Planning Officer Report

Planning Officer Report And Recommendations {{table:78305}}

Officer's Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE DEVELOPMENT CONTROL MANAGER AS OTHER SIMILAR AND ASSOCIATED PLANNING APPLICATIONS ARE BEING CONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING COMMITTEE.

The Application Site

1. The application site comprises land contained within field no.s 311156, 310654, 310651, 314180, 314179, 311213, 311212, 310584, 310585, 310586, 314176, 314113, 310512, 314112, 314174, 314107, 310582, 310501 and 310578 that are located west of Staarvey Road in German. The various locations are open fields in agricultural use.

The Proposal

1. The proposal comprises the creation of field access tracks within the applications site.

Planning History

1. There has been one previous and one current planning application within the immediate surrounding area that could be considered material to the assessment of this current planning application:

1. Planning application 04/01472/B sought planning approval for the erection of an agricultural shed and creation of an access road onto Staarvey Road. This previous planning application was approved in 2004 and subsequently implemented.

1. Planning application 11/00927/B seeks planning approval for the erection of an extension to an existing agricultural shed with associated hardstanding. At the time of writing this planning application was pending a decision.

1. The applicant currently has a number of planning applications for agricultural development elsewhere on the Island. Planning application 11/00926/B seeks planning approval for the extension of an existing agricultural shed with hard standing on land at The Braaid, Marown. Planning application 11/01360/B that seeks planning approval for the creation of field access tracks on land in Marown. Planning application 11/01368/B seeks planning approval for the creation of field access tracks elsewhere in German.

Planning Policy

1. In terms of land use designation, the application site is located within a wider area of land that is designated for any site specific purpose under the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Provisional Order 1982. The land is also within a wider area of land that is classified as being of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance.

1. In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 contains four policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application.

1. General Policy 3 states:

"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, historic, or social value and interest; (Housing Policy 11);
• (c) previously developed land which contains a significant amount of building; where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environment; 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-dependent 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."

1. Environment Policy 1 states:

"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."

1. Environment Policy 2 states:

"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:

• (a) the development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape; or
• (b) the location for the development is essential."

1. Environment Policy 15 states:

"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."

REPRESENTATIONS

1. German Parish Commissioners have no objection to the planning application.

1. The Department of Infrastructure Highways Division do not oppose the planning application.

1. The Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture's Senior Biodiversity Officer (Zoologist) has expressed an interest in the planning application. They highlight the potential presence of wildlife habitat within and around the proposed tracks, emphasising the need to protect such areas during the construction of the tracks.

1. Manx National Heritage expresses an interest in the planning application. They highlight concerns over the need for the proposed development and the overall extent of development. They question the potential impact of the proposed development on the landscape, on wildlife habitat and on possible archaeological remains.

1. The Manx Electricity Authority expresses an interest in the planning application.

Assessment

1. The planning application seeks planning approval for the creation of field access tracks within the applications site. The proposed tracks are typically 4.5 – 5.0m wide and 300 – 450mm deep with a built in 1:10 gradient to assist drainage. The fill material is understood to be a sized material base with topping that is designed to grass over in time. The works are effectively designed to provide a stable base for field access tracks to serve the farmer and the animals using the respective field. Current conditions within the fields are understood to be affecting animal welfare and are stated to be responsible for the loss of 19 animals last winter.

1. The starting point for assessment has to be the established presumption against development within areas not designated for development with the relevant local plan. In this instance the application site is located within a wider area of land that is not designated for any site specific purpose and the presumption against development is set out within General Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007. However, there are a number of exceptions to the presumption against development listed within this policy. In terms of the proposed development criterion (f) allows an exception to be made where building and engineering operations are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry. This ground for exception is subsequently expanded upon by Environment Policy 15, which sets out the general criteria for assessing the acceptability of proposed agricultural development.

1. As part of the assessment of the proposed development advice has been sought from the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture's Agricultural Advisor. It is understood that as part of their assessment they met with the applicant and walked the various sites. The advice provided by the Agricultural Advisor covers a range of different areas, the detail of which is set out within his letter of the 25th November 2011. Based on this advice and discussion with the applicant's agent it is concluded that although there is no legislative requirement there is agricultural justification for the proposed tracks. In accordance with planning policy it therefore remains necessary to consider whether this agricultural justification outweighs other impacts that the proposed development may have.

1. Based on an assessment of the area, representations received and material planning considerations it is considered that the main impacts to consider are the effect on visual amenity, effect on watercourses and wetlands, effect on wildlife habitat, effect on potential archaeological interest, effect on private amenity and effect on highway safety.

