DEC Officer Report

Application No.: 24/00440/B Applicant: Mr George Moore Proposal: Relocation and reorientation of 2no. agricultural buildings, and alteration to site levels (retrospective) Site Address: Field 324368 Top Road Crosby Isle Of Man Planning Officer: Paul Visigah Photo Taken: 18.07.2024 Site Visit: 18.07.2024 Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 05.09.2024 _________________________________________________________________

Conditions and Notes for Approval

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions

• C 1. The buildings hereby approved may only be used for agricultural purposes.

Reason: the countryside is protected from development and an exception is being made on the basis of agricultural need. As such the buildings must be used for the purposes for which it is approved.

• C 2. The agricultural buildings hereby approved shall be removed and the ground restored to its former condition in the event that they are no longer used or required for agricultural purposes.

Reason: The buildings have been exceptionally approved solely to meet agricultural need and their subsequent retention would result in an unwarranted intrusion in the countryside.

• C 3. The soil mounds currently on the field shall be removed from the site within three months of the approval becoming final. Reason: In the interest of the visual amenity and character of the area.
• C 4. Within three months of this approval becoming final details of the levelled site area of the site proposed to be grassed and details of planting to be integrated within this area (including species, density and location) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The grassed area shall be implemented as shown in the approved details and retained as such, thereafter.

All planting, seeding or turfing of the site must be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the approval of the development. Any plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed, or become seriously damaged

or diseased must be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the surrounding countryside.

N 1. All extracted minerals, extracted from their natural state, remain the property of the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture under the Minerals Act 1986 (as amended). No Royalty is payable while the minerals are stockpiled on-site. A Royalty will become payable should the minerals be removed from the surface owner's landholding. Prior to the removal of the minerals, the owner must notify and obtain prior consent from the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture before any such movement occurs.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.

The proposed development is considered to be acceptable in principle having demonstrated a clear agricultural need, without detriment to the visual amenity of the immediate locality and wider landscape. The proposals are considered to be in accordance with Strategic Policy 5, Spatial Policy 5, General Policies 2 and 3, and Environment Policies 1, 14, and 15 of the Strategic Plan (2016).

Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to the following plans and documents:

• o 2024-017-103 Cypress Farm - Floor Plan and Photographs
• o 2024-017-104 Cypress Farm - Roof Plan
• o 2024-017-105 Cypress Farm - Elevations
• o 2024-017 Cypress Farm - Planning Statement Received 11 April 2024;
• o 2024-017-101 Rev A Cypress Farm - Site Location and Site Plan
• o 2024-017-102 - Proposed Site Sections
• o 2024-017 Cypress Farm - Drawing Register Received 10 May 2024;
• o Correspondence from Agent Regarding Soil Extracted dated 21 June 2024; and
• o Correspondence from Agent indicated that mounds on field are not part of the current application dated 3 September 2024.
• o Correspondence from Agent regarding removal of mounds from field dated 9 September 2024. _______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status

None ___________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THE DEVELOPMENT COULD BE CONTRARY TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN BUT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The site is Field 324368 situated on the northern side of the A23 (Top Road), Crosby and north-west of Nab Farm. Access to the land is via a single lane road which links the site to

