Officer Planning Report Recommendation

Planning Report And Recommendations {{table:326335}} {{table:326334}}

Officer's Report

The Site

1. The site is the curtilage of an existing building which lies to the south of the A13 Jurby Road and at the northern edge of a group of buildings whose most recent use was as a film studio. The large buildings to the south of the application property were created from around 2000 onwards. The application building shares an access with the film studio and is around 9m from the closest film studio building to the south.

1. The building is a modest and basic bungalow 7.3m by 14.5m and around 4m high.

The Proposal

1. Proposed is the use of the property as a residential dwelling. No changes are proposed to the building which is currently laid out as residential accommodation.

Planning Status And Policy

1. The site lies within an area of white land on the Town and Country Planning (Development Plan) Order 1982, that is, not designated for development but outwith any areas of High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance.

1. Whilst there are policies regarding the presumption against development in the countryside, this proposal involves a building which was originally a dwelling and which has had an authorised intervening use as manager's accommodation in association with the film studio. The film studio is presently not operational as such and therefore the property has no authorised use. It has been purchased from the operator of the film studio and the new owner wishes to operate the building as a dwelling, unassociated with the film studio or its site.

1. As the change of use represents development and the site is within an area where development is discouraged, General Policy 3 is applicable in this case. This makes provision for the development of sites which may be considered as "previously developed land" which is defined as:

"that which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated fixed surface infrastructure. This definition includes defence buildings, but excludes:

Land that is or has been occupied by agricultural or forestry buildings Land that has been developed for minerals extraction or waste disposal by landfill purposes where provision for restoration has been made through development control procedures Land in built-up areas such as parks, recreation grounds and allotments, which, although it may feature paths, pavilions and other buildings, has not been previously developed Land that was previously-developed but where the remains of the permanent structure or fixed surface structure have blended into the landscape in the process of time (to the extent that it can reasonably be considered as part of the natural surroundings).

There is no presumption that the land that is previously-developed is necessarily suitable for housing development nor that the whole of the curtilage should be developed.” (Appendix 1 - Definitions and Glossary of Terms).

1. General Policy 3 states: “Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of:

c) previously developed land which contains a significant amount of buildings where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environmental and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment”.

Planning History

1. Planning permission was granted for the change of use of the building to manager’s accommodation under PA 98/1606.

1. Most recently planning permission was sought for the change of use of the film studio site excluding the application building and curtilage to an light industrial site with warehousing. This was refused for reasons relating to the fact that the proposal did not comply with the policy on previously developed land and also:

> “The residential property on the site (Baldromma Beg) has been sold off from the overall site use. As such, there would be a dwelling immediately adjacent - in fact in amongst a proposed industrial site and which would share the same access. The impacts of the proposed change of use on the amenities of the property are likely to be adverse - the increased level of traffic, the likelihood of heavier and larger vehicles and an increased level of activity and as such the proposed development is considered to be unneighbourly and unacceptable for this reason.”

1. Clearly at the time of that decision, it was understood that the property was used for residential purposes.

Representations

1. The Department of Economic Development objects to the application, indicating that the proximity of a residential property to the film studios site is likely to restrict the legitimate use of the film studio complex for these purposes. They also add that privacy and confidentiality are an important part of a film studio operation and these would be compromised by the use of the application building as a dwelling.

1. Two residents of Maughold echo these concerns.

1. Lezayre Parish Commissioners and Highways and Traffic Division indicate that they do not oppose the application.

Assessment

1. Whilst the original use of the property was a dwelling, since then the buildings alongside and which are served by the same access, have been converted and expanded to form a film studio

complex. The dwelling was converted to manager's accommodation which complemented the complex and brought the building into the film studio site. The fact that the property has been sold off is outwith the control of the planning process but its use is within this control.

1. The re-introduction of a residential use so close to the operation of the adjacent buildings is likely to affect the operation of the studio in terms of the likely noise and activity from the use of the buildings, sometimes at unsociable hours and with large vehicles some of which will manoeuvre around the site very close to the application building. Its severance from the main site does not seem to have been carefully thought through as whatever use the main part of the site is put to, this will affect the amenities of the building due to their proximity and the shared access.

1. It is considered that the residential use of the application building will lead to an unacceptable level of amenities (privacy and peace) for the occupants of the proposed dwelling and constraints on the legitimate use of the film studio buildings, neither of which is considered acceptable.

Party Status

1. The local authority, Lezayre Parish Commissioners are, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (d), considered an "interested person" and as such should be afforded party status.

1. The Department of Economic Development is a statutory authority and should be afforded party status.

1. The Department of Transport Highways and Traffic Division is now part of the Department of Infrastructure of which the planning authority is part. As such, the Highways and Traffic Division cannot be afforded party status in this instance.

1. The residents of Maughold are not directly affected by the proposal and shouldn't be afforded party status in this case.

Recommendation

Recommended Decision: Refused

Date of Recommendation: 16.12.2011

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.

It is considered that the residential use of the application building will lead to an unacceptable level of amenities (privacy and peace) for the occupants of the proposed dwelling and constraints on the legitimate use of the film studio buildings.

I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control / Development Control Manager/ Senior Planning Officer.

Decision Made : Refused Date : 20 December 2011

Determining officer (delete as appropriate)

Signed : ... Anthony Holmes Senior Planning Officer

Signed : ... Michael Gallagher Director of Planning and Building Control

Signed : ... Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer

Signed : ... Jennifer Chance Development Control Manager