Loading document...
Application No.: 10/01089/B Applicant: Wheatfield Investments Ltd Proposal: Conversion of barn to provide living accommodation and extend existing curtilage Site Address: Kiondroghad Barn Orrisdale Kirk Michael Isle Of Man Considerations Case Officer: Miss Laura Davy Photo Taken: 06.08.2010 Site Visit: 06.08.2010 Expected Decision Level: Senior Planning Officer Written Representations 33 Ballaquark Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 2EY Interest expressed Kionedroghad Cottage Orrisdale Kirk Michael Isle Of Man Objects to the proposal Consultations Consultee: Manx Electricity Authority Notes: Contact the MEA Planning Department (tel. 687766) to discuss the electricty supply for this application. Consultee: Highways Division Notes: Defer 23.09.10 - Do not oppose has no traffic management parking or road safety implications. Consultee: Michael Commissioners Notes: No objection 05.11.10 - Objection
THE SITE The application site relates to Kiondroghad Barn, Orrisdale, Kirk Michael. There is an existing two storey barn which was built more than 100 years ago, it was used for agricultural purposes such as to store animal feed and to house animals, but has since been used as a store for general items. The 8 December 2010 10/01089/B Page 1 of 6
site gently slopes and rises upwards by about a metre towards the West. The building barn measures approximately . To the rear of the building is an existing track which provides access to the adjacent field. To the other side of the existing track is a two storey cottage which has been extended in the past. There are a number of mature trees within the curtilage of the site.
Proposed is the conversion of the barn to provide living accommodation. Also proposed is extending the existing curtilage which would project approximately 3.5 m to the front of the barn which forms part of an agricultural field. To the front of the building a timber fence would be constructed on the boundary. The existing stonework would be re-pointed and the existing openings would be sealed up with Manx stonework, one of the existing doors would be taken out and a window would be formed. The windows in the rear elevation would be obscure glazed to prevent overlooking to the existing two storey cottage situated to the other side of the track. Three conservation roof lights would also be installed in the rear elevation. Two solar panels would be installed and a number of roof lights. The conversion also includes the erection of a single storey porch which would be constructed of Manx stone, and finished with a pitched roof. As part of the proposal approximately 4 trees are to be removed as they are within 3 m of the existin' building, the roots that have disturbed the sections of foundations would be dug out and the foundations repaired.
There are no previous planning applications relating to this site.
The application site is within an area zoned as "High Landscape Value or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance" it is also on the outskirts of areas which are recognised as "Ancient Monuments and Sites of Archaeological Interest" identified on the 1982 Development Plan. It is appropriate to consider Housing Policy 11, Environment Policy 2 and Energy Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (20th June 2007).
Highways Division wish to defer as no visibility splays are shown from entrance onto the highway. 36 metres required. Amended plans have since been submitted and Highways Division do not oppose as it has no traffic management, parking or road safety implications. Michael Commissioners have no objection, but have requested that the applicant uses the existing stone as the external facing. The Commissioners made the following observation; it was difficult to ascertain the footprint on the plans. Since receiving amended plans, the Commissioners have made the following comments: The Commissioners have an objection to this planning application, as they would like to see the plans for the extension to the curtilage boundary, before the application goes ahead. (No site plan provided). Further comments have been received from the Commissioners dated the 2nd December 2010, stating that they have no objection as long as the curtilage is the same as the first plan. The M.E.A wish to express their interest in the application, and request that the applicant contacts the Authority. The owners/occupiers of Kionedroghad Cottage, Orrisdale have expressed interest in the application as adjoining land owners. This property and the application site share a common access, Kionedroghad Cottage has the right of way over this access, and there is no on street parking in the vicinity. Increased vehicular traffic and in particular large industrial vehicles and equipment is likely to obstruct the right of way during the course of any development. Kionedroghad Cottage and the application site have a shared party wall which is in a poor state of repair, development of the application site is likely to cause further deterioration and even collapse of the party wall. There is also concern about the loss/damage to the amenity. The Southerly aspect is over agricultural land. The rear of the proposed development is approximately 20 feet at the nearest point from the front
wall of Kionedroghad Cottage. They were of the understanding that the application site had not been zoned for residential development and was zoned as agricultural land. For these reasons set out, the owners/occupiers of Kionedroghad Cottage wish to object. The owner/occupier of 33 Ballaquark,Douglas has expressed an interest and makes the following comments:The design of this 'conversion' (it seems to be mostly new) hardly retains the appearance of a converted barn in the countryside. it will certainly give the impression of being a new dwelling. This does not seem in the spirit of planning circular 3/89, nor the policies in the Strategic Plan. It is just an excuse for a new dwelling where one would not otherwise be allowed. And it is not in accordane with the Design Guide 3/91.
