historic, or social value and interest; (Housing Policy 11);
• (c) previously developed land(1) which contains a significant amount of building; where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environment; 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-dependent 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."

4.4 While not in area zoned for development the principles under General Policy 2 are considered to be relevant. General Policy 2 requires that proposed developments do not adversely affect the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape. It also requires that development does not adversely affect the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality. - 4.5 Housing Policy 4 requires that new housing will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions(1) of these towns and villages where identified in adopted Area Plans: otherwise new housing will be permitted in the countryside only in the following exceptional circumstances:

• (a) essential housing for agricultural workers in accordance with Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10;
• (b) conversion of redundant rural buildings in accordance with Housing Policy 11; and
• (c) the replacement of existing rural dwellings and abandoned dwellings in accordance with Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14.

4.6 In respect of conversion of existing rural buildings into dwellings Housing Policy 11 states that this may be permitted, but only where:

• (a) redundancy for the original use can be established;
• (b) the building is substantially intact and structurally capable of renovation;
• (c) the building is of architectural, historic, or social interest;

• (d) the building is large enough to form a satisfactory dwelling, either as it stands or with modest, subordinate extension which does not affect adversely the character or interest of the building;
• (e) residential use would not be incompatible with adjoining established uses or, where appropriate, land-use zonings on the area plan; and
• (f) the building is or can be provided with satisfactory services without unreasonable public expenditure. Such conversion must:

• (a) where practicable and desirable, re-establish the original appearance of the building; and
• (b) use the same materials as those in the existing building.

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 Lezayre Parish Commissioners state in their letter received 08/02/2019 that they recommend approval. - 5.2 Senior Forester comments as follows: Close to the end of the existing garage/playroom there are two large mature spruce trees. These are good specimens for the species but since the construction of this outbuilding these trees have no longer been suited to the location, being too large for the space available. The root protection of the nearest tree (labelled A in the attached photo) is approximately 8m; well within the proposed footprint of the sun room extension. The impact to health and longevity of this tree could therefore be significant. Tree B is a little further away but the impact here could still be moderate. - 5.3 In addition to the physical damage that may be done to the roots and rooting environment, there is also likely to be increased pressure to remove these trees if the application is proposed. These trees are already overbearing to the building and it is likely these trees are going to cause a future resident of this building some apprehension. Shading of the amenity space at this end of the building may also be an issue. - 5.4 Given these issues, in your assessment of the impact of this application, I recommend that you proceed on the assumption that approval will ultimately lead to the removal of these spruce trees. In this instance however, despite the likely impact to these two trees, I am not objecting to the application. This is because if the owner were to have applied under the Tree Preservation Act to remove these trees, I would probably have approved the application, albeit with a replanting condition. - 5.5 Highways Services: The proposal would not change the existing site access arrangements. It would remove an existing single garage space but otherwise retain the existing site parking provision. The proposed dwelling would require 2 car parking spaces to comply with the parking standards. The site parking demand would be increased by 3 spaces as a result of the development to account for the new dwelling and garage space to be lost. There should be sufficient parking and turning space already within the site to accommodate the additional parking demand so no new highway issues should arise. Highway Services does not oppose the application. - 5.6 Neighbours: No observations have been received from local residents

- 6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 Though previous permissions have been granted in respect of this building and its use as a garage/workshop and it is clear that the shell of the building has been in place for some

• time, works to complete the building appear to have been piecemeal over the years resulting in the building remaining incomplete particularly from the inside.
• 6.2 Since the original decision in 2001 the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 has been adopted. The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 is now more restrictive on development within the countryside and is silent on new development in the form of detached garages/extensions to garages/stores were it to be considered today.
• 6.3 However, the proposal would result in a fully self-contained two bedroom dwelling on two floors occupying part of the building and extended to include a sunroom some 30m distant from the main house across the green to the south to which it would relate. General Policy 3 lays down a general presumption against new residential development within the open countryside such as this without justification such as the provision of agricultural worker's dwellings or conversion of redundant rural buildings which are of architectural, historic or social value and interests in accordance with housing policy 11. Housing Policy 4 states that new housing will be located primarily within existing towns and villages and again; provide essential housing for agricultural workers and conversion of redundant rural buildings in accordance with policy 11.
• 6.4 In respect of conversion of existing buildings within the countryside Policy 11 lays down criteria in respect of the conversion of existing buildings within the countryside to a residential use.
• 6.5 Whilst the proposal would satisfy some of these criteria (Policy 11) in terms of the use of part of an existing if recently constructed building, that though not yet complete is substantially intact and capable of conversion as proposed thereby maintaining the form of the building; the building is of recent construction and is not any historic or architectural interest that would justify such a conversion. As such, the proposal would fail an essential criteria contained within Housing Policy 11 in respect of conversion of buildings located within the countryside into a residential use.
• 6.6 General Policy 3 lays down a general presumption against new residential development within the open countryside such as this without justification and Housing Policy 4 requires that new housing be located primarily within existing towns and villages. Again unless it is to provide for essential housing for agricultural workers and conversion of redundant rural buildings in accordance with policy 11, Housing Policy 4 discourages residential development in the countryside. The proposal would therefore fail the requirements of these policies.
• 6.7 The applicant has stated special circumstances, in support of this application, in that the dwelling would be required to house elderly parents close to their home to provide them with a level of support needed at their stage of life thereby providing the social benefits of homecare inherent in this. The applicant also maintains that such an arrangement would enable three generations of the family who have farmed in Andreas for 20 years to remain together.
• 6.8 Though laudable, the proposed residential conversion to provide accommodation for elderly parents would be in the form of a fully self-contained two storey dwelling with stairs to the upper floor and located some 30m to the north, across the green, from the main house. In effect, the proposed dwelling would not display any of the elements that would usually be expected from ancillary accommodation for elderly parents. The wholly self-contained accommodation is some distance from the main dwelling to which it relates, contains two bedrooms which are located on the upper floor and accessed only by stairs. Arguably, a dwelling of this size and configuration would be suitable for sale or rent as an independent dwelling and has none of the features of subsidiarity usually found in ancillary accommodation.
• 6.9 Located directly to the south west of the site and within the red line area of the submitted drawings, presumably under the applicants' control, is a block of two dwellings each

used as holiday accommodation which is significantly closer to the main house and arguably with the potential for use as ancillary accommodation for elderly parents without any requirement for planning permission. No consideration of this has been made of this potential use within this application.

- 7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 General Policy 3 lays down a general presumption against new residential development within the open countryside such as this without justification and Housing Policy 4 requires that new housing be located primarily within existing towns and villages and again unless it is to provide for essential housing for agricultural workers and conversion of redundant rural buildings in accordance with Housing policy 11. The proposal would therefore fail the requirements of these policies. - 8.0 RECOMMENDATION

8.1 It is recommended that the planning application be refused 9.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

9.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• o The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent;
• o The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any
• other person in whose interest the land become vested;
• o Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material, in this case Department of Infrastructure Highway Services and
• o The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

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. _____________________________________________________________________

I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.

Decision Made : Refused Date: 25.03.2019 Determining officer

Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett Principal Planner

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.