Loading document...
Application No.: 17/00071/B Applicant: Claire Marie Pullen & Philip Pullen Proposal: Erection of agricultural storage shed Site Address: Croit Aust Andreas Road Aust Ramsey Isle of Man IM7 4EF Case Officer : Mr Chris Balmer Photo Taken: 07.02.2017 Site Visit: 07.02.2017 Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee
THE APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THE LOCAL AUTHORITY HAVE OBJECTED TO THE APPLICATION BUT IS RECOMMENDED FOR AN APPROVAL.
1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is Field 134041 which is a parcel of agricultural land located on the southern of the Andreas Road (A9). To the east of the site is a wooded area and beyond the residential dwelling Croit Aust, all of which is owned by the applicants. The applicants recently gained planning approval for a replacement dwelling (17/00070/B) of Croit Aust. - 1.2 The application site is flat with an unusual, almost 'Z-shaped'. The proposed agricultural barn would be located to the northern section of the site, running parallel with the Andreas Road. The roadside boundary (north) of the site comprises of a 1 metre high grass bank with mature landscaping made up of a variety of trees and hedgerows/bushes. To the east of the site (aspect of site where barn would be sited) is a wooded area made up of a significant under of mature trees and the western boundary sheared with the neighbouring property Aust Vane comprises of an approximate 2.5m high mature hedgerow. - 1.3 The site is accessed via an existing field gate entrance off a private road to the western corner of the site. This private road then exits onto the Andreas Road. The private road serves a number of residential properties. Pedestrian access to the site is also available from the main dwelling house Croit Aust via various unmade tracks from the dwelling though the wooded area to the field.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The application seeks approval for the erection of agricultural storage shed to the northeast corner of the site, approximately 5 metres from the northern boundary of the site. The building would run parallel with the Andreas Road. The building would have a width of 10 metres, a depth of 6 metres and a ridge height of 5.2 metres (eves 3.3m). The building would be finished with either green profiled metal cladding or timber cladding to the elevations and roof and has been confirmed by the applicants it would be of a portal steel frame construction. The ground floor of the barn would be split into two sections, one for a machinery store and the second for agricultural equipment and animal food store. The latter area also has an internal staircase which provides further animal food storage within the roof space. To the west elevation it is proposed to have a pair of double doors which would access onto a new area of hardstanding (measuring 2.5m x 6m). A further door is proposed within the southern elevation, to provide access to the agricultural equipment and animal food store area.
2.2 There is no track proposed to be installed from the barn/hardstanding to the field entrance to the west. - 2.3 Additional planting is also proposed (some of which has been planted already) along the northern roadside boundary of the site to reinforce existing landscaping. Such planting consist of Sweet Chestnuts and Holly trees. - 2.4 In terms of the need for the building in summary the applicants' submission indicates that: "This barn is for the owners of Croit Aust to store vehicles and goods in connection with the management of their small holding. The house has limited storage and no garage and is on a restricted site separated from the land holding by a belt of established trees." - 2.5 In terms of the design and size of the shed the applicants indicate that it has been designed to accommodate:
2.6 The applicants also comment that:
"The small holding naturally divides into two halves, the one open ground facing south with good potential for crops associated with market gardening. The other a mix of open ground and mature woodland is ideal for hens and potentially pigs reared in a natural way. There is also the opportunity to plant fruit trees on the sheltered edges to provide another crop."
2.6 Further they state:
"This form of diversified farming is maybe not commercially viable at a large scale but when supported by a second income can provide a meaningful and sustainable lifestyle." They also indicate that the approved house and proposed barn (submitted at same time) are integral part of the applicant's plans for their future.
3.1 The application site is within an area not designated for development under the Isle of Man Development Plan Order 1982. The site is not within an area zoned as High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance. - 3.2 Due to the land use designation of the site and the type of development proposed, the following policies of the Strategic Plan are relevant to consider: - 3.3 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:
3.4 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." - 3.5 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 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 is it 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".
