Loading document...
Application No.: 20/00619/B Applicant: John Richard & Linda Anne Oxley Proposal: Erection of agricultural storage building Site Address: Field 414502 Sloc Road Earystane Colby Isle Of Man Planning Officer: Miss Lucy Kinrade Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 30.07.2020 _________________________________________________________________ R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons Reasons for Refusal R 1. There is insufficient justification and evidence of agricultural need demonstrated for a building of this size, height and design at this site contrary to General Policy 3 and Environment Policy 1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons None _____________________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report THE APPLICATION SITE
1.1 The application site is field 414502 located along the western side of the Sloc Road, Lingague, Colby. The field forms part of a wider land holding covering 18.6 acres in the immediate area. THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Proposed is the erection of a 12m x 6m agricultural building set back approx. 70m from the road towards the end of an access track and within the north-eastern corner of the field.
2.2 The building is proposed to be 3.2m to eaves and 4m to centre ridge. A large roller door is proposed on one elevation.
2.3 The building is to be portal framed and clad in olive green metal cladding. There is no information provided to clarify the base structure on which the building is to sit. - 2.4 The application form and agricultural questionnaire indicates that the proposed building is to store a tractor, agricultural equipment and feed to support efficient farming activities on the site. There are no cattle or sheep purchased yet, but 10 cattle and 20 sheep and proposed, potatoes are to be grown on 4 acres and the proposed building will facilitate each and provide a lambing shed. It states that there are no other buildings on the site.
3.1 The site has not been the subject of any other applications. PLANNING POLICY - 4.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1999 states "agriculture" includes horticulture, fruit growing, seed growing, dairy farming, the breeding and keeping of livestock (including any creature kept for the production of food, wool, skins or fur, or for the purpose of its use in the farming of land), the use of land as grazing land, meadow land, market gardens and nursery grounds, and the use of land for woodlands where that use is ancillary to the farming of land for other agricultural purposes, and "agricultural" shall be construed accordingly."
4.2 The application site lies within an area not designated for any particular purpose on the Area Plan for the South 2013 and within character appraisal area A2. It is therefore necessary to assess the current application against those policies which seek to protect the countryside for its own sake (Environment Policy 1), ensure there is a sufficient agricultural need demonstrated to warrant a building in this location (General Policy 3 f) an that the building is designed appropriately for its specific purpose and its siting does not result in the loss of high quality agricultural land or detriment the rural countryside landscape (Environment Policy 15). Section 7.14 of the Strategic Plan also refers to horticultural activity albeit on a much larger nursery and market garden scale, although the principle tests of their acceptability is also relevant (Environment Policy 17). - 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 overriding 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 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: f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry." - 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
4.7 Environment Policy 17: "The development of buildings and other facilities associated with nurseries and market gardens will only be permitted where:
REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 Arbory Commissioners - Objection (20/07/2020) insufficient information to overcome the presumption against development in the countryside. The Commissioners concerned to receive another agricultural barn application with lack of information and it is questioned what advice DEFA provides to such applicants.
5.2 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services - Do not oppose (09/07/2020) ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The Strategic Plan contains policies that support agricultural development, but as part of any such application it is necessary for the applicants to demonstrate a sufficient agricultural need to outweigh the test of those policies that ultimately seek to protect the countryside for its own sake. Should sufficient need be demonstrated and the principle of need be accepted, the assessment shall then fall to the visual and amenity impacts in order to protect the quality of the landscape.
6.2 The supporting information states that the proposed building is for storage of agricultural machinery to support farming activities on the site including keeping of livestock
and growing potatoes. It appears from submitted photographs there is already some external storage of equipment at the site, and while the growing of potatoes and maintaining of the land may be in progress, the agricultural questionnaire clearly highlights that no livestock exist.
6.3 Often there can be a chicken an egg situation when it comes to agricultural need and agricultural buildings, without an established operation in place it can often be difficult to demonstrate a need for a building, while on the other hand applicants often want to ensure they have all the appropriate facilities and buildings in place before investing in agricultural or horticultural paraphernalia or investing in livestock. - 6.4 Often agricultural enterprises are the sole income of farmers and their livelihood is heavily dependent on their continued and efficient operation. The bigger and more established the farming operation the easier it's likely to be to demonstrate an agricultural need for a new building to continue the farming operation. This is not to say that smaller farm holdings or start up hobby farms should be discouraged as these can also help contribute to local economy and sustainability, but rather that their agricultural justification is proportionate to the size of the operation and that they can provide detailed evidence to support the need for any building. - 6.5 The risk is that any ad hoc decisions taken on agricultural buildings without sufficient justification of need could lead to a proliferation of unwarranted large permanent buildings across the countryside which may become obsolete if the intended farming operation had not materialised as expected. - 6.6 Any structure positioned here would require planning approval prior to its installtion. In seeking to address the chicken and egg situation, it may be that the basic farming/horticultural needs are first met by a smaller and less permanent building. Once the holding becomes more established and an agricultural need can be sufficiently demonstrated would a larger more permanent structure be considered. - 6.7 Although it is empathised that the applicants perhaps wish to have a building in situ and ready for when the current Corona Virus pandemic allows for stock purchase, however it is not considered that there is sufficient agricultural or horticultural need demonstrated nor an overriding national need for a building of this size and in this location to outweigh those policies that seek to protect the countryside for its own sake and for which there is no other reasonable and acceptable alternative proven. CONCLUSION
7.1 On review of the application submission and those relevant policies of the Strategic Plan it is not considered that sufficient justification or evidence of need has been demonstrated for a building of this size and footprint in this location and as such the proposal would result in an unwarranted development in the countryside contrary to General Policy 3 and Environment Policy 1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
8.2 The decision maker must determine:
I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.
Decision Made : Refused Date: 30.07.2020 Determining officer
Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett Principal Planner
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
