Loading document...
Application No.: 19/00448/B Applicant: Cheeseden Investments Limited Proposal: Alterations and extension to existing tholtan to form dwelling Site Address: Kates Cottage Ballnahowe Road Ballnahowe Port Erin Isle Of Man Planning Officer: Miss Lucy Kinrade Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 08.08.2019 _________________________________________________________________ R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons Reasons for Refusal - R 1. Although an argument could be made that the existing building is of sufficient interest to warrant its retention and conversion, the extent of the structural works required to make the structure sound coupled with the unacceptable upwards extension, the overbearing rear extensions, the inappropriate modifications to the apertures and spread of hard standing and domestic curtilage would have a significant and adverse impact on the original appearance, character, historic interest and materials of the original building contrary to General Policy 3 (b) and Housing Policy 11. - R 2. There is no information to demonstrate that potable water can be provided for the site contrary to Housing Policy 13 (c). - R 3. The proposed alterations and extensions and the subsequent introduction of large areas of hard standing would result in an unacceptable visual impact on the wider rural landscape and countryside setting of the site contrary to Environment Policy 1 and paragraphs 8.10.1 and 8.10.2 - R 4. There is insufficient information available to understand the impact of the development on the adjacent watercourse contrary to Environment Policy 7. _______________________________________________________________
It is recommended that the following organisation should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):
19/00448/B Page 1 of 11
It is recommended that the following organisation should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):
1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is located part way along the Ballnahowe Road linking Port Erin to Cregneash. The site sits on the western side of the road around 500m south of the Port Erin town boundary and around 100m south of the entrance to Ballamann. - 1.2 The red line for the site encapsulates a 600sq m corner of field 414094, within this site and running along the edge of the site nearest the road and field access is an existing shell of a former Manx stone cottage. - 1.3 The drawings for the application indicate the shell to be around 9m long and 5.4m wide. There are full walls up to ground level, and above this at first floor the walls vary in condition, the front elevation is around 3m high and stops part way up the two first floor windows. The rear elevation and southern gable are both around 3m high (although the land banks around this corner making it appear less than 3m). The northern gable is partially crumbled, although in the most part sits around 3m high.
2.0 STRUCTURAL REPORT Observations - 2.1 The structural report submitted with the application states the following observations for the site: - 2.2` "The outbuilding is of considerable age, the roof has collapsed, and the first floor is absent. Either during the roof collapse the gable peaks have collapsed or having had the restraint removed via the collapse of the roof peaks have been blown…The building was two storey as evidenced by the joist holes in the front wall and originally had a duo-pitched roof."
19/00448/B Page 2 of 11
2.3 "The ground floor construction could not be determined….the external walls are of Manx stone construction…the front elevation accommodates a door and two moderately sized windows at ground storey level and two small windows at first storey level. The rear and both gables do not have openings. " Structural Comment - 2.4 The following structural issues were noted:
2.5 "The existing stone cottage can accommodate the proposed conversion works. The cottage requires the south facing wall to be temporarily propped until such times as the front right hand corner of the front wall is demolished and rebuilt using the original stone. The proposed new floor slab should be set at a level to avoid underpinning the external walls and should the external wall height be required to be slightly raised then the existing walls height be required to be slightly raised then the existing walls and the sub-soils are accommodating of the resultant small increase in load."
3.0 THE PROPOSAL - 3.1 Proposed is the alteration and extension of the existing structure to form a residential dwelling. The application includes the upwards extension of the existing shell to provide a full first floor and a new pitched slate roof including two integral chimney stacks on each gable. The proposed eaves level 3.5m and central ridge being around 6m. The front elevation is proposed to be re-pointed and the right hand corner rebuilt to remove the existing crack. A new first floor window is to be formed above the existing front door. - 3.2 At the rear the application includes the removal of between 2m (ground floor) and 3m (first floor) of the existing Manx stone to provide access into a proposed two storey extension. The proposed extension is to be around 5.5m wide and to project 4.5m from the rear. The extension is to have eaves levels 3.5m and a central ridge 5.5m high. A single pitched roof dormer is proposed on each side of the rood slope. The extension is to be finished in a smooth painted cement render. - 3.3 In addition to the works proposed to the existing structure, the application also seeks approval for the creation of a residential curtilage for the proposed new dwelling, this curtilage is to be enclosed by a 1.5m sod hedge form by the excavated earth from the site and planted with various hedge species. On the northern boundary an access is proposed joining with the proposed access track from the main road. Within the site and to the rear of the dwelling (west side) the application proposes the creation of an off road parking/turning area finished in either block paving or grasscrete. Running directly around the house is a proposed patio area.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 There have been no previous planning applications submitted for this specific site considered relevant in the case of this application.
19/00448/B Page 3 of 11
4.0 PLANNING POLICY - 4.1 The site lies within an area not designated for development on the Area Plan for the South 2013 (APS). On the 1982 Development Plan this area is also within an area of High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance. The APS included a character assessment for various locations around the south, the site sits within the 'Cregneash and Meayll Peninsula (H4)' where the "overall strategy is to conserve the strong sense of openness of this rugged area, its expansive and dramatic views and to conserve the setting of the numerous archaeological features and Cregneash village and the surrounding traditional field pattern as well as the wartime structures on Meayll Hill. Key Views: Dramatic views of rising uplands to the north and across Port St. Mary Bay to the northeast. Dramatic views: across the Sound to the Calf of Man. Panoramic, open views across the Peninsula. Extensive, panoramic, open views across ever-changing sea and sky engulfing the character area on three sides." - 4.2 Given the locality of the site there is a general presumption against any kind of development as set out in General Policy 3 and an emphasis placed on the protection of the countryside and landscape for its own sake in Environment Policies 1. The most relevant policies and paragraphs of the IOM Strategic Plan 2016 in the assessment and determination of the current application are: General Policy 3 (b) and (d), Environment Policy 1, Paragraphs under 8.10 and 8.11.1, and Housing Policies 11, 12 and 13. - 4.3 General Policy 3
"Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of: (b) conversion of redundant rural buildings which are of architectural, historic, or social value and interest; (Housing Policy 11); (d) the replacement of existing rural dwellings; (Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14)..."
4.4 Environment Policy 1:
"The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. For the purposes of this policy, the countryside comprises all land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 at A.3.6 or which is not designated for future development on an Area Plan. Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an overriding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative."
4.5 Environment Policy 7:
"Development which would cause demonstrable harm to a watercourse, wetland, pond or dub, and which could not be overcome by mitigation measures will not be permitted. Where development is proposed which would affect a watercourse, planning applications must comply with the following criteria:
19/00448/B Page 4 of 11
"8.10.1 Throughout the countryside, there are examples of buildings which are no longer suitable or needed for their originally intended use, but which are of sufficient quality or interest to warrant retention and re-use. 8.10.2 Conversion of such buildings into dwellings can make a useful contribution to the housing stock, ensure retention of our built heritage, and improve the appearance of what might otherwise become derelict fabric. The following policy is therefore appropriate:
4.7 Housing Policy 11: Conversion of existing rural buildings into dwellings may be permitted, but only where:
Further extension of converted rural buildings will not usually be permitted, since this would lead to loss or reduction of the original interest and character."
"There are in our countryside many existing dwellings, some of which contribute positively to its appearance and character, and some of which do not. A number of dwellings have been abandoned for many years; their physical remains being a reflection of agricultural and social change across the Island. They form features in the rural landscape which are often not unacceptable in their present state. It is appropriate to encourage change which would result in overall environment improvement, and to discourage change which would not. Where the building(s) concerned are of architectural merit or of local, historical or social interest demolition and replacement will be discouraged.
4.9 Housing Policy 12: "The replacement of an existing dwelling in the countryside will generally be permitted unless:
In assessing whether a property has lost its habitable status by abandonment, regard will be had to the following criteria:
4.10 Housing Policy 13:
19/00448/B Page 5 of 11
"In the case of those rural dwellings which have lost their former residential use by abandonment, consideration will be given in the following circumstances to the formation of a dwelling by use of the remaining fabric and the addition of new fabric to replace that which has been lost.
Where:
This policy will not apply in National Heritage Areas (see Environment Policy 6). Permission will not be given for the use of buildings more ruinous than those in (a) above, or for the erection of replacement buildings. Extensions of dwellings formed in accordance with the above may be permitted if the extension is clearly subordinate to the original building (i.e. in terms of floor space measured externally, the extension measures less than 50% of that of the original)."
Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 Rushen Parish Commissions - in support (30/05/2019) - all new built properties should fit sustainable heating systems which particularly applies in this case. - 5.2 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services - Oppose (15/05/2019)
19/00448/B Page 6 of 11
are likely to be found in the lower level planting and hedgebanks surrounding the building for refuge or hibernation.