Given the nature of the proposed development it is appropriate to consider Housing Policy 11 which states: "Conversion of existing rural buildings into dwellings may be permitted, but only where:
Permission will not be given for the rebuilding of ruins or the erection of replacement buildings of similar, or even identical, form. 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."
It is also appropriate to consider Environment Policy 2, which states: "The present system of landscape classification of Areas of High Landscape Value or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV's) as shown on the 1982 Development Plan and subsequent Local and Area Plans will be used as a basis for development control until such time as it is superseded by a language classification which will introduce different categories of landscape and policies and guidance for control therein. Within these areas the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration unless it can be shown that:
In terms of the installation of solar panels, Energy Policy 4 is considered to be relevant in the assessment of the application: "Development involving alternative sources of energy supply, including wind, water and tide power, and the use of solar panels, will be judged against the environmental objectives and policies set out in this Plan. Installations involving wind, water and tide power will require the submission of an EIA."
The main issues to be considered in the assessment of this application are whether the proposed development would comply with Housing Policy 11 and whether the development of the site would be contrary to Environment Policy 2.
On the first issue, the building is considered to be of sufficient interest to warrant its retention being of stone construction and having an attractive appearance and character. From a site visit it is clear that the original agricultural use of the building is now redundant and now lies empty.
The application is supported by a Structural Inspection Report which concludes that the barn is in good structural order and appears to be suitable for the conversion proposed.
The proposed development is considered to be generally sympathetic to the existing character of the building, utilising existing apertures where possible and introducing limited new door and window openings. The porch extension would be constructed using materials to match the existing barn structure.
The proposed extension which forms part of the proposed development would measure approximately . It is considered that this would respect the existing building in terms of character and appearance.
The existing barn is set back from the road by quite some distance and is not highly visible from the highway; there are a number of existing trees which are to be retained which would provide some screening.
Also proposed is the installation of solar panels and roof lights in what will be the front elevation of the property. Again this is not highly visible from the highway, it is considered that the proposal would not result in adversely impacting the character and appearance of the building within the landscape.
Also to be considered is the potential impact to the adjacent property Kionedroghad Cottage, as mentioned above; the owners/occupiers have some concerns regarding their amenities and privacy. The barn is approximately 12 m from the front elevation of Kionedroghad Cottage, the only windows which would be in this elevation are at ground floor level and would be obscure glazed to prevent overlooking to Kionedroghad Cottage. There would be no windows at first floor level in this elevation, but there would be roof windows to provide light to the first floor.
The proposed development would consist of modest alterations which would not adversely affect the character and appearance of the site or surrounding area.
The existing curtilage of the site is proposed to be extended; the curtilage would be extended by approximately 3 m into the existing field. The extension of the curtilage is proposed to provide space for the proposed porch, and to provide adequate parking provision. If the curtilage was not extended the proposed development could potentially have a harmful impact on the neighbouring property Kionedroghad Cottage.
If the front porch were erected on the elevation facing Kionedroghad Cottage it would result in the loss of privacy and would have more of an impact in terms of proximity.
By extending the cutilage of the application site, it is considered that the proposed development would not have an adverse impact to the neighbouring property. I therefore consider that the encroachment into the adjacent field would not create significant adverse impacts enough to warrant a refusal on these grounds, particularly as it is required in order to have less impact to the neighbouring property.
There are a number of existing trees within the curtilage of the site, some which would be retained and some would be removed. Approximately 5 small elm trees would need to be removed and 2 small self seeded sycamores as all these trees are within 3 m of the existing structure, the roots potentially damaging the existing barn. Two mature elm trees are to be retained along with a number of self seeded sycamores.
It is judged that the proposed development would be sympathetic to the existing appearance and character of the site and surrounding area. It is considered that the removal of some of the trees would not be detrimental to the character and appearance of the site.
For the above reasons the application is considered to be acceptable and is recommended for approval.
The local authority is, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (c) and (d), considered an "interested person" and as such should be afforded party status.
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.
The owners/occupiers of Kionedroghad Cottage are afforded party status.
The owner/occupier of 33 Ballaquark, Douglas is not afforded party status.
Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 08.12.2010
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
The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
This permission relates to the conversion of barn to provide living accommodation and extend on the existing curtilage shown in drawings Location Plan, Site Plan, Photographs, 72.1.08 and Structural Inspection received 20th July 2010, drawing 32.3.10 Rev A received 20th September 2010, drawing 27.2.10 Rev A received 25th October 2010 and Agent Letter received 6th December 2010.
8 December 2010 10/01089/B Page 5 of 6
C 3. Obscure glazing shall be installed in the rear elevation ground floor windows and shall be kept and maintained thereafter.
I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to the Senior Planning Officer.
Decision Made : Permitted Date : December 2010
Signed : Senior Planning Officer
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
