Loading document...
The site defined in red represents the land associated with Cronk Froy, a newly built property with outbuildings which replaced a previous dwelling and outbuildings on the site. The site is described as Private Dwelling on the application form although the area defined includes a field to the north, separated from the house by a lane leading to the house and another new lane which has permission parallel with the existing one, serving this property only, leaving the adjacent property, High Bank, served only by the existing lane. The site also includes two fields to the south of the house beyond the residential curtilage permitted under PAs 04/2503 and 05/92395.
The site lies within an area designated on the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982 as an Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance.
The following applications have been submitted in respect of this site:
PA 90/1139 - construction of extension and garage - permitted PA 94/0935 - construction of extension and garage - permitted PA 04/2503 - construction of replacement dwelling with integral garage - permitted PA 05/92395 - amendment to approved replacement dwelling to change windows and rooflights - permitted.
Both of the last two applications included a condition which required further plans of the junction of the access with the land alongside "Green Hedges" and in the case of the last application, details of the finish of the access lane. This information has recently (22nd August, 2007) been submitted and with which the Department of Transport is now satisfied.
Proposed is the erection of a stable block in the field to the north of the house and outbuildings. This will accommodate four stables and a store and tack room and be constructed in rendered walling with a slate roof. The building will be 5.4m by 15m. The building will be situated very close to the access fro the new lane which will be fenced off by a new gate.
The house which was erected on the other side of the access lane is not small and contains outbuildings although these are shown as a tractor/implement store and garage so neither would appear to be available for use for the stables.
The stables look uncomfortably like a dwelling, particularly due to the rendered finish. A proposal for a rendered stable building (albeit with cavity walling) was refused not far from here, on the Clanagh Road under PA 93/1710 where the Inspector overturned the approval granted by the Planning Committee and noted that "Whilst I have no reason to doubt the good intentions of the appellants in this case, all experience of such matters points to the necessity for particular care to be exercised in the consideration of a proposal for a building in the countryside which could readily be converted to a dwellinghouse. Buildings last a long time, usually longer than the intentions of their builders. In this case, it is not at issue that the proposal is contrary to the development plan, and it is not suggested that it is needed in connection with the working of the land. Whilst I agree that the visual impact of the proposal would not be so great, it should not be disregarded either. The grant of permission would result in an additional building in the countryside, not dissimilar in impact to that of the dwellinghouse which from a distance it would resemble".
However, other rendered walled stables have been permitted including the following, the last of which is close to this site.
PA 03/1254 proposed a rendered walled stable building at Cornaa alongside a public footpath. The drawing submitted showed cavity walling although the applicant agreed that this should be changed to single block which could be finished with dark-coloured render. After the Planning Committee had refused the application, the appeal Inspector upheld the refusal but noted that he agreed "with the appellant that there is no reason why stables constructed of natural stone or dark-coloured rendered brickwork or blockwork, suitably landscaped with planting, should have any greater visual impact on the landscape, than one built of timber..." and he acknowledged that "due to the exposed nature of the appeal site, a rendered blockwork or stone walled structure is likely to be more durable and require less maintenance than a timber one, However, while there is no reason to doubt the appellant's intention to use the building as stables, circumstances can change and the proposed cavity wall construction of the proposals would constitute a substantial permanent building, future uses of which may be difficult to control".
At Ballavartyn Road, an application for rebuilding stables which had blown down during strong winds, an appeal Inspector noted that "...the error on the submitted plans which showed a cavity wall construction. This would be clearly more suitable as a domestic building, and would naturally lead to thoughts of subsequent conversion. I am entirely convinced that this was not the intention of the Appellants who simply want to replace the previously approved stables with something more robust
to withstand the worst of the weather. Clearly any approval can be given subject to a condition which would limit the use of the building to stables" and recommended a condition which required that the building was clad in dark stained horizontal timber boarding.
There is clearly a different approach by inspectors to the consideration of applications for stables which are constructed in blockwork rather than timber and in this case the building is not unlike a domestic structure in appearance and has a new access running directly to it so could easily be severed from the occupation of the main dwelling. However, bearing in mind the conclusions of the inspector in the last case above, a condition could be attached controlling the use of the building although there may still be the issue of a subsequent application being submitted at some time in the future for the conversion of what would then be an existing building associated with one field and with its own separate access.
I visited the site and was able to see that the access approved under PAs 04/2503 and 05/92235 is rough-formed despite the further details not having been provided when this application was submitted, although they have subsequently been submitted on 19th January, 2007. In the field where the stables are to be built was a green metal container, materials and scaffolding. The house and the field are visible from the A5 Castletown Road.
The applicant has provided further information in the way of confirmation from Kennaa stables that they have a pony there which is to be re-housed at Cronk Froy along with another pony which may be purchased as a companion. There may be proposals to buy another 2 ponies in the future. The letter also explains that Mr. Killeen has use of a workshop at the White Hoe for the storage of builder's materials in connection with the applicant's building firm and the applicant's agent has confirmed by e-mail dated 19th January, 2007 that the materials are left over from the work being carried out on site which has not yet been completed.
On the basis of the above previous case studies it would seem unreasonable to object to the application on the basis that it should not be made from rendered blockwork and should be timber. There is ample land on which the ponies may be grazed (9 acres) and the site is located in a rural area where it would not be an unreasonable one in which to keep horses.
Whilst the neighbour has objected on the basis that the building would be located in an area of an Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance and that there is ample space in the existing buildings to accommodate the horses or space within the immediate curtilage of the dwelling in which to accommodate any new building, the proposed use is a legitimate one in this location and there are no buildings within the permitted group which would properly serve as stables. It is also perhaps understandable that the applicants would not want the horses so close to their dwelling for reasons of noise and smell and that the horses would benefit from a little distance from the house and the comings and goings associated with its use.
The location of the stables will render it visible from the A5 but with the backdrop of the new house and High Bank. As such I do not consider that this will be an adverse impact on the view of this area. The stables will be visible from High Bank but in order to keep the stable reasonably close to Cronk Froy, this is almost inevitable. It is not directly in front of the adjacent property but may affect their view, which is not generally considered to be a material planning consideration.
The Department of Transport and the local authority are, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (c) and (d), considered "interested persons" and as such should be afforded party status.
The owner of High Bank is directly alongside the site and should be afforded party status in this instance.
Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 24.09.2007
C: Conditions for approval N: Notes attached to conditions R: Reasons for refusal O: Notes attached to refusals
C 1. The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
C 2. This permission relates to the construction of stables as shown in drawing WL/06/1013/1 received on 18th December, 2006 and the accompanying location plan.
C 3. The building may only be used for the keeping of horses and/or related equipment and/or horse feed.
C 4. No works may commence on the proposed building until such times as the entrance and access from the existing access lane have been improved in accordance with the drawings which satisfy conditions 4 and 5 of the approval granted in respect of PA 05/92395.
N 1. The applicant is encouraged to paint the external render of the new building in a natural colour - dark brown or dark or olive green - to enable the building to better blend in with its surroundings.
I confirm that this decision accords with Government Circular Nos 44/05 (Delegation of Functions to Director of Planning and Building Control) and 47/05 (Delegation of Functions to Senior Planning Officer)
Decision Made: Permitted Date: 28/9/07
Signed: M. I. McCauley Director of Planning and Building Control
24 September 2007 06/02203/B Page 5 of 5
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown