DEC Officer Report

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Application No.: 23/01191/C Applicant: Mr Jason Price Proposal: Proposal to add additional use as tourist accommodation to residential annex Site Address: The Barn Hillside Cottage Ballavale Road Santon Isle Of Man IM4 1EH Planning Officer: Mrs Vanessa Porter Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 01.12.2023 _________________________________________________________________ Reasons for Refusal R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons - R 1. The existing building is not of any historic, social or architectural interest or of any visual attraction to warrant its conversion and so fails Housing Policy 11 (c) and Environment Policy 16 (b) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. - R 2. The proposal does not fit within or meet any of the accommodation types and the high level criteria sought by 'Policy on the Development of Non-serviced Accommodation' to complement and enhance the Island's visitor economy and is not considered to be of any overriding national need as to outweigh Environment Policy 1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. - R 3. The proposal would undermine established policies of the Strategic Plan which indicate a presumption against the creation of new habitable units in the countryside. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Strategic Policies 2 and 8, Spatial Policy 5 and General Policy 3 of the Strategic Plan. - R 4. By reason of its failure of Housing Policy 11, Environment Policies 1 and 16, Strategic Policies 2 and 8, Spatial Policy 5 and General Policy 3, the proposal also fails to meet Business Policies 11, 12 and 14 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. _______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status

Additional Persons

None _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report APPLICATION SITE

1.1 The application site is within the curtilage of The Barn, Hillside Cottage, Ballavale Road, Santon, specifically an existing garage and ground/first floor annex. - 1.2 The site has a parking apron which can accommodate several cars. PROPOSAL

2.1 The current planning application seeks approval for firstly the alteration of the floor plan to provide a bedroom to ground floor level and a kitchen/lounge, bedroom and bathroom to first floor level. - 2.2 Secondly the proposal seeks approval for the additional use of the property as tourist accommodation. PLANNING HISTORY

3.1 The most relevant past application, are PA85/00980/B which was for the original build of the garage and PA20/01473/B which whilst not for the garage itself was for within the curtilage and was for the, "Alteration and erection of two storey extension and erection of detached garage with ancillary living accommodation above," which was approved. PLANNING POLICY. - 4.1 The site lies within an area zoned as "Not for Development" on the Area Plan for the East. The site is not situated within a Flood Risk Zone nor a Conservation Area.

4.2 When looking at the Isle of Man Strategic Policies, conversions of rural buildings into residential accommodation are assessed against Paragraph 8.10 and Housing Policy 11 of the Strategic Plan 2016, with the reuse of rural buildings for tourist use against Environment Policy 16. - 4.3 These policies make clear that only buildings of historic, architectural or social interest are suitable for conversion, Business Policies 11, 12 and 14 also support tourist uses but only if they comply with Housing Policy 11 and Environment Policy 16, and also that they do not undermine other policies within the Strategic Plan such as Strategic Policies 2 and 8, and Spatial Policy 5 which seek to direct development to existing settlements and to protect the environment and countryside. Environment Policy 1 makes it clear that the countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake and only development which would not adversely affect it or which is considered to be of overriding national need being permitted. - 4.4 Further to the above another material considerations is the 'Policy on the Development of Non-serviced Accommodation', dated March 2019, adopted by the Department for Enterprise in order "to shape a future development strategy for the sector, help inform planning policy and to guide the Department as to what support mechanisms may be required to maximise the potential benefits of an expansion on non-service accommodation in the Island." This document is helpful in outlining what type of tourist accommodation the Isle of Man is looking for and states that the focus for the future "will be on the types of non-service accommodation identified as being in shortage within the study, namely;

• 8.2.1 developments of multiple units;
• 8.2.2 those that cater for families;
• 8.2.3 those that cater for individuals with disabilities
• 8.2.4 proposals which incorporate leisure and entertainment facilities;
• 8.2.5 high quality, luxury, boutique developments;

• 8.2.6 clusters or separate small scale units which complement existing tourist activities or leisure facilities;
• 8.2.7 glamping units and
• 8.2.8 those catering for group experiences."

REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Highway Services have considered the application and state, "No Highways Interest." (27.10.23)

5.2 No comments have been received from Santon Commissioners at the time of writing this report.

ASSESSMENT 6.1 The matters for consideration in the determination of this application are;

• - preamble
• - principle of the development

- 6.2 PREAMBLE

• 6.2.1 As stated within section 3 of this report, there was an application, PA85/00980/B, which was for the original build of the existing garage. This application was for the erection of a structure which has a double garage and stable to ground floor level and a tack room, shower room and games room/ study above. The application included two conditions which are relevant, Condition 1 and Condition 7. Condition 1 states, "The building(s) shall not be used for any other purpose than that indicated on the plan or in the application without the consent of the committee," and Condition 7 states, "The exterior stonework must be a traditional random rubble wall to the satisfaction of the committee. Note: Split stone on the backing of render is not acceptable as a finish."
• 6.2.2 With the above in mind, application PA20/01473/B showed the existing garage as being different to the garage as approved under PA85/00980/B, originally PA20/01473/B showed that alterations were proposed to the front elevation of the garage this was removed from the end application and the officers report states the following with the Planning History, "4.1 The existing garage was approved as a garage and stable with tack room and games room above (85/00980/B). The applicant has stated that the garage was as it is shown in the submitted existing drawings when they purchased the site two years ago and that the owners before that confirmed that it was also like that when they owned the property. They suggest that that internal fittings suggest that it has been like that for a considerable time - beyond the ten years in which enforcement action would be possible under the 1999 Town and Country Planning Act. No changes are now being proposed to this building."
• 6.2.3 This was followed by Condition 2, "No approval is granted to the creation of the additional parking spaces shown on drawing JPL_01 or the alterations to the existing garage as shown in drawing JPL_04. The existing garage must remain as shown in the drawing JLP_02 with garage space on the ground floor behind the two garage doors and the remainder of the building to be used only as accommodation which is ancillary to that of the main house, Hillside. Reason: to clarify the extent of the approval."
• 6.2.4 The above condition means that whilst the proposal under PA20/01473/B was not in accordance with PA85/00980/B, the use was accepted as ancillary.
• 6.2.5 Whilst the above is the case, there are still works to the main structure which have not had the benefit of Planning Permission nor a Certificate of Lawfulness application. This means that whilst the use was accepted as ancillary, the structure itself whilst not enforceable is still illegal with regards to Planning.

- 6.3 PRINCIPLE OF THE DEVELOPMENT

• 6.3.1 The fundamental issue to consider in the assessment of this application is whether the proposal complies with the relevant policies of the Strategic Plan, including those which are restrictive of development in the countryside outside of areas zoned for development.
• 6.3.2 There is an underlying element to the strategic policies outlined in part 4 of this application which is that there are established planning policies which make it quite clear that new development should be located within existing settlements and only on certain exceptions, listed in General Policy 3 should be allowed in the countryside. The conversion or re-use of existing buildings in the countryside for new tourist or residential uses is permitted but development must comply with the strict criteria contained in Housing Policy 11 and Environment Policy 16.
• 6.3.3 Housing Policy 11 states that within 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." Within Environment Policy 16 it states that a building either needs to be no longer required for its existing use, as in redundant or the property needs to be of historic relevance.
• 6.3.4 Business Policy 12 in line with the policies above provides that permission will generally be given for the conversion of "redundant buildings" in the countryside to tourist use, subject to compliance with paragraph 8.10, Housing Policy 11 and Environment Policy 16 of the Strategic Plan. Business Policy 14 provides that tourism development may be permitted in rural areas, but requires compliance with other Strategic Plan policies, including specific cross references to Business Policy 12, and through that policy to Housing Policy 11. As a result, whilst Housing Policy 11 relates to conversions into dwellings, by virtue of Business Policy 12 it also applies to conversions to tourist use.
• 6.3.5 With the above in mind and when turning to the proposal, the first port of call is that both Housing Policy 11 and Environment Policy 16 stipulate that the existing rural building must be of historic, social or architectural interest to warrant its conversion and that it must be demonstrated as redundant from its existing use.
• 6.3.6 It is evident that the existing building is not of any historic, social or architectural interest nor of any other visual attraction which would warrant its conversion to a new dwelling or a separate tourist unit, and as such would fail both Housing Policy 11 (c) and Environment Policy 16 (b).
• 6.3.7 Both policies also require that the existing use of the building is demonstrated as redundant, with this application nothing has been provided with the application which would state that the additional living space is redundant from its use and noting that in PA20/01473/B, the application form states that the "existing garage and annex will be converted to provide accommodation for family (grandparents) to move to" and that the new garage with studio above, "studio above new garage creates the potential for accommodation for children in teenage years and beyond." Of which they have stated on the application form they have 4 children.
• 6.3.8 Whilst this does not necessary mean that the garage is not redundant from its existing use, having had a discussion with the applicant they have stated that the proposed garage under PA20/01473/B is not going to be built and as such the only ancillary accommodation to the site would be the existing garage and the level of redundancy is questioned.
• 6.3.9 With the above in mind there is often concern in the spread of incremental and piecemeal development throughout the countryside which results in an undermining of those policies which are in place to ultimately protect the countryside for its own sake.

