Loading document...
Applicant: KNR Construction Limited Proposal Change of use of building for storage of equipment and tools and vehicle workshop; alterations including installation of roller shutter door and creation of hardstanding for parking of work vehicles (retrospective) Site Address Ballachrink Farm Ballanicholas Garth Cosby Isle Of Man IM4 2HD Case Officer : Lucy Kinrade Photo Taken: 13.02.2025 Site Visit: 13.02.2025 Expected Decision Level Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation 04.03.2025
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
Reason: The Department has assessed the impact of the proposal on the basis of the specific use and any alternative uses within the same Use Class will require further consideration.
Reason: The development hereby approved is only acceptable in this location because of the small scale nature of the building and operation.
Reason: the application has been approved on an exceptional basis and if the use ceases the site shall be reverted to agriculture to avoid the accumulation of unwarranted development in the countryside.
N 1. The applicant is reminded of their separate obligations under the Highways Act 1986 in respect of not allowing surface water runoff into the highway.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. New development should be directed to town or village centres and designated land, though some rural buildings may be repurposed for tourism or small-scale commercial uses under Environment Policy 16 and this can help in providing extra income for farms. While this building lacks merit under EP16b, it remains intact and the proposed use requires no extension, meeting EP16(a) and (c). The building's small size and small scale of operation do not cause significant traffic issues or affect town vitality, in line with EP16(d) and (e) and Transport Policy 4, and this small size and scale means the proposal doesn't adversely harm the agricultural character of the site or surrounding countryside to an unacceptable degree, meeting EP16(f) and Environment Policy 1. Parking on the rear hardstanding does not impact agricultural land per Environment Policy 14, nor harm surrounding farming operations or the wider landscape. Conditions will restrict use and ensure the site returns to agriculture if the use ceases.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the following all date stamped and received 15/11/2024:
Right to Appeal
It is recommended that the following organisations should be given the Right to Appeal on the basis that they have submitted a relevant objection:
THE APPLICATION IS BEFORE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THE PROPOSAL COULD BE CONSIDERED CONTRARY TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, HAS RECEIVED OBJECTION FROM THE LOCAL AUTHORITY AND IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site relates to an existing agricultural shed forming part of the wider cluster of farm buildings at Ballachrink Farm. The shed is attached to a larger building and with
a small concrete apron to the front serving both. The shed and larger building were both approved for use as part of the farms agricultural plant repair business under 19/00248/C.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 This current planning application seeks approval for:
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The site has been subject to a number of previous planning applications including 19/00248/C for the additional use of the building and shed as part of the farms agricultural plant repair business. Conditions were added to control the use and linking it to the main farm:
4.0 PLANNING POLICY - 4.1 The site is not designated for development on the Area Plan for the East 2020. The site is not at any flood risk on recent maps nor is it within any Conservation Area and there are no registered trees nearby. - 4.2 Relevant policies of Strategic Plan.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only. - 5.1 Marown Parish Commissioners - objection (02/01/2025) on two grounds
5.2 The Department of Infrastructure Highway Services - do not oppose (17/12/2024) and no further comments (09/01/2025). - 5.3 The Department of Infrastructure Highway Drainage - there is no information provided to determine details of surface water or its interaction with the main highway to understand the proposals compliance with Section 58 of the Highway Act 1985 and 11.3.11 of the Manual for Manx Roads. - 5.4 The following were also consulted but no response received as of 17/02/2025: o DEFA Forestry
6.1 There is therefore a presumption against development here and where the protection of the countryside and landscape is a priority, as set out in Environment Policies 1 and 2 and General Policy 3 of the Strategic Plan. The Plan makes provision for development in such areas where there is agricultural justification and there is no unacceptable environmental impact which outweighs the justification. - 6.2 Industrial development which would perhaps best describe the proposed use, is generally directed to land designated for such purposes and there are no policies which would indicate that an industrial use such as this would be acceptable in an area not designated for development. - 6.3 Agriculture plays an important role in shaping and maintaining the landscape and as such serious consideration needs to be given before losing agricultural land to development and this is reiterated through Environment Policy 14. - 6.4 There are a number of traditional farm buildings strewn across the Island, some being of size unsuitable or of only limited use for modern farming. Some of these traditional rural buildings represent not only a valuable part of Island heritage, but also an opportunity for diversification and re-use. Environment Policy 16 sets out the criteria for such conversions. - 6.5 The key matters to consider in the assessment of this application are the physical works to the building itself and to the hardstanding at the rear, and the change of use for buildings storage. - 6.6 Physical Works
at any time. A condition to return the shed back to agricultural use should the operation cease would also safeguard this part. With exception to the shed, the remaining farm holding and cluster of buildings are quite clearly in agricultural use. The adjoining building is used for agricultural plant repair and so the dominant character of the site remains evidently and recognisably agricultural. The occupation of anything larger or occupation of multiple spaces for non-agricultural related operation may alter this character. A condition to restrict the proposed operation to within the red line only would therefore be appropriate, with no external storage of any materials, tools or equipment and the hardstanding apron being used only for parking of vehicles associated with the use of the shed.