1. In terms of visual impact, having viewed the site within the surrounding area it is considered that public views of the various fields and therefore locations of the tracks is relatively limited. Indeed, the topography of the overall area and existing high hedges or other screening limits public visibility of the proposed development. Furthermore, when judging visual impact it is necessary to take account of the scale and eventual appearance of the proposed development. In this instance it is inevitable that tracks do not have the same level of impact as built development, such as agricultural barns. Whilst the proposed tracks do extend across a significant area they are no wider than five metres, ground levels are not significantly altered, and once completed the land is designed to blend into the surrounding field. Based on this the actual visual impact of the proposed tracks is therefore considered to be relatively limited and the effect on the visual amenity of the area concluded to be acceptable. In terms of Environment Policy 2 and the impact on the area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance it is concluded that the development has already been identified as essential and that it would not unduly harm the character and quality of the landscape.

1. As for effect on watercourses and wetlands there is no direct evidence to suggest that the proposed tracks would adversely affect such areas. It is understood that the proposed tracks are constructed in a manner that still allow drainage of surface water. The primary intention of the proposed development is to provide a stable base for access for use by the farmer and animals. In this respect it is concluded that any effect on watercourses or wetlands would not be sufficiently harmful to justify refusal of the planning application.

1. Turning to the effect on wildlife habitat it is noted that this issue has been raised within a number of representations to the planning application. The Agricultural Advisor has stated within their advice that the proposed tracks avoid areas of unimproved habitat. As no conclusive evidence of adverse harm to wildlife has been received it is considered that there is insufficient justification to oppose the planning application on the grounds of impact on wildlife habitat. However, given the identified wildlife potential in and around the proposed development it is considered appropriate for any planning approval to be subject to a condition requiring work to be undertaken in consultation with the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture's Wildlife and Conservation Division.

1. In respect of effect on potential archaeological interest it is necessary to consider the scale of development and reasonable likelihood of discovery or disturbance of any such archaeology. In this regard it is considered that the extent and primarily the depth of the proposed tracks are such that it would be unreasonable to oppose the planning application on the grounds impact on potential archaeological interest. The imposition of an archaeological watching brief type of condition would be unduly onerous and therefore unreasonable to the applicant.

1. The issue of effect on private amenity has been raised within representations to the planning application. In this respect it is considered that the distances involved and type of development proposed are such that the impact of the proposed tracks on surrounding residential property would not be likely to be significant enough to warrant refusal of the planning application. Whilst it is important to ensure that agricultural development does not harm private amenity it is also necessary for those living within the countryside to accept the occurrence of agricultural activity as part of living within such areas.

1. Finally, in terms of the effect of the proposed development on highway safety it is concluded there is no significant impact as none of the proposed development directly involves alterations or access to the public highway. This conclusion is supported by the stance of the Department of Infrastructure Highways Division.

1. The proposal is not considered to affect any other obvious material planning consideration.

Recommendation

1. It is recommended that the planning application be approved subject to conditions restricting the type of material used in the construction of the tracks and requiring work to be undertaken in consultation with the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture's Wildlife and Conservation Division.

Party Status

1. It is considered that the following parties that made representations to the planning application should be afforded interested party status:

German Parish Commissioners; Manx National Heritage; and The Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture's Senior Biodiversity Officer (Zoologist).

1. It is considered that the following parties that made representations to the planning application should not be afforded interested party status:

The Department of Infrastructure Highways Division; and The Manx Electricity Authority.

Recommendation

Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal

C: Conditions for approval N: Notes attached to conditions R: Reasons for refusal O: Notes attached to refusals

C 1. The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.

C 2. This approval relates to the location plan, access track detail plan and drawing no. 409-10 date stamped the 27th September 2011.

C 3. Prior to the commencement of the approved development the applicant must notify the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture's Wildlife and Conservation Division to allow monitoring to ensure that works do not breach the provisions of the Wildlife Act 1990. Written evidence of such notification must be forwarded to the Planning Authority.

C 4. In order to avoid contamination, pollution or other harm to the land the material used in the construction of the tracks hereby permitted by this planning approval shall be inert material to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. For guidance purposes the material will normally be considered inert if:

• (a) It does not undergo any significant physical, chemical or biological transformations;
• (b) It does not dissolve, burn or otherwise physically or chemically react, biodegrade or adversely affect other matter with which it comes into contact in a way likely to give rise to environmental pollution or harm to human health; and
• (c) Its total leachability and pollutant content and the ecotoxicity of its leachate are insignificant and in particular, do not endanger the quality of any surface water or groundwater.

I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the Town and Country (Development Procedure) 2005

Decision Made: _______________ Committee Meeting Date: 22/12/11

Signed: _________________________ Presenting Officer

Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason is required. Signing Officer to delete as appropriate YES/NO