Alterations and erection of extension (Amendment to P/A 18/00007/B)

Housing Policy 11

The application is considered to comply with Environment Policy 2, Housing Policy 11 and 15

Housing Policy 11: Conversion of existing rural buildings into dwellings may be permitted, but only where: (a) redundancy for the original use can be established; (b) the building is substantially intact and structurally capable of renovation; (c) the building is of architectural, historic, or social interest; (d) the building is large enough to form a satisfactory dwelling, either as it stands or with modest, subordinate extension which does not affect adversely the character or interest of the building; (e) residential use would not be incompatible with adjoining established uses or, where appropriate, land-use zonings on the area plan; and (f) the building is or can be provided with satisfactory services without unreasonable public expenditure. Such conversion must: (a) where practicable and desirable, re -establish the original appearance of the building; and (b) use the same materials as those in the existing building. 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. 8.10.3 Permission will be given in certain circumstances for the re-establishment of residential use where there is an abandoned dwelling, since such dwellings can sometimes have a negative impact, usually arising from the sense of dereliction and dilapidation. See Housing Policy 13 below. 8.11 Replacement Dwellings in the Countryside 8.11.1 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.

extensions to traditionally styled dwellings

The application is considered to comply with Environment Policy 2, Housing Policy 11 and 15

Housing Policy 15: The extension or alteration of existing traditionally styled properties in the countryside will normally only be approved where these respect the proportion, form and appearance of the existing property. Only exceptionally will permission be granted for extensions which measure more than 50% of the existing building in terms of floor space (measured externally).

development on land zoned as AHLV

The application is considered to comply with Environment Policy 2, Housing Policy 11 and 15

d/Governor 's Road junction. Any future applications will be considered on their merits taking into account the proposals set out in this plan and the Strategic Plan (see Maps 3 and 6). Natural Environment Proposal 2 (Green Gap) Between the settlements of Douglas and Onchan in the area straddling Blackberry Lane, development which would erode the separation and detract from the openness between the settlements will not normally be supported. Applications may be considered favourably if reason for an exception can be demonstrated in line with General Policy 3(g). Laxey and Baldrine - Encroaching ribbon development along the A2 C oast Road which connects Laxey and Baldrine has the potential to connect the two settlements. At present this area largely retains its sense of being in the open countryside with clear sea views. Additionally, services for networked water supply and other essential utilities would be difficult to provide for additional development in this area (see Maps 3, 7 and 9). Natural Environment Proposal 3 (Green Gap) Between the settlements of Laxey and Baldrine, development which would erode the separation and detract from the openness between the settlements will not be supported. Glen Vine and Crosby - These two settlements, although proximate in location, are separate and distinct in many ways. Consultation has clearly demonstrated this through the views expressed during the stages of plan development. In cases such as this, the breaks in the urban fabric and the features of nature which provide a sense of openness should be protected from development which would erode this (see Maps 3 and 10). Natural Environment Proposal 4 (Green Gap) Between the settlements of Glen Vine and Crosby, development which would erode the separation and detract from the openness between the settlements is unlikely to be supported. Douglas, Union Mills and Strang (see Maps 3, 4 and 8) Natural Environment Proposal 5 (Green Gap) Between the settlements of and Douglas, Union Mills and Strang, development which would erode the separation and detract from the openness between the settlements is unlikely to be supported. The Upland Environment The Manx Uplands are an iconic part of our landscape and heritage. Reference to the 'sweet mountain air' and 'green hills and rocks' are enshrined in our national anthem and the colours of the heather and gorse are woven into the very fabric of Manx tartan. The hills are a place of great beauty, yet for some they are also a place to work and for others a place to exercise or simply enjoy open space. Our Uplands are also home to plants and animals that whilst familiar to us, are rare and impor tant in a global and European context. Furthermore, the uplands are a rich repository of cultural and archaeological remains, which are sensitive to change and can easily be damaged by inappropriate development. Production of food is an important and obvi ous function of hill land. But surprisingly, the Manx hills provide everyday functions that most people take for granted. Peatlands, which cover most of our hills reduce the impacts of climate change by locking up carbon dioxide, collect and filter our drinking water and slow the passage of rainfall into streams and rivers, thus reducing downstream flood risk. These multiple uses are of great benefit to the economy of the Isle of Man and the well - being of its people. It is important that the hills continue to provide these benefits long into the future. Ensuring sustainable management of such a wide range of uses to the satisfaction of all interested parties whilst retaining functions essential to the well -being of the Isle of Man is of paramount importance. The Isle of Man Government is the owner and landlord for the majority of the Uplands in the East region and is therefore in a position to implement policy which will deliver the optimum range of ecosystem services. Appropriate and positive Upland management such as controlled rotational burning/cutting of heather and low intensity grazing helps to reduce the fuel load of the hill, provides firebreaks and reduces the risk of unplanned wildfires that further protects the biodiversity of the site, but also the vast amounts of carbon locked away in the peat soils. The majority of this work is carried out by The Department of Environment, Food & Agriculture's grazing and shooting tenants. The Manx Uplands are critically important from a habitat and biodiversity perspective. The hills in the East support a significant number of breeding hen harriers; however, other native Upland breeding birds such as curlew and red grouse have suffered severe declines in recent decades and as such are of high conservation concern. Strict control of access and recreational activity on vulnerable soils should be implemented to reduce soil erosion and subsequent carbon loss. Curlew and hen harriers are recognised as an internationally important species, while (within the EU) upland heather moorland is designated