7.0 CONCLUSION - 7.1 It is accepted that new development is first to be directed to appropriate town or village centres and on land designated for such purposes, however there is some acceptance in the reuse of some rural buildings as outlined in General Policy 3 and Environment Policy 16 for tourist or small scale industrial or commercial uses which can offer some additional income and diversification for farms. While this building is not of any interest or merit meeting EP16b and this weighs against the proposal, the building it is intact and doesn't require extension meeting EP16(a and c) and the small scale size of the shed and nature of operation doesn't result in unacceptable traffic implications nor a level of activity that prejudices vitality or viability of existing town or village services meeting with EP16(d and e) and Transport Policy 4. It is this small size and small scale nature that helps to ensure the proposal does not result in any adverse harm to the overall agricultural character of the site as a whole, and of a size and scale not to harm the overall surrounding countryside environment or wider rural landscape in line with EP16(f) and Environment Policy 1 and this weighs in favour of the proposal. The parking of a vehicle on the rear hardstanding would not result in the loss of any high quality agricultural land as per EP14, nor is it considered to result in any harm to the surrounding agricultural operations or gate into the field behind, noting that the farmer is on site and any disruption to them they could cease the operation at any time. Conditions will help to ensure control is restricted to the proposed use only and should the use cease returned to agriculture, and the approved use only within the red line as shown on the plan and no external storage of materials or equipment on the site.
9.1 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). - 9.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to:
9.3 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. - 9.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required):
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to the it 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.
Decision Made : Permitted Committee Meeting Date: 17.03.2025 Signed : L KINRADE 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 file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.
Application No. : 24/91312/B Applicant : KNR Construction Limited Proposal : Change of use of building for storage of equipment and tools
and vehicle workshop; alterations including installation of roller shutter door and creation of hardstanding for parking of work vehicles (retrospective)
Site Address : Ballachrink Farm Ballanicholas Garth Cosby Isle Of Man IM4 2HD
Planning Officer : Lucy Kinrade
Presenting Officer As above
Addendum to the Officer’s Report
The case officer updated the Committee on matters relating to comments received from DOI Highway Drainage and the interested persons listed in the Right to Appeal. The Case Officer sought to update their recommendation since the writing of report and publishing of the agenda so as to remove Department of Infrastructure from the right to appeal list on the basis that their representation was not an objection but comments highlighting the need for separate compliance with other legislation and so the case officer recommended that their approval include a note to remind the applicant of their separate obligations under the DOI Highways Act 1986 in respect of not allowing surface water onto the highway.
One member of the Committee made reference to the dark skies location of the site and suggested a further condition be added to prevent any external lighting at the site.
The Committee refused to accept the Case Officer's updated recommendation on the basis of 5 conditions and 1 note, and instead recommended approval on the basis of 6 conditions and 1 note.
Members unanimously agreed that Right to Appeal only be given to the local authority, and Department of Infrastructure would not get right to appeal.
C6. There shall be no external lighting at the site. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure no harm to the dark skies.
N1. The applicant is reminded of their separate obligations under the Highways Act 1986 in respect of not allowing surface water runoff into the highway.
It is recommended that the following organisations should be given the Right to Appeal on the basis that they have submitted a relevant objection:
It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal on the basis that they have submitted a relevant objection:
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