4.1 There are no previous planning applications on this site which are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application; albeit the following application near to the site was recently approved: - 4.2 Replacement dwelling on existing site - Croit Aust, Andreas Road - 17/00070/B - APPROVED
5.1 Lezayre Parish Commissioners have recommended the application is refused (on 10.02.2107, 03.03.2017 & 12.04.2017). Consider the building is too large at just under half the footprint of the proposed house and it is too tall, even though they acknowledge the applicant has amended the scheme to reduce the height; and they consider the building is too large to work the holding. - 5.2 Highway Services have no objection (on 24.02.2017): - 5.3 The owner/occupier of Aust Veg, Aust Lane, Aust objects (09.02.2017, 06.03.2017, 24.03.2017, 31.03.2017, 03.04.2017 & 27.04.2017). Clearly visible from our property Aust Veg; no dimensions are shown on plans; consider the building is too large at just under half the footprint of the proposed house and it is too tall, even though they acknowledge the applicant has amended the scheme to reduce the height; they consider the building is too large to work the holding 0.8 acres; barn would impinge on countryside atmosphere but incongruous considering the size of the plot; list of equipment to be stored including a dumper truck is most unusual and would only require a single storey shed; I applied for a small bungalow on my site which was refused and would not even have been seen from the road; proposal appears bigger than Croit Aust; the barn has upstairs windows;
06.03.2017, 05.04.2017 & 27.04.2017). The barn has got proportions which are out of placer for the size of the plot; no measurements shown; bigger then Croit Aust; upstairs windows; green iron cladding would be out of place to neighbours band road passers; it is inconceivable that it is necessary for a small digger, tractor and dumper truck to be housed is needed; access to fiel is via narrow lane by all residents and usage of heavy equipment would create a problem of accessibility; if market gardening were to be the purpose of this construction as suggested, there would be issues with access and turning due to the narrowness of the lane; the food store space is large enough to feed hundreds of animals; I applied for a small bungalow on my site which was refused; attached photograph (appear to show applicant in front of Glen Road Garage) are self-explanatory and lead one to conclude that what is being built has nothing to do with agriculture; In response to applicants comments size of shed should be appropriate with the size of the plot ¾ of an acre; a track will be needed in the future, field is a loamy clay soil and impassable during wet winters; applicants using term as "market garden" is used to justify an "agricultural shed" for this acreage of land; the proposal is to plant a row of non-native fast growing evergreen trees which will take up to 15 years to effectively shield the shed, planting non-native growing trees (i.e. conifers) will be as unsightly as a 5.5m high shed; comparing shed to a double garage is irrelevant; proposals on a green field site in the middle of a field, next to a main road and footpath on a small usable parcel of land of less than 0.8 of an acre is not justified.
5.6 The owner/occupier (B.Oscroft) of Aust Vane, Aust Lane, Lezayre objects (05.04.2017 & 20.04.2017). quiet residential area and the applicants are wanting to turn this into an agricultural farming area; there will be tractors, noise, dust, constant working in a peaceful area; no mention of the size of the shed; could not get out of my driveway for 10mins due to applicants not giving notice that they would be stopping traffic to fell hedges and trees, is this what we are to expect, disruption and delays without notice; this is not an industrial site it is for residents. - 5.7 The owners/occupiers of Thalloo Aust, Aust Lane, Aust object (14.04.2017). the size and configuration of the two storey barn is relative to the size of the field (0.8s acres) is far larger than required; the site plan depicts the shed appearing far smaller than the dimensions indicate; and the amended elevations is also misleading and not clear. - 5.8 In response to the objections made the applicants have made a number of comments which are summarised below:
6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The starting point for any development within the countryside (i.e. not zoned for development) is General Policy 3 paragraph F of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. This policy states that development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of those buildings which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry. The applicants proposed use of the building would appear to fall within both these uses. - 6.2 Environment Policy 15 also needs consideration, as the first paragraph of this policy requires first the Planning Authority to be satisfied that there is agricultural or horticultural need for a new building, sufficient to outweigh the general policy against development in the countryside. - 6.3 In terms of the need of a building and its size on this site the applicant has outlined in their Planning Statement and subsequent letters, although some local residents consider there is not a need for a building of this size. Certainly, the size of the building is significantly smaller than the general modern agricultural building you would expect to find on a working farm, the proposed shed measuring 6m x 10m would represent a small agricultural barn in this respect. However, the key issue is whether the barn on this site is appropriate for the size of the site and the needs of the applicant, which is better described as a small holding. - 6.4 The applicant has provided further information in relation to the equipment in terms of size/type. Clearly, for the equipment listed (paragraph 2.5 of this report) there are various sizes & types of diggers, tractors, dumper trucks etc. Following questions on this matter from the department the applicants provided the following comments, as well as photographs of the current equipment they have on site, some of which would be retained but other would be replaced:
"We already have the dumper truck and have been using it for moving the wood we have removed from the wooded area and moving top soil to prepare the vegetable plots. I will send a picture of it to you. We haven't bought the tractor yet as have nowhere to store but do not expect to get a huge one, just big enough to drag a topper etc. We have been using a very old and slow ride on mower in the mean time which isn't really up to the job. We have a digger that I will also send you a picture of. We plan to get some sawmill equipment to process wood from the trees and then also need to store all the usual tools required for fencing etc.
We expect to use the equipment all year round but not every day, hardly at all in the winter. Additional space for feed and produce storage is also required."
