Loading document...
Application No.: 24/90929/B Applicant: Sandash Farms Ltd Proposal: Erection of a cattle shed extension Site Address: Ballakissack School Lane Santon Isle Of Man IM4 1EG Senior Planning Officer: Jason Singleton Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 23.09.2024 _________________________________________________________________
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
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.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.
The proposal is considered to be acceptable in terms of the agricultural need satisfying General Policy 3, and the proposed buildings scale, materials, colour, siting and form would be in accordance with Environment Policy 1 and 15 of the Strategic Plan.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This decision relates to drawings and supporting information received on 14 August 2024, referenced;
Right to Appeal It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal: DoI - Highways Services - No objection. ___________________________________________________________________
1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is referred to as Ballakissack Farm, School Lane, Santon. The farm is characterised by a number of agricultural buildings clustered together and a detached dwellinghouse. Access to the dwellinghouse and the farm buildings is via a track that extends to 400m in length off the A5 Douglas to Castletown Road. The farm buildings sit to the north of the A5 highway.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Proposed is the erection of an extension to an existing cattle shed. The proposed structure would measure approx. 8.4m x 13.5m with a pitched roof and a ridge height of 6.4m. The building would be finished with green GRP corrugated roof sheets, timber Yorkshire barding walls and the lower proportions precast concrete panels. - 2.2 The application is accompanied with an agricultural statement which states the farm holding comprises 34.4 Hectares owned and a further 141.6 hectares of rented land on agricultural tenancy which farms an approx.;
2.3 The applicant notes; "We are in the process of installing a new milking parlour and associated setup. This is the vital next phase to allow previous planning application from 2022 (22/00201/B) to connect with the existing cattle sheds. We are replacing the current 30+ year old setup with a new one to help with farm labour costs as well as improving our efficiency but also helping us stay within environmental and Red Tractor regulations for slurry management with it incorporating a new undercover collecting yard for the cows to wait to be milked". - 2.4 The applicant advises that the extension of the agricultural building would provide covered housing for existing livestock and connects to the new milking unit.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY - 3.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is noted on Map 3 of the Area Plan for the East as an area recognised as being within white land or land not zoned for development or not for any particular purpose and within an area of 'Incised Slopes' as part of the Landscape assessment. The intention of the latter is to protect the countryside and its rural character.
3.2 The site is not within a Conservation Area or within an area identified as flood risk. There are no defined registered trees or registered trees areas on the Govt maps. - 3.3 Within the adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, the following policy are considered to be the pertinent relevant policy in the determination of this application:
General Policy 3f - Exceptions for Development in the countryside for agriculture Environment Policy 1 - Protection of the countryside and its ecology Environmental Policy 15 - visual impact of any buildings
Environment Policy 22(iii) - Environmental Harm through vibration, odour, noise and light
4.1 The application site/ Farm benefits from the following approvals; 22/00201/B - Erection of a replacement agricultural building. (Approved.) 20/00595/B - Erection of barn and lean to. (Approved.) 15/01038/B - Erection of an agricultural building. (Approved). 08/00884/B - Erection of extension to existing agricultural building. (Approved) 05/92187/B - Erection of a slurry store. (Approved) - 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS
5.1 Santon Commissioners has not commented at the time of writing.
5.2 Highways Services do not object (No Highways Interest) 27/08/24 "After reviewing this Application, Highway Services HDC finds it to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and/or parking as the proposed extension is relatively minor and the existing site and access can accommodate the proposals satisfactorily". - 6.0 ASSESSMENT
6.1 There aforementioned policies would indicate there is a general presumption against new development in the countryside, as indicated in Environment Policy 1 and General Policy 3 of the Strategic Plan. The starting point for any development within the countryside (i.e. not zoned for development) is therefore General Policy 3, paragraph F which allows exemption for agricultural buildings and Environment Policy 15, which requires, firstly 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. Then further assessment to ensure the built form is appropriate in terms of size, scale material and colour with siting and form that is sympathetic to its surroundings without being detrimental to the character and appearance of the countryside. This is also underpinned through Environmental Policy 1 to ensure any development does not adversely affect the countryside.
6.2 The applicant has provided details through their agent to confirm they "the farmer/ owner", of land buildings who lives within the farm holding. The site is an active farm with its land holding and dairy operation noting the number of livestock. The main farm buildings and dwellings are all clustered together and at the centre of the farming lands as noted on the land ownership plan submitted as part of this proposal.
6.3 The 'Agricultural Questionnaire' confirmed this is an active farm and the buildings on site area currently being used for agricultural purposes for the husbandry of animals and for their support (storage of feed, hay and farm equipment). As such the principle of an extension
to and existing farm building for the welfare of animals/ milking would accord with GP3f where its use would be used for the conduct of 'agriculture'.
6.4 Having considered the justification and its broad acceptance in principle, we turn to the siting of the building. Environment Policy 15 notes the proximity of the proposal should be sited as close the farmstead as possible and be appropriate in terms of scale, materials, colour, siting and form to ensure they are in keeping with their surroundings. In this case the proposal would be of the same style or method of steel frame construction and level of finish using the Yorkshire boarding timber sheets to clad the vertical elements (concrete walls to the lower proportions) and roof pitches would be seen to match that of the existing farm buildings. - 6.5 The location would be sited close (infill development) to the existing group of farm buildings, and (approx.40m) from the applicants farm house and would be considered appropriate for its intended use for the husbandry of animals, as noted in section 2. The proposed building would be suitable for its intended use in accordance with Ep15. Visual Impact on the countryside - 6.6 The siting of the proposed building as noted above would confirm the location is not one of open countryside but would be read within the context of an existing working farm to which planning policies support for the placement next to existing building groups and replacing an existing building. From the highway the building would be read amongst other agricultural buildings of similar type, size and colour, if viewable from the highway. The addition of this proposed building and its use would confirm to the guidance given in EP15 where it would not be considered to have any detrimental impact upon the wider countryside (EP1) or would not be considered to harm the character and quality of the wider landscape designation of TAPE. Impact on the residential amenity - 6.7 The later paragraph of Ep15 refers to the potential conflicts of siting of agricultural buildings near residential properties, which is further supported through EP22 that deals with statutory nuisances. Firstly, in considering the farm dwelling closest to the proposed building (Applicants Farm House) this would be approx. 40m away but given the current farm layout their residential curtilage. As such the proposal would not be eroding any amenity space of the dwelling and is close enough to allow the owners, who farm the land to be on hand where they would have responsibility for the welfare of the animals during the calving periods and wider agricultural responsibilities. - 6.8 In relation to the nearest neighbouring residential property "The Conifers" and "Druin Veg", School Lane Santon and consideration has to be given to any adverse impact from the proposed building and use giving rise to the potential for statutory nuisances. These properties are approximately 200m to the south of the nearest corner of the proposed replacement building. In this instance the replacement agricultural building and its use would be no different than the current use and would not be considered to have any detrimental impact upon their neighbouring amenities through any statutory nuisance.
7.1 The planning application has been designed to ensure its siting and appearance has no adverse impact on the character of this site and the wider countryside, or that of the neighbouring property, which has been recommended for approval. - 8.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL
8.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted).
8.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to:
8.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10. - 8.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required):
8.5 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 the Right to Appeal. _____________________________________________________________________
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 and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status and/or rights to appeal.
Decision Made : Permitted Date: 25.09.2024 Determining Officer
Signed : C BALMER Chris Balmer Principal Planner
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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
