Loading document...
Department of Infrastructure Murray House Mount Havelock Douglas Isle of Man IM1 2SF
23rd August 2013
Dear Sirs
PROPOSAL Change of use of small parcel of land from agricultural land to domestic garden, to rear of No. 1, Knock Rushen Castletown Isle of Man IM9 1TQ This application requests permission for the change of use of 0.1 acres of land, immediately abutting the rear of the applicant's garden and currently being used as a construction compound.
The following information is provided in support of this application;
The application site is as indicated on the drawings and has an area of approximately 0.1 acre that has been used since 2008 as part of a construction compound. The land is on the eastern edge of a large, 10 acre field.
The proposed garden abuts the rear garden of Plot 1 and is bounded on the south east by the existing $2 \mathrm{~m}-3.5 \mathrm{~m}$ high garden wall to Knock Rushen House.
The site extends south west to line through with the western extent of the garden wall of Knock Rushen House. The end of this wall has often previously been described as demarcating the extent of development in Castletown.
The north-west boundary of the site will be a continuation of the north boundary of Plot 1. Historically, due to the rock being so close to the surface in this area, the application land was not farmed and was previously used as access to the now developed "Humpy Field". The Farmer also used it for rubbish/ agricultural plant storage as it was out of sight hidden behind the large garden
wall of Knock Rushen House. The fact that the rest of the field enjoys good top soil depths and that this small area is unusable was why it was the only area that the farmer was agreeable to sell the applicant.
The field, of which the application site is part of, was allocated for Housing under the Castletown Local Plan 1991.
Consideration was given to reallocating this land for Residential Use as part of the recent consultation for the Area Plan for the South (2012). The Inspector, in his report to government, provided commentary for this land between sections (4.194) to (4.199) inclusive and advises in (4.198); '...I remain to be convinced that it would not be possible to devise some mitigation measures that would allow some development without causing the harm mentioned by the Department.'
The Inspector also reported at (4.196) that a Report for a previous planning application for residential development of the land, found that 'there would be little harm to ecological interests and archaeological interests could be protected.'
The proposed Area Plan for the South shows the land as un-zoned for residential use.
The applicant is relocating his family and business to the Island. They have bought No. 1 Knock Rushen, a large house ( 6000 sq ft ) but noticeably lacking amenity space commensurate with the size of the house. This point was noted by virtually all previous potential purchasers. The applicant has however successfully acquired the application land from the farmer for his amenity.
In relative terms, the parcel of land the farmer was prepared to sell is much smaller than the construction compound and comprises an area that the farmer considered un-farmable, as described above, and of no impact to the remainder of his field as it does not project past the stone wall of Knock Rushen House.
The sale conditions from the farmer committed the applicants to erect boundaries to the land, formed by post and wire stock fencing backed up by native hedge planted just inside the fence line. These works will be low key and would, in effect, be compliant with Clause 39 of Schedule 1 of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012, if this application had not been submitted.
The site levels will generally remain unaltered.
The applicant also wishes to carry out additional planting within the land including trees to the boundary of Knock Rushen House to further enhance mutual privacy.
The land is completely screened to the south east boundary, being fully hidden behind the existing high stone garden walls of Knock Rushen House. Additionally, Planning permission has previously been granted (PA10/00898/B) for the construction of a large detached 3 storey dwelling in the garden of Knock Rushen House in a position between the application site and the sea shore, which if built, will further screen the application site.
The application site will not be noticeable when viewed from Scarlett and the south, as the boundary treatment will be traditional rural and the back drop is the Knock Rushen residential development comprising 2 and 3 story houses currently nearing completion.
In a recent similar planning application (13/00019/C), the Inspector, in recommending approval, stated in section (7) that 'both the principle and actual impacts are material' consideration when considering change of use applications for land.
The application site is only a small part of a large field which previously was thought suitable for residential development and the Inspector for the Area Plan for the South recently reinforced this view.
The application site is screened by an existing high garden wall when viewed from the coast and when viewed from other vantage points it is with a backdrop of residential properties. The proposed use of the land for garden will have no additional detrimental visual impact on the landscape or negative impact on anyone or anything.
The proposed works are something that could be installed by the farmer and do not require planning permission, which is solely for change of use. The applicant understands that this event is fairly common but wishes to obtain approval to prevent any neighbour conflicts in the future.
Granting permission for this change of use will not set precedence for other properties at Knock Rushen as the application site is uniquely tucked into the corner of a field well screened by Knock Rushen House and its garden wall. It is on the only land which the farmer was willing to sell due to its unproductive rocky makeup. Additionally the rest of the houses on the south west boundary of the Knock Rushen Development, are separated from the field boundary by roads or footpaths with two exceptions (no 5 and 7) which have garden commensurate with their size already and are situated on the field boundary. Garden extension proposals for either of these properties would provide an un-natural projection into the field and could justifiably be refused.
The extra garden space requested is required by the applicant as he has young children who will make good use of the outdoor space. They are also keen to secure their long term future privacy of
their property which the extension of the garden will provide together with the additional planting they intend to install along the common boundary with Knock Rushen House.
We trust that we have provided sufficient information for this application to be considered but should you have any questions or require any more information, please do not hesitate to contact the writer.
Yours faithfully,
George Li For and on behalf of Hartford Homes Ltd.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