• Top Road and serves the site and the surrounding fields and farms further north. The field is enclosed by Manx hedges which run along the western, northern and eastern boundaries of the site, while the southern boundary comprises and combination of sod bank and line of trees. The sod bank on the western boundary which abuts the highway rises to about 2m to 2.5m.
• 1.2 The current field access is situated on the south-west end of the site, while another field access is situated on the northern boundary of the site. The field is steeply sloped from North to South.
• 1.3 There currently is a large mound on site which sits almost at the centre of the site and rises to between 7 to 8m. The longest span of the mound measures about 39m, while its shorter span is about 24m. A smaller mound which is about 2m tall, with longer span measuring about 17.5m and shorter span measuring about 6.6m sits south of the larger mound and about 22m north of the agricultural building on site. These mounds were created from soil excavation carried out to enable the creation of the building on site.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for relocation and reorientation of 2 number agricultural buildings, and alteration to site levels (retrospective). - 2.2 The external building footprint for both buildings joined together would be 36.6m long x 24.4m wide with a pitch roof height of 6.5m (4.6m to the eaves). These buildings would be built together, joined at the eaves and forming a double pitched roof. Both buildings would cover a floor area of 893.sqm. - 2.3 The building is steel framed with external elevations comprising a blend of concrete panels to the base with Yorkshire boarding above, and Plastic coated steel sheet cladding in green. The Fibre cement sheet roof will include the installation of 8 GRP rooflights for natural light on each roof plane. The building will be open fronted on the north and south elevations, with the northern end having low gates. - 2.4 The new buildings are positioned such that their west elevation (Gable 2) would be positioned about 43.9m the highway, while the east elevation would be 22m from the eastern boundary. Its south elevation would be about 9m from the southern boundary which comprises the line of trees and sod bank. This positions the buildings closer to the highway by about 24 from that previously approved, whilst it would also move further into the field and away from the southern boundary by about 9m. - 2.5 The scheme also involved alterations to the ground level to make the building appear sunken and limiting the appearance from the surrounding fields and highway. - 2.6 The current planning application does not include the creation of the mounds which currently exist on the upper (northern) section of the field.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY - 3.1 Site Specific:

• 3.1.1 The site lies within an area not designated for development on the Area Plan for the East, Map 10 - Crosby/ Glen Vine. The site is not within a Conservation Area or prone to flood risks. There are no protected trees on site and the site is not within a Registered tree area.

3.2 National: STRATEGIC PLAN (2016)

• a. General Policy 2 - 'Development Control' considerations.
• b. General Policy 3 - presumption against development outside allocated sites, other than specific exceptions which include, (f) "building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry".
• c. Environment Policy 1 - protection of countryside and its ecology.

• d. Environment Policy 3 - Development to safeguard woodland areas.
• e. Environment Policy 4 - protection of ecology and designated sites/protected species.
• f. Environment Policy 14- Soil quality considerations for development that would result in permanent loss of agricultural land.
• g. Environment Policy 15 - Development of agricultural buildings in the countryside.
• h. Strategic Policy 1 - Efficient use of land and resources
• i. Strategic Policy 4 - development proposals must protect or enhance the nature conservation and landscape quality of urban as well as rural areas.
• j. Strategic policy 2 - Priority for new development to identified towns and villages
• k. Strategic Policy 5 - Design and visual impact
• l. Spatial Policy 5 - Development in countryside only in accordance with General Policy 3.
• m. Transport Policy 4 - Highway capacity and safety considerations.

3.3 The Town and Country Planning Act 1999

• 3.3.1 This document defines agriculture to include 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."
• 4.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

4.1 The Department's Biodiversity Strategy is capable of being a material consideration. It seeks to manage biodiversity changes to minimise loss of species and habitats, whilst seeking to maintain, restore and enhance native biodiversity, where necessary.

4.2 Food Matters Business Development Strategy 2015-2025

• 4.2.1 The Strategy's aim if for the Isle of Man food sector to have flourishing businesses reliably supplying locally-produced staple and artisanal products, profitably exporting and contributing to a local food culture celebrated and valued by residents, visitors, retailers and the hospitality sector by 2025.
• 4.2.2 Strategic Vision: Growing a sustainable, profitable and increasingly collaborative food supply chain, focused on meeting the needs of customers.
• 4.2.3 Future Targets include:

• o Contributing to the Island's food security
• o Adding further value to the Island's economy
• o Increasing employment opportunities
• o Supporting the health and well-being of our people.

4.3 Minerals Act 1986.

• 4.3.1 The ownership of minerals in the Isle of Man is vested in the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture under the Minerals Act 1986. The Department permits operators/developers to extract minerals via mining leases, mining licences and mining permissions and the Minerals Act 1986 broadly sets out the circumstances and procedures by which these Agreements are granted.
• 5.0 PLANNING HISTORY

5.1 The application site has been the subject of a number of previous planning application one of which is considered to be materially relevant to the current application:

5.2 Approval was granted under PA 21/00174/B for Erection of two agricultural buildings and creation of new field access - Approved. This building was erected but the buildings were not built according to the approved plan. The building was erected closer to the road and

further away from the southern boundary. The new position resulted in significant earthworks and excavation to enable the erection of the buildings, with significant volumes of soil excavated from the site area and deposited within the field. The position and the orientation of the buildings was also altered such that the building orientation was flipped 180 degrees. As such, the new development was the subject of enforcement action with a retrospective application for the new building submitted under the current scheme.