6.5 It is important that where possible and desirable, the department should try and support genuine agricultural or equestrian use of land which is not designated for development. The department in recent times has experienced more applications for small holdings/horticultural activities throughout the Island, the majority of which involve proposals which involve the erection of buildings for storage facilities, for feed, animals and/or the storage of machinery (security/prevent damage from weather etc) for the up keep of land and/or to undertake the agricultural activities i.e. growing of crops etc. - 6.6 The proposed building would have a footprint of 6m x 10m and is split into two internal sections. The larger section which is proposed to house the machinery internally measures 5.5m x
5.5 m. The approximate dimensions of the equipment proposed to be stored are:
6.7 All three vehicle can likely be stored in this section of the building, albeit one piece of equipment would need to be parked in parallel with the gates and therefore would need to be removed to gain access to the other vehicles in the barn. The barn is not wide enough to comfortable park all three vehicles side by side. Alternatively, one of the three pieces of equipment could be stored in the other smaller section of the barn (measures 3.7m x 4.7m - taking account for internal stair case) and this would likely be the small dump truck; as the other two vehicles would not get through the doorway to this section of the barn due to height of door being 2m. Additional to the vehicles being stored is the general equipment/animal feed etc as listed in paragraph 2.5 of this report.
6.8 The applicants has also expanded further on the reasoning for the floor space within the roofspace, stating the following;
"We were just trying to create a secure dry storage area away from rodents etc to keep food safe as we expect to have excess fruit and veg to store and animal feed. We needed a high door way to get the digger in but didn't need that full height all the way to the end so we thought it would be a good use of space to put in a mezzanine and it kept the footprint smaller and therefore the concrete slab to a minimum."
6.9 The need for the vehicles and their type and their size would all seem to be appropriate for this site for the maintenance of the site and wooded area, but also to meet the agricultural activities the applicants propose. Overall, in terms of where there is a need of a barn and whether the size of the barn is appropriate to the site; the department is satisfied that both aspects are acceptable and comply with the relevant aspect of Environment Policy 15. - 6.10 The next aspect of the policy which needs consideration relates to its siting and visual impact. The proposal would be in sited close to public highway and in a fairly isolated position, albeit the character of the Andreas Road in the immediate area, is of sporadic built development (mainly dwellings) along or close to the road side. - 6.11 The road side boundary comprises of matured hedgerows/bushes of various heights, albeit there are sections where views of the site and beyond can be achieved from the public views from Andreas Road. The proposed building will be seen from certain aspects, but mainly only when travelling immediately past the site. Approaching the site along the Andreas Road from the east (Ramsey direction) would likely be screened by the existing roadside boundary landscaping before the site and also the woodland immediately to the east of the building. Views when traveling along the Andreas Road in the opposite direction (from Andreas) again would be limited given the
7.1 In conclusion the creation of the barn and hardstanding will increase built development on this site and will change the visual appearance of the site from one which is currently a field. However, the works proposed are considered appropriate partially given the visual impact would be mitigated to an acceptable level, but also given the use of the building will facilitate the proposed uses which will be of benefit to the site and surrounding countryside both in the short and longer time. Accordingly, it is considered the proposal would comply with the relevant policies as indicated within the Isle of Man Strategic Plan and therefore it is recommended that the application be approved. - 8.0 PARTY STATUS
8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
With effect from 1 June 2015, the Transfer of Planning & Building Control Functions Order 2015 amends the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 to give effect to the meaning of the word 'Department' to be the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture unless otherwise directed by that Order.
8.2 In accordance with Article 6(3) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure)(No2) Order 2013 and paragraph 2(1) of Government Circular No. 01/13, the following persons who have made representation to the planning application are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application:
The owner/occupier (L.Nichols) of Aust Vane, Aust Lane, Lezayre The owner/occupier (B.Oscroft) of Aust Vane, Aust Lane, Lezayre The owner/occupier of Aust Veg, Aust Lane, Aust
8.3 In accordance with Article 6(3) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure)(No2) Order 2013 and paragraph 2(1) of Government Circular No. 01/13, the following persons who have made representation to the planning application are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application:
The owner/occupier of Knock-e-Dhooney, Andreas The owners/occupiers of Thalloo Aust, Aust Lane, Aust Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 23.06.2017
Reason: To comply with article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
REASON: the countryside is protected from development and an exception is being made on the basis of agricultural/forestry need. As such the building must be used for the purposes for which it is approved.
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: in the interests of the visual amenities of the area and is of an acceptable method of construction.
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.
Decision Made : Refused Committee Meeting Date: 03.07.2017
Signed : Miss Corlett Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See below
Application No. : 17/00071/B Applicant : Claire Marie Pullen & Philip Pullen Proposal : Erection of agricultural storage shed Site Address : Croit Aust
Andreas Road Aust Ramsey Isle of Man IM7 4EF Presenting Officer : Miss Corlett Addendum to the Officer’s Report
The Planning Committee, at its meeting of 3rd July, 2017, was not satisfied that the proposed building in terms of its size and particularly its height is justified by the size and nature of the holding involved and the proposal would therefore be contrary to General Policy 3 and Environment Policy 15.
R 1. The Planning Committee is not satisfied that the proposed building, in terms of its size and particularly its height, is justified by the size and nature of the holding involved and the proposal would therefore be contrary to General Policy 3 and Environment Policy 15 of the Strategic Plan.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