flood risk

to meet with the general principles of General Policy 2 (l) and Environment Policies 10 and 13

flood risk

to meet with the general principles of General Policy 2 (l) and Environment Policies 10 and 13

irements of the relevant gas supply agency. Flood Risk 63 There was widespread concern about the adequacy of drainage and the risk of flooding, particularly in parts of Braddan, Onchan and Laxey. Environment Policy 10 of the Strategic Plan indicates that where development is proposed on any site where there is a potential risk of flooding, the prospective developer will be required to submit a flood risk assessment, together with details of proposed mitigation measures. This approach is reinforced in Utilities Proposal 6 of the draft Area Plan, which (among other things) requires the incorporation of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) into new developments, to attenuate the rate of surface water run-off. I consider these policies to be reasonable. Clearly, without adequate mitigation measures, new building should normally be resisted on land which is at serious risk of flooding, or where the proposed development would increase the flood risk elsewhere. 64 In my view, the format of Utilities Proposal 6 could be improved. First, as a Proposal of the Area Plan, I consider that it should be in a bold typeface, to differentiate it from the supporting text. (The same applies to a number of other policies e.g. Transport Policy 2, and Utilities Policies 2 and 5). Second, there appears to be an error of syntax at the start of the second sentence of Utilities Proposal 6, which should perhaps read 'Strategies to achieve this will include …'. Third, the third bullet point of this Proposal introduces SuDS. Subsequent bullet points describe features of SuDS, and are therefore subordinate to the third bullet point. For clarity, I consider that they should be indented. I recommend that the draft Area Plan be modified accordingly. Sewage Treatment 65 There was also some public concern about the adequacy of the sewerage system, both in terms of its capacity to accommodate the effluent from proposed residential development areas, and in terms of the current practice of discharging untreated sewage into the sea. Infrastructure Policy 1 of the Strategic Plan indicates that developments entailing the erection of multiple dwellings should take place only on sites that will ultimately be connected to the IRIS system, which takes sewage to a treatment works at Meary Veg. (IRIS is an acronym for Integration and Recycling of the Island's Sewage). However, as long ago as 2006/7, a review was undertaken to decide whether to continue with the IRIS strategy. This concluded that it would be beneficial to adopt a regional sewage treatment strategy (RSTS) for those settlements that were not already connected to the IRIS system, including Laxey, Baldrine and settlements in the Central Valley. To that extent, Infrastructure Policy 1 of the Strategic Plan is now out of date. 66 I understand that a planning application will soon be submitted for the development of a local sewage treatment facility for Laxey. Feasibility studies for the provision of a similar facility to serve Baldrine are ongoing. A replacement sewage works at Ballagarey, serving part of the Central Valley became operational in 2018. However, capacity limitations mean that planned development in Crosby is likely to have to rely on standalone sewage treatment for the time being, until the existing treatment works is replaced as anticipated in 2022. The Programme for Government (2016-2021) indicates an intention to complete the regional sewage treatment infrastructure within the lifetime of the present administration. 67 It seems to me that these considerations should be taken into account in the allocation and phasing of land for development. I will return to this matter when considering the draft Area Plan's proposals for housing. Electricity Renewable Energy 68 Peel Energy considered that the Area Plan should contain a detailed and specific chapter on renewable energy, providing measurable criteria against which applications for the development of renewable power generating facilities would be assessed. They cited the States of Jersey Island Plan 2011, which includes such material. And they pointed out that a Climate Change Emergency has recently been declared on the Isle of Man; that a Climate Change Bill is soon to be presented to Tynwald; and that there has been strong public support for the Government's Climate Change Mitigation Strategy. They argued that, in failing to provide detailed guidance on renewable power generation, the Area Plan was inconsistent with the Strategic Plan; and that since the Area Plan post-dated the Strategic Plan, its largely negative provisions would prevail. 69 Energy Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan applies to development proposals for renewable energy generated by wind, water, tidal or solar power. It indicates that any such proposals will be judged against that Plan's environmental objectives. Proposals for wind, water or tidal power would need to be supported by an Environmental Impact Assessment. The supporting text indicates that renewable energy schemes will be given similar scrutiny as is gi

flood risk

to meet with the general principles of General Policy 2 (l) and Environment Policies 10 and 13

