Officer Assessment Report

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. Consideration may be given to proposals which result in a larger dwelling where this involves the replacement of an existing dwelling of poor form with one of more traditional character, or where, by its design or siting, there would be less visual impact. REPRESENTATIONS Department of Transport has raised no objection to the proposed development. Onchan Parish Commissioners have objected on the proposed development on the following grounds: "The proposals are contrary to the provision of the Onchan Local Plan 2000 and that the proposals far exceed the limitations of Housing Policy 14 of the Island Strategic Plan in respect of its size and design." The occupiers of 2 Glen View have objected to the proposed development on the following grounds: - The existing dwelling is a fine substantial building clearly visible in the landscape and is not derelict. The dwelling has been unoccupied since 2006. There is no structural survey to indicate the condition of the building but it would be around 100 years old. - The house would be contrary to policy as it is not on the footprint of the original and is above the 50% increase of external floorspace; nothing in its design justifies this. It is detached from the farm buildings and would be an isolated development in the countryside. - There have been refusals on appeals of similar applications whereby the replacement farmhouses are not proposed on the original footprint and of a scale far larger than existing. - Strategic Housing Policy 12 is on the renovation of houses in the countryside not their demolition and replacement which is applicable to all traditional houses not just those which are registered. The policy makes no reference to the 'status' of the dwelling being relevant. If demolition of Registered or non registered buildings is continuously permitted the Island's countryside will lose its quality and heritage value. - The application indicates that the dwelling is a replacement farmhouse. If this is the case it does not need to be so large. Furthermore the red line around the site cuts through the existing dwelling and there is nothing to suggest that it will actually be used in association with the extensive farm buildings on the site. This means that the site is likely to be split. - Access to the site has substandard sight lines and has been the scene of tragic accidents in the past. If this land is split in terms of house, farm buildings and land there is likely to be a substantial increase in traffic for which the access is not suitable. The Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society have made the following observations: - The proposal does not accord with the Strategic Housing Policy by virtue of its siting, size or design; - The loss of pre-1920 farmhouses, particularly around the Onchan and Douglas area is contrary to the Strategic aim of sustainability in the countryside. It believed that the stated aim of the policy in terms of renovation of old buildings should be followed. This could not be followed unless a full Structural Engineers report demonstrates why this is not feasible. - The society is aware that in this case the farmhouse should not be considered as derelict. It was lived in up to three years ago when the farmer tenant had to move out following a forced requisition sale of the whole premises. - The Society considers that the existing premises should be renovated (and if need be extended for appropriate fashion) or, if there is genuine proven need for a larger house for the financial sector, that should be built where it can be accommodated in the landscape without necessitating demolition of the existing property. - The current proposal would however result in a large house very visible in the landscape and detached from its surroundings. The size is greater than 50% more than the existing floorspace measured externally. 5 February 2010 ## Assessement The application site is located as 'Open Space' in the Onchan Local Plan 2000. Given the nature of the proposed development it is therefore appropriate to assess the proposed development against the policies identified earlier within the report (i.e. General Policy 3, Environment Policy 1, Housing Policy 4, Housing Policy 12 and Housing Policy 14). Under the provisions of General Policy 3 and Housing Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 the erection of a replacement dwelling on a one for one basis is an accepted exception to the general presumption against development within the countryside. In this instance it is considered that the existing dwelling has not lost its residential use by abandonment (although currently derelict) and therefore also accords with Housing Policy 12. This means that the primary policy to assess the proposed development against is Housing Policy 14. The planning application seeks approval in principle and therefore does not show the detail of the proposed dwellings. Illustrative drawings however have been provided of the design and floor plans of the proposed dwelling. Housing Policy 14 indicates that generally a replacement dwelling should not be larger than 50% of the existing floor area measured externally. Although only illustrative drawings, the proposed dwelling would have a total floor area of 1003 square metres. The existing dwelling has a floor area of approximately 268 square metres. Thus the proposed dwelling would be approximately 274% larger than the existing dwelling as it stands today. Furthermore, the new dwelling would not be situated on the original footprint of the dwelling. The proposed new dwelling will be located approximately 60 metres to the east of the existing building. As the planning application proposes a replacement dwelling with a greater than 50% increase in floorspace, the proposal will only accord with Housing Policy 14 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 where this involves the replacement of an existing dwelling of poor form with one of more traditional character, or where, by its design or siting, there would be less visual impact. This criteria cannot be tested without further information which has not been submitted as part of this application apart from the 'illustrative drawings.' In this instance, it is considered that the proposed dwelling does not replace a dwelling of poor form, and the proposed dwelling as shown on the illustrative drawings and floor plans is not of a traditional character. The Guide to the Design of Residential Development in the Countryside, Planning Circular 3/91, suggests that the basic rural dwelling would have footprint dimensions of 11m by 5.5m with a standard ceiling height of 2.5m. Larger dwellings should follow the style and pattern of traditional farmhouses. It advises (Policy 3) that they should be rectangular in plan and simple in form and illustrations are provided of various ways of extending the basic footprint. The proposed property has dimensions which are considerably larger than those recommended in the Circular (46m x 16.5m), and larger than the building which is on site at present. As such, it is doubtful that the proposed dwelling could be accepted as a more traditional property. It is considered that the percentage increase of 274% in floor area would result in a dwelling that would detract from the character and appearance of the area. Its form, size and massing, and would resultant in an increased visual impact especially since the dwelling would occupy a relatively prominent position. As a result of this positioning, the existing dwelling has a clear visual impact within the area. As such, the proposal does not represent an exception to the provisions of Housing Policy 14. Although the application is only in principle, the application does not attempt to address the criteria in Housing Policy 14. Although the application includes illustrative plans, these indicate a property with a floorpscae greater than 50% threshold and not sited on a familiar footprint as the existing. Should a property of this scale be considered, they need to be of a more traditional character or as a result of their siting and design result in less visual impact. This cannot be tested without further information. Furthermore, it is not considered appropriate to grant permission subject to a vast array of conditions that includes the floorspace not being over 50% of the original dwelling, being sited. 5 February 2010 close to the original footprint of the existing dwelling and being designed in accordance with policies 2-7 of Planning Circular 3/91. Such conditions are imprecise and simply re-iterate policy. They do not demonstrate that development in accordance with the policy is achievable. RECOMMENDATION It is considered that the proposal would contravene with the relevant policies of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007, for the reasons set out above, and therefore is recommended for refusal. PARTY STATUS It is considered that the following parties, who submitted comments, accord with the requirements of Planning Circular 1/06 and are therefore, afforded Interested Party Status: Department of Transport Onchan Parish Commissioners The following parties are not afforded Interested Party Status: 2 Glen View Isle of Man Natural History & Antiquarian Society Recommendation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 11.01.2010 **

Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal C: Conditions for approval N: Notes attached to conditions R: Reasons for refusal O: Notes attached to refusals**

R 1.

The proposal fails to demonstrate that the replacement dwelling would meet any of the criteria set out in Housing Policy 14 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 and as such fails to demonstrate that it would be acceptable development in the countryside in terms of its visual impact and design.

I confirm that this decision accords with Government Circular No 10/09, Delegation of Functions (Development Procedure), GC No 11/09 (Advertisements) and GC No 12/09 (Registered Buildings) all to the Senior Planning Officer

Decision Made: Refused Date: 5/2/10 Signed: __________________________ Senior Planning Officer 5 February 2010