• 6.3.10 Garages are not uncommon in the curtilage of private residential dwellings, in fact the Permitted Development allows for such subject to conditions, and so to some degree it might seem unreasonable to allow such garage structures to serve a dwelling in the countryside so long as they do not adversely affect the countryside or contravene planning policy.
• 6.3.11 These garages are often designed to allow for some additional accommodation in the roof space, which is presumably being included at the applicant's need. In assessing such applications if the overall design is considered acceptable, the Department may be seen as being unreasonable if they resist such additional accommodation in the upper floor minded that Section 6 of the Act indicates that the use of such space incidental to the main house would not be development. However, this does not mean that a subsequent proposal for the same being used for separate tourist purposes should be accepted.
• 6.3.12 As stated above, the Department is concerned with the potential for incremental development in the countryside undermining policies that seek to protect it. If it is accepted that there will be additional comings and goings by people not associated with the primary dwelling, it may be hard to resist the accommodation being rented out for long term lets, which is effectively a separate unit of accommodation. The overarching strategic and spatial policies in the Strategic Plan aim to provide for a sustainable island by directing all new development including residential development to existing town centres and within existing settlements. Proposals for new tourist/residential accommodation in the upper floors of newly built garages in the countryside is neither sustainable nor development supported by policies. Providing for tourist accommodation in a modern build is not sustainable nor is the built fabric of interest and quality as prescribed by Strategic Policy 8.
• 6.3.13 Taking into account the Non-serviced accommodation study (see 4.4 of this report) it is also evident that the proposal does not fit within or meet any of the accommodation types and the high level criteria which is being sought for to complement and enhance the Island's visitor economy. For this reason the proposal is also not considered to be of any overriding national need as to outweigh Environment Policy 1.

CONCLUSION

7.1 In the first instance whilst the ancillary use of the existing garage has been approved via a condition under PA20/01473/B, the structure still has not been built in accordance with the original approval and conditions under PA85/00980/B, and whilst the time period for enforcement has gone past. The existing garage is still illegal with regards to Planning.

7.2 When looking at the proposal itself, on balance, it is considered that the proposal would fail the redundancy test and the existing garage is not of sufficient quality or interest to warrant retention and re-use as tourist and is considered country to Strategic Policy 8, Business Policy 11, 12 & 14, and Environment Policy 16 of the Strategic Plan. Similarly as the proposal fails to satisfy those aforementioned policies the proposal would be contrary to Environmental Policy 1 and 2 of the strategic plan.

7.3 If the proposal was recommended for approval, steps could be taken prior to this application to regularise the existing garage structure either via an alteration to this application, to seek retrospective approval of the garage or via a Certificate of Lawful Development. Both of which would seek to make the existing structure legal and accepting of further development. - 7.4 As the proposed change of use does not comply with the policies within the Strategic Plan, it is deemed unnecessary to seek additional applications/information within this application.

7.4 Ultimately, the proposal cannot be accepted on an unlawful development, and whilst this is the case the proposal is considered to be unacceptable and to fail Housing Policy 11 (c),

Environment Policy 16 (b), Environment Policy 1 and Business Policies 11, 12 and 14. The proposal is also considered to undermine Strategic Policies 2 and 8 and Spatial Policy 5.

INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf);
• (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure;
• (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and
• (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

8.2 The decision maker must determine:

• o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and
• o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status

I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status

Decision Made : Refused Date : 05.12.2023 Determining officer

Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management

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.