Loading document...
Application No.: 17/01136/B Applicant: Lisa Jane Kinrade Proposal: Erection of a multi-functional agricultural building Site Address: Field 620610 Rhowin Road Maughold Isle Of Man Case Officer : Miss Abigail Morgan Photo Taken: 20.10.2017 Site Visit: 20.10.2017 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 05.01.2018 _________________________________________________________________
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
Reason: The building has been exceptionally approved solely to meet agricultural need and its subsequent retention would result in an unwarranted intrusion in the countryside.
Reason: The countryside is protected from development and an exception is being made on the basis of agricultural need. As such the building must be used for the purposes for which it is approved.
Reason: The caravan is in place without planning approval and its removal would be in the interest of protecting the visual amenity of the area.
This approval relates to Location Plan, Site Plan, Shed Plans A, B, C, D, E and F, Shed Floor Plan, Excavation Site Plans A, B, C, Excavation Description, Accompanying Notes and Photo of Example Build all date stamped received 31 October 2017.
None _____________________________________________________________________________
1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is an area land in Field 620610. - 1.2 The applicants own a total of 11 acres in fields - 620610, 620609, 620608 and 620565. There is a small-scale small holding/farming enterprise operating with sheep including 32 loaghtan ewes, 2 breeding rams and 35 lambs being fattened. - 1.3 The fields are accessed of Hibernia Lane, with hedging and sod banks around the boundaries of the fields. Field 620610 is higher than the adjacent road and there is a thick boundary hedge/tree line ranging from 1.8m to 2.5m + in height. - 1.4 The landscape in the area rises up away from the road as might be expected for this part of the Island when on the adjacent fields site views beyond are really quite limited as even a slight change in topography results in the land beyond being somewhat obscured. The countryside of the area is characterised by a sense of openness coupled with the existence of isolated dwellings and associated buildings.
2.0 PROPOSAL - 2.1 Planning permission is sought for the erection of a multi-functional agricultural building to provide barn / store and stabling. This is designed to provide somewhere to store feed and machinery related to the field maintenance as well as provide winter shelter for the animals on the farm in addition to lambing purposes. - 2.2 The new building would expand their enterprise with an increased breeding programme and storage for tractor, medical supplies, feed and bedding and pens for the lambing. - 2.3 The proposal is for one building, but there are distinct parts within it. It is in essence a standard modern agricultural barn in design and finish. This measures 9.2m by 9.2m with a ridge height of apx 4.3metres. It would be finished in dark green steel cladding, block work and grey fibre cement roof tiles. Due to the topography of the land, there would need to be some excavation to give a level internal floor. - 2.4 The submitted survey plans and accompanying statement state excavated materials to be be used to fill out several holes in the 4 fields and to reinforce an uneven and muddy section of the adjacent field, with this field to be ploughed and reseeded in the next season. The excavated material has already been spread as the development has been started. - 2.5 During the course of construction the applicant realised that there was insufficient turning space for the tractor to enter the building and so proposed the following amendments;
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 Planning was approved under 16/00490/B for the erection of an agricultural building. This was in response to an enforcement issue relating to the unauthorised use/storage of a caravan,
which is being used for storage of feed, medicines etc. This application was proposed to replace the caravan.
4.1 The application site is within an area recognised as being an area of 'High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance' under the Isle of Man Development Plan Order 1982. The site is not within a Conservation Area. - 4.2 Due to the zoning of the site and the type of development proposed, the following policies of the Strategic Plan are relevant to consider:
General Policy 3 states in part: "Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of:
4.3 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 over-riding 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." - 4.4 Environment Policy 2: "The present system of landscape classification of Areas of High Landscape 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 landscape 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:
4.5 Environment Policy 15: "Where the Department is satisfied that there is agricultural or horticultural need for a new building (including a dwelling), sufficient to outweigh the general policy against development in the countryside, and that the impact of this development including buildings, accesses, servicing etc. is acceptable, such development must be sited as close as is practically possible to existing building groups and be appropriate in terms of scale, materials, colour, siting and form to ensure that all new developments are sympathetic to the landscape and built environment of which they will form a part.
"Only in exceptional circumstances will buildings be permitted in exposed or isolated areas or close to public highways and in all such cases will be subject to appropriate landscaping. The nature and materials of construction must also be appropriate to the purposes for which it is intended.
"Where new agricultural buildings are proposed next to or close to existing residential properties, care must be taken to ensure that there is no unacceptable adverse impact through any activity, although it must be borne in mind that many farming activities require buildings which are best sited, in landscape terms, close to existing building groups in the rural landscape."
5.1 DOI Highway Services, no highways implications. 28.11.2017 - 5.2 No other representations were received at the time of writing.
6.1 It has been previously assessed, PA16/00490/B, that the development proposed is acceptable with limited impact in visual terms and also without causing undue harm to the natural environment or cause undue harm on public amenity. No significant material circumstances have altered since the original approval was issued. This application seeks amendments to the position of the building and minor design changes to improve the overall usability and functionality of the building. - 6.2 It is not considered that these alterations affect the previous assessment. In the first instance, it must be determined whether or not the proposal represents an essential agricultural need; if this is accepted the second key assessment point is whether or not the siting and design of the building is acceptable from a landscape impact point of view. - 6.3 It was previously established that there is a good case for a new building in this location, as the smallholding did not have any storage or animal protection - except for the caravan, which has no planning approval - and the site visits during the course of the previous and this current application have confirmed a number of animals on the land. - 6.4 It is clear that the applicant is endeavouring to establish their enterprise and that since the previous approval there has been an increase in livestock. While the operation is not what you would described as a fully-fledged farm holding which employs full time workers etc, Environment Policy 15 does not indicate or require that agricultural buildings can only be approved if the farm holding is of a substantial size and/or employs one or more. The requirement is that the Department is satisfied that there is agricultural or horticultural need for a new building. This was established and accepted under the previous application. - 6.5 In terms of the details of the proposal, the building is not especially large by agricultural standards. It would be constructed of materials appropriate to an agricultural building, and would not be unduly prominent as a result. Its location near to mature boundary screens it from wider general views and it would be set well into an existing slope such as to reduce this prominence even further, while the area of hardstanding around it would not be unduly large or, in all probability, visible at all from further afield. The building would be largely screened from public view by its position and the slight variation in topography here. The proposed alterations would not impact on this position. - 6.6 The nearest dwellings are apx 270m to the north and apx 80m to the south. The distance and views at an oblique angle (respective to each dwelling north and south) and the set-down of the building into the hill would also ensure a limited impact in visual terms on the occupiers. - 6.7 It is proposed to replicate the conditions imposed on the previous approval with the exception of the time for implementation of the development as it has already started, the bund condition as this proposal does not include a bund and details of the disposal of the excavated materials as these details are included in this application.
7.1 It is considered that sufficient evidence has been provided to indicate that there is an essential need for the proposed building (as required by General Policy 3), and that the proposal would be satisfactory from the point of view of its impact on the visual amenity of the area (as required by Environment Policy 2) and the residential amenity of neighbouring dwellings (as required by Environment Policy 15).
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:
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 : Permitted Date : 05.01.2018 Determining officer
Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