5.3 PA 23/00899/B to Drill a borehole for a viable potable water supply to new agricultural shed - Approved. The reason for approval considered that the proposed borehole is necessary to provide a reliable and controllable water source for the barn, and the proposal was not considered to result in a material impact upon the character and appearance of the wider landscape. - 6.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.

6.1 DOI Highways Division have indicated that they do not oppose the application (14 May 2024).

6.2 DEFA Minerals have made the following comments regarding the application (19 August 2024):

• o They note that the email from the applicant states that the remaining stone excavated (approximately 1,500-1,800 tonnes) is stored in the field above the agricultural building, and state that as the material has not been moved outside of the curtilage of the surface owner's landholding, no royalty is currently payable on the material.
• o They state that in accordance with the Minerals Act 1986 (as amended) a royalty will become payable should the minerals be removed from the landholding.
• o They request that the following note be added: "All extracted minerals, extracted from their natural state, remain the property of the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture under the Minerals Act 1986 (as amended). No Royalty is payable while the minerals are stockpiled on-site. A Royalty will become payable should the minerals be removed from the surface owner's landholding. Prior to the removal of the minerals, the owner must notify and obtain prior consent from the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture before any such movement occurs."

6.3 Marown Parish Commissioners have stated that they have no objection to the application (16 May 2024/25 July 2024).

6.4 No comments have been received from neighbouring properties. - 7.0 ASSESSMENT

7.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are;

• i. The principle of the development;
• ii. The visual or amenity impacts on the character and appearance of the countryside;
• iii. Loss of High Quality Agricultural Land; and
• iv. Potential Impact on neighbouring trees.

7.3 THE PRINCIPLE OF THE DEVELOPMENT (GP3, EP1, EP 15, and TCPA)

• 7.2.1 In considering the justification for the development, it is noted that the site is not designated for development, and as such there is a presumption against development here. However, General Policy 3 makes provisions for possible exceptions for development on land not zoned for development in the countryside, such as buildings and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry.

• 7.2.2 In the case of the current application, it is considered that the site is an agricultural field which should support schemes that seek to promote agriculture, with the applicants providing sufficient information within the previous application to erect the buildings on site under PA 21/00174/B to reinforce the use of the field for agriculture, with the key concern being that the buildings were not erected according to the approved plans. From reviewing the application documents, it has also been demonstrated why the works were carried out as proposed; to take advantage of the existing lie of the field to minimise visual impacts and improve animal welfare for the cattle to be kept in the buildings.

• 7.2.3 Moreover, the land is legitimately used for agricultural purposes and it is equally legitimate to require works needed in association with this use. Given the above, it is judged that the scheme would be acceptable in principle. Albeit, the acceptability of the entire proposal for the site would be dependent on whether there would be any adverse impacts on other factors highlighted in 7.1 above.

7.3 VISUAL IMPACTS (EP15, EP2, STP 5 and GP2)

7.3.1 Where sufficient agricultural need is demonstrated as with this scheme, EP15 goes into further detail on the requirements in terms of siting and size/material used etc. Key here, is that buildings should be sited as close as possible to existing buildings if any. In this case, the proposed building would not be sited in close proximity to the existing buildings in the immediate vicinity, although it should be noted that the justification for the siting as proposed has been adequately discussed under PA 21/00174/B where it was considered acceptable, with Paragraph 6.3.2 of the Officer Report clearly articulating why the siting is acceptable.