Environment Policy 13: Development which would result in an unacceptable risk from flooding, either on or off-site, will not be permitted. 7.13. Agriculture 7.13.1. Agriculture is an integral and vital part of the rural economy and rural society and to a great degree is responsible for the appearance and stewardship of the countryside. The Island's farms not only provide the community with a healthy proportion of meat and vegetable produce but also provide employment opportunities. It is important to sustain agric ultural industry by safeguarding its prime resources, by allowing appropriately designed and sited new buildings (where need is established) and by encouraging conservation -based land management regimes (including appropriate tree and shrub planting). Howe ver, this must not be at the expense of the appearance and character or openness of the landscape, or result in the loss of traditional hedgerows and field boundaries or the loss of limited areas of good quality agricultural land. A recent study on agricultural soils on the Isle of Man (1) revealed that the majority of the agricultural land on the Island (80.26%) fell within Class 3, based on the land use capability class system in England and Wales (classes range from Class 1 to 5, with Class 1 being the mo st versatile land). Class 3 land characteristics can be summarised as land with moderate limitations which restrict the choice of crops and/or demand careful management. Only 4.87% of agricultural land falls within Classes 1 and 2. According to the agricultural land use capability map (figure 4 of the study), all of the Class 1/2 land of which Class 1 is the dominant class can be found in the south of the Island to the east of Ballasalla. New Area Plans will include a general presumption against the rel ease of Class 1 and 2 agricultural land for development. The highest level of protection will apply to the highest graded quality of land with Classes 1 and 2 soils being afforded most protection from development and being taken out of agricultural use. Where there is a proposal to develop land which is categorised in the Agricultural Soils of the Isle of Man report as being mixed Classes 2 and 3, those wishing to develop the land should ascertain which parts of the site represent higher grade of soil wi th these parts being avoided for development purposes. 7.13.2 One of the prime considerations in the determination of development proposals in the countryside will continue to be the conservation and enhancement of the landscape. In terms of the di versification of farms and farm buildings, there may be some circumstances where this may be appropriate and it is acknowledged that small scale enterprises can promote healthy economic activity in rural areas whether this be for commercial, industrial, tourism, sport or recreation uses. There is, however, a general presumption against the introduction of new uses into the countryside (including industrial or office uses): (a) for which there is no local need; (b) which would materially effect the rural character of an area; (c) which would necessitate the creation of new buildings; and (d) which would be more appropriate in industrial zones, business parks or within urban centres. 7.13.3 In recent years there has been increasing demand for new development and buildings in the countryside, particularly for new modern agricultural buildings. Such buildings can have, and in a number of areas already have had an adverse effect on the character and appearance of the landscape, particularly when sited in exposed locations away from building groups and on elevated land. It is important that new development should be compatible with the character of the surrounding area, and the need for n ew buildings in the countryside will be balanced against the harm that development may have on the particular environment within which it is proposed. In terms of new agricultural dwellings, permission will not be granted unless real agricultural need is demonstrated and will in every case be assessed in terms of need, sensitive siting, design, and size, and be subject to an agricultural occupancy condition. (1) Agricultural Soils of the Isle of Man, Harris et al, (Centre for Manx Studies) 2001 7.13.4 It is recognised that there have been considerable changes in the economy in the last twenty years. The number of people in full time agricultural employment has reduced for a number of reasons including increased mechanisation, reductions in the number of farms; and increases in the size of farm holdings. In many cases smaller farms have been amalgamated into larger units to increase economic viability. This has often been accompanied by the sale of former farmhouses and cottages to those who do not earn their employment in agriculture. At the same time there has been an increase in part time involvement in farming either where the income from agriculture is supplemented by other employment or where the person's main employment is not in agriculture but they farm on a part time basis. In considering the applications for new houses in the coun tryside the Department will give careful consideration to agriculture justification based on full time employment in agriculture. See also Section 8.9 in Chapter 8 - Housing.