5.5 The owners of Glebe Cottage, Maughold - objection (27/04/2019 and 08/07/2019)
6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this application are:
6.2 The existing structure represents the type of building that may be considered to contribute to the 'heritage identity' of the Island building stock, and to contribute to a sense of place in such rural locations as Ballnahowe. Manx National Heritage (MNH) have provided a photograph and supporting information as part of their comments which potentially date the structure back to around the mid-19th century. The structure is of historic interest. (i) - 6.3 The eaves level for the structure can be seen through parts of the front and rear elevations, although it's clear from the site photographs and the structural report that both gables are incomplete with the upper sections being partially collapsed, no internal first floor and no roof. The building is not considered to be substantially intact. The structural observations of the structural report would imply that in its present state the structure would not be capable of renovation without undertaking considerable structural work. (ii)
19/00448/B Page 7 of 11
6.4 Historically the building would have once been a habitable dwelling. In its own right the rebuilding to match the historic design could similarly create a satisfactory dwelling (albeit perhaps smaller than the average modern day home and likely to require internal modification to meet current building regulations standards). The photograph provided by MNH displays a single storey building attached to the north gable; although this no longer exists it perhaps demonstrates how a subordinate extension may be considered achievable here without adversely affecting its original character or interest. With or without extension the building could accommodate a satisfactory dwelling. (iii)
6.5 The existing dwelling is evidently not fit for habitation. Its residential use has been lost by abandonment. What remains of the structure is also considered to be of historic interest. The replacement of the structure would not be considered acceptable under HP12.
6.6 In the case of those rural dwellings which have lost their former residential use by abandonment, consideration will be given in the following circumstances to the formation of a dwelling by use of the remaining fabric and the addition of new fabric to replace that which has been lost. - 6.7 The structure is not substantially intact. There are not three full walls standing up to eaves level. The structural capability of what walls are remain is questionable with the structural report indicating that works would be required to make it structurally sound including the rebuilding of one corner. It its own right the existing would not be structurally capable of being retained. (i) - 6.8 Although there is no existing usable track from the highway there is an existing gated access adjacent to the north gable from which direct access from the highway can be achieved. The structure is not remote unlike some buildings that can be found in isolated positions across the countryside. In this respect it would be reasonable to say that access is achievable. (ii) - 6.9 The application form indicates that new or amended services would be required for electricity and water. The drawing states that the existing pole at the site is an electricity pole suggesting that electricity is readily available. There is no information available to demonstrate if fresh potable water is available or how this can be provided for the site. (iii)
6.10 The existing structure has been abandoned for many years; its physical remains being a reflection of agricultural and social change across the Island, often such features in the rural landscape are not unacceptable in their present and ruinous state. In the case of this application there is information that suggests the building is of historic interest to warrant its retention and sensitive development in order to convert it back to a habitable dwelling in its original state and in seeking to continue to positively contribute to the Islands built heritage. - 6.11 However the introduction of a large extension to the rear would result in an overbearing and inappropriate mass being added to the original structure which would significantly and adversely overpower the original and historic interest and appearance of the building. The substantial harm would not be considered acceptable. - 6.12 The consequential spread of hardstanding, residential curtilage and associated domestic paraphernalia coupled with the unacceptable extension to the existing building result in an overall appearance of the site which appears contrived and which is likely to result in the full extent of the development bringing visual harm to this rural context of this site.
19/00448/B Page 8 of 11
E - Other Material Considerations
6.13 Drawing number 2 indicates that there is an existing stream within a culvert running directly alongside the eastern edge of the site. The application has not been provided with a 9m within the watercourse form. There is risk that development here could impact the watercourse and or its local habitats contrary to Environment Policy 7. - 6.14 There is little or no information available or the hardstanding which is to form the access track from the main highway.
7.0 CONCLUSION - 7.1 The existing structure in its own right is not structurally intact or capable for development without undertaking a number of initial structural works. While there is perhaps a tilted balance in support of the existing structure being of such historic interest to warrant its retention and conversion to its original state, the proposal as put forward within this application results in an unacceptable upwards extension (beyond that of the original building) and the introduction of a substantial extension at the rear has an overbearing impact on the original structure. These extensions and alterations including inappropriate modification to apertures coupled with the spread of hard-standing and domestic curtilage results in an unacceptable and harmful impact on the character and appearance of the historic structure and an overall unsympathetic visual appearance of the site on the wider rural landscape and context.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 (Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons:
8.2 The Planning Committee must determine:
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.
Decision Made : Refused Date : 09.08.2019 Determining officer Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management 19/00448/B Page 9 of 11
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.
19/00448/B Page 10 of 11
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