• 7.3.2 Further to the above, the site levelling works around the buildings would ensure that it blends into the landscape and concealed by the nature of the site layout. Additionally, the buildings would be erected using steel frame construction with Olive green profiled sheets and timber panels to clad the vertical elements, such that the building would be seen to reflect the agricultural nature of the building and would be of similar appearance to the existing 'modern' farm buildings that define the countryside.
• 7.3.3 Therefore, given the scale, colour, form and materials of the proposed building, and its concealed position which would ensure the buildings are not particularly prominent when viewed from the surrounding landscape not be a prominent feature within the landscape, it is considered that the buildings would be acceptable when viewed within the context of the site and surrounding area. Accordingly, it is considered that these elements of the proposal would comply with the requirements of EP 15, as well as Strategic policy 4 which seeks to protect the character and quality of the landscape.
• 7.3.4 A key concern with the scheme in terms of visual and landscape impact lies in the creation of soil mounds on the site which have altered considerably the character and appearance of this part of the countryside which is not known to have raised rock outcrops. These mounds, one of which rises to about 7 to 8m dominates views to the site area, thus resulting in detrimental impacts to the character and appearance of the site and landscape. The applicants have, however, indicated that they do not intend to leave the mounds on site as currently is, with these not being proposed as part of the current scheme. As such, it is considered that any associated adverse visual impacts would be diminished by the fact that the location of these mounds on site would only be temporary, in addition to the fact that the field would be restored to its natural lie.

- 7.4 LOSS OF HIGH QUALITY AGRICULTURAL LAND (EP 14)

• 7.4.1 Environment Policy 14 allows for development on agricultural land provided that they do not result in the loss of high quality agricultural land. High quality agricultural land is defined as being Class 1/2, Class 2/3 and Class 3/2 as annotated on the Agricultural Land Use Capability Map. The proposal site is shown as being within Class 3/4 and as such falls outside the defined land protected by EP14.

• 7.4.2 Whilst the class of agricultural soils on the farm (Class 3/4) does not imply that the soils should not be managed appropriately as the Strategic plan does not in any way imply that Class 3/4 soils should be poorly managed or used unsustainably as majority of the agricultural soils on the Island (80.26%) fall within Class 3 soils, the nature and scale of the build is such that the agricultural potential of the adjoining fields would not be compromised, save for the soil mounds on the fields which would be removed from the field. As such, it is considered that the requirements of Environment Policy 14 are met in this regard.

7.5 IMPACT ON TREES (EP3 & GP2)

• 7.5.1 There would be no impacts on adjacent trees given that the proposal would be erected at a position situated away from the mature trees on the site boundary, such that there would be no impact on adjacent trees on the boundary. The development would also be set further from the mature shrubbery and vegetation along the site boundary.

7.6 OTHER MATTERS

• 7.6.1 Excavation on site (Minerals act 1986)

• 7.6.1.1 Within the application to enable the creation of the new buildings, significant soil excavation was carried out, with the soil excavated amounting to approximately 1,500-1,800 tonnes. This level of soil extraction from the ground would require prior consent from the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture should the applicant seek to remove the soil from the site. Also, a Royalty will become payable should the minerals be removed from the surface owner's landholding. The above would, however, be subject to approval being granted via other legislation and process outside the remit of Planning.

• 7.6.2 Other Works: Mound Removal

7.6.2.1 The mounds which currently sit within the field are not proposed as part of the current application. As such, the applicants have written in to indicate that they are satisfied with the inclusion of a condition to facilitate the removal of the mounds on site. Therefore, a condition would be included to ensure that the mounds are removed within a stipulated time.

- 8.0 RECOMMENDATION

8.1 On balance, the proposed buildings are considered to be agriculturally justified, and appropriate in terms of the proposed design and siting, and broadly accords with the aforementioned policies of the Strategic Plan. The application is therefore recommended for approval. - 9.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

9.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf);
• (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure;
• (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and
• (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

9.2 The decision maker must determine:

• o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department
• of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and

• whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status

9.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given Interested Person Status. _____________________________________________________________________

I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to that body by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status and/or rights to appeal.

Decision Made : …Permitted……….... Committee Meeting Date:…16.09.2024

Signed :…………P VISIGAH……….. 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 Customer note This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/customers and archive record.