Loading document...
Application No.: 16/00297/C Applicant: Ballavartyn Developments Ltd Proposal: Change of use of part existing stables into boarding kennels with reception, dog grooming facilities and storage Site Address: Stable Block Ballavartyn Equestrian Centre Castletown Road Newtown Santon IM4 1HT Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken: 06.04.2016 Site Visit: 06.04.2016 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is a large, irregularly shaped parcel of land associated with the Ballavartyn Equestrian Centre, which was originally approved under PA 10/01672/B. That application showed one 'main' and very large stable block, along with three other stable blocks, which would be large by domestic standards but even all together remain smaller than the single block. The facility also provided for significant external facilities, none of which can be seen from the main A5 highway. - 1.2 The nearest residential dwellings - outside of the application site - are roughly 150m from the application site.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the change of use of roughly two thirds of the middle of the three stable blocks to provide kennelling. A reception office is shown along with a 'grooming & clipping' area and a store: some 30 kennels are shown, while 10 stables would be retained within the remainder of the building. - 2.2 No external changes are proposed.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 Following the original, aforementioned, approval for the facility, a number of successive applications have been submitted on the wider site area, which includes the main dwelling. Most have been approved and a couple withdrawn with one refused, but none is considered to be directly material to the assessment of this application, which is the first of its kind on the site. (The other applications have related to, inter alia, replacement dwellings (10/01658/B), conversion of buildings to tourist accommodation (10/01674/B; 10/01660/B; 12/00028/B; 13/00795/B), provision of floodlighting (13/00429/B), the creation of parking and re-location or change of use of approved, or creation of new, buildings (12/01617/B; 12/01386/B; 13/00474/B).
4.0 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - 4.1 The site lies within a wider 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. It has no other zoning. - 4.2 The Strategic Plan does not really contain any policies that directly relate to such a proposal as has been submitted. However, in view of the active use of the site and the nature of the current application, it is considered reasonable to have regard to General Policy 2, Environment Policy 16 and Environment Policy 22. - 4.3 General Policy 2: "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:
4.4 Environment Policy 16: "The use of existing rural buildings for new purposes such as tourist, or small-scale industrial/commercial use may be permitted where:
"Proposals to convert rural buildings to residential accommodation will be considered along with the advice given at Section 8.10 of this document."
4.5 Environment Policy 22 (in part): "Development will not be permitted where it would unacceptably harm the environment and/or the amenity of nearby properties in terms of: (iii) vibration, odour, noise or light pollution."
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 DoI's Highway Services offered no objection to the proposal on 18.3.2016, commenting: "Adequate parking on site for the additional traffic which will be generated by this proposal." - 5.2 Santon Commissioners, on 18.4.2016, felt that the application was an almost academic exercise as the buildings are already used for animal management, but there remains the issue of noise and the Commissioners have requested caution be exercised in the consideration of neighbours who may suffer the inevitable barking.
6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The views of the Commissioners more or less sum up the situation. On one hand, the use of a stable block for kennels might not seem ideal, given the noise associated with kennels and the fact that many horses - particularly those stabled at Ballavartyn - require peace and calmness. However, it must also be borne in mind that the applicant is the operator of the facility and must have given strong consideration to this concern and also, presumably, will have discussed the idea with their clients. As a general principle, then, despite first appearances, it would seem an appropriate use in this location. - 6.2 To turn the situation on its head, it is also true that such facilities tend to be located away from residential areas due to the associated noise and disturbance of both the animals and also the comings and goings of their owners. As such, a location such as Ballavartyn could - given the preexisting buildings thereon - be said to represent one of the better locations for such use even if it remains unzoned for development. - 6.3 Turning to the detail, Environment Policy 16 allows for the conversion of rural buildings to non-residential uses subject to various criteria. While none of these necessarily directly applies to the proposal, equally none of the criteria is directly in conflict with the use of part of this building for kennels. The buildings, while not especially attractive, are equally entirely appropriate to their use and their modern construction and well-considered materials and form are welcome. Moreover, it is evident that the applicant is clear that there is space room therein to give it over to a complementary use (as per parts 'a', 'b' and 'c' of that policy), while Highway Services are content with the impact from a traffic and parking perspective. The proposal is in general conformity with the general principles of EP16. - 6.4 The impact from the proposal in terms of environmental impacts - specifically those as outlined in part (iii) of Environment Policy 22 - is, as noted by the Commissioners, a potential concern. However, in view of the fairly isolated position and route of the access to the site as well as the location of the site relative to nearby dwellings, as outlined earlier, it is concluded that this could not form a substantive objection to the application. - 6.5 In view of the above considerations, it is further concluded that the proposal is in accordance with the general principles outlined in GP2 - specifically, those of parts (b), (c), (g), (h), (i), (j), (k) and (m).
7.0 RECOMMENDATION - 7.1 It is recommended that the application should be approved.
7.2 Consideration was given to controlling the use of the site relative to what is proposed via condition, but in view of the generally unobjectionable nature of the proposal it was concluded that no conditions were judged necessary to make the application acceptable.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 23.05.2016 Conditions and Notes for Approval: C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.
Reason: To comply with article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
The development hereby approved relates to the following drawings, all date-stamped as having been received 16th March 2015: P10-01, P10-02, P10-03, P10-04 and P10-05.
I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Senior Planning Officer in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.
Decision Made : Permitted Date: 23.05.2016 Determining officer
Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer
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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
