Loading document...
Application No.: 09/00024/A Case Officer : Miss S E Corlett #### Consultations #### Representations ### Planning Applicant: Mr & Mrs John Masson Proposal: Approval in principle to re-instate residential use of redundant dwelling and access drive Site Address: Ballalona The Orchard Field 425035 Ronague Road Ronague Castletown Isle Of Man **
The site represents an elongated piece of land which lies to the east of the Ronague Road the B42 and Corlea Road (B39), accessed via a lane past Ballaglonney Farm and which ultimately leads west to Ronague Chapel. The eastern part of this access is marked on the Footpath Map as "Public Footpath pedestrians only".
The site is approximately 2.3 acres in size and presently what appears as unimproved and unmanaged open space. Also defined in blue is additional land associated with Ballacricket Farm which lies to the north west.
The site contains a former cottage - a stone building with the majority of the roof in place, two chimneys and an amount of what looks like beach stone in one gable. The front elevation has a small front door and a door to the right and a window to the left. The south western gable has no windows, the north eastern gable has two small higher level windows and the rear elevation has no windows. The floor area represents approximately 9m by 5m.
Access to the site is along the public footpath from the Ronague Road which runs past two Ballaglonney Farms in the form of a narrow, single track lane which is in part concrete and part tarmacadam up until the entrance to Ballaglonney where the access follows the public footpath across a field, over two styles and down a very muddy lane.
The total length of the access from the public highway is 1000m to the point where the made up road finishes and there is a further 500m of field across which a new track/lane would have to be formed.
The site lies within an area designated on the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982 as "white land", that is, not designated for development.
Planning permission was sought and refused for the erection of a completely new dwelling to the north of the application building, together with the refurbishment of the application building and the upgrading of the track "to private driveway kerbed and surfaced with chippings." This application, PA 92/1668 was refused for the following reasons:
Proposed is the reinstatement of the residential status of the building and its use as a dwelling. No plans have been submitted but a Structural Engineer's report has been received which notes that the former first floor no longer exists and "the slate roof and supporting structure require a complete refurbishment". They note that a former window in the rear elevation has been blocked up and the rear wall is partially sand/cement rendered and "in acceptable alignment". Vertical movement has developed on the front elevation between the door openings running down from the eaves to the mid height of the openings and a full height separation crack local to the right hand gable and similar stress-induced movement cracking has occurred to the right hand gable with full height vertical cracking on the front wall and the lack of restraint has caused an outward bow in the gable. The report notes additional movement cracking on the wall running vertically between the two first floor windows in the north eastern gable and it is recommended that this wall is taken down and rebuilt in cavity blockwork with a stone outer skin. A concrete beam should be introduced to cap the walls and steel bonding plates repair the other cracks. The report concludes that the structure "is in serviceable condition".
Advice from Building Control has been sought on the practicability of renovating the building. The site visit revealed the status of the access (see above) and the condition of the property. The structural cracking on the north eastern gable is close to substantial cracking on the northern end of the front elevation, suggesting that if the gable is removed, at least part of the front elevation would collapse (see photographs).
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry recommend that any work is undertaken more than 8m from any watercourse. The pond lies approximately 10m from the side of the building and if permission is granted, a condition should be attached to require a method statement to be submitted with the application for the reserved matters, to prevent contamination of or damage to the watercourse.
Environmental Protection Unit recommend that a licence to discharge into the watercourse will be required and the soakwaway should be at least 10m from the watercourse to avoid foul seepage.
A resident of Maughold expresses concern that whilst the cottage may comply with Housing Policy 13, it is remote and "decayed" and the application should not be approved.
Arbory Parish Commissioners would have liked to have seen full proposals indicating how large the dwelling would need to be to be habitable and note that the property is some distance from existing mains services.
Department of Transport Highways and Traffic Division do not object to the application providing that two parking spaces are provided, visibility splays are provided at the point of access onto the public highway and that the access shall provide turning for a vehicle.
Manx Electricity Authority recommend that the applicant should consult them regarding electricity supplies. This is not a material planning consideration and should not be referred to in the planning decision notice.
A resident of Port Soderick suggests that the proposal may struggle to satisfy certain Strategic Plan policies.
The following Strategic Plan policies are considered relevant in this case:
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:
a) essential housing for agricultural workers who have to live close to their place of work (Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10) b) conversion of redundant rural buildings which are of architectural, historical, or social value and interest (Housing Policy 11) 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 d) the replacement of existing rural dwellings (Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14) e) location-dependant development in connection with the working of minerals or the provision of necessary services; f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry g) development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative and h) buildings or works required for interpretation of the countryside, its wildlife or heritage".
Housing Policy 13 states:
"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
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
