DEC Officer Report

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Application No.: 22/01205/B Applicant: Mr Matthew & Mrs Lynda Ingham Proposal: Retention of construction compound area for use as a parking area for large equestrian horse boxes and trailers associated with the Equestrian arena (retrospective) Site Address: Ballaclucas Farm Top Road Crosby Isle Of Man IM4 4HN Planning Officer: Miss Lucy Kinrade Photo Taken: 01.02.2023 Site Visit: 01.02.2023 Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 17.01.2024

Conditions and Notes for Approval

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions

• C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

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.

• C 2. The car park hereby approved shall be used only in association with the equestrian facility at 'Ballaclucas Farm' as outlined in blue on dwg P10-01 only.

Reason: a car park in this location is only considered acceptable and warranted given its connection and use by the established equestrian facility only and to which it relates in the interest of protecting the countryside from unwarranted development.

• C 3. In the event that the car park is no longer required in association with the equestrian facility or the use of the equestrian facility ceases for a period longer than 24 months, the car park must be removed and the ground restored to its original agricultural field condition and retained as such thereafter.

Reason: the car park is only considered acceptable in relation to the operation of the equestrian facility and any retention without that facility would be unwarranted development in the countryside.

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

On the basis that suitable justification of need has been provided to outweigh the loss of high quality agricultural land, and minded of the acceptable visual, amenity and highway safety impacts, the proposal is considered to be acceptable and not at odds with General Policy 3, Environment Policies 1 and 2, and Environment Policies 15, 19, 20 and 21 of the Strategic Plan 2016. Conditions ensuring the car park remains for use by the equestrian facility only and the car parks removal and return to agricultural land should the equestrian facility no longer be operational.

Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the following drawing and information:

• o A planning statement dated 30th October, 2023 from Sarah Corlett Town Planning Consultancy Ltd
• o Drawing P10-10 showing SUV plus horse box trailer
• o Drawing P10-11 showing large fixed axle horse box
• o Drawing P10-12 showing large fixed axle horse box T reverse turning
• o Covering Email from Sarah Corlett dated 20/11/2023

• - All date received 20/11/2023

• P10-01 - location plan o P10-02 - as approved site plan o P10-03 - as built site plan o Cover letter o Supporting statement by Kay Associates Ltd.

• - All date stamped and received 15/09/2022 _______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status

Additional Persons

None _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

THE APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE AS THE RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE IS CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - 2(1)(c) PLANNING COMMITTEE STANDING ORDERS.

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site relates to Ballaclucas Farm, Top Road, Crosby a site that has over time become an equestrian centre including an outdoor manege, a large indoor arena, stable buildings, tack and feed store, storage areas and drying room. The site sits on the northern side of the Top Road part way between the backroad connecting Strang to Crosby. There are no private or personal restrictions on the use of the site. - 1.2 The equestrian facilities sit around 100m back from the road and behind Ballaclucas Farmhouse. The facilities are accessed via a separate entrance east of the house. - 1.3 Immediately to the rear of the indoor arena building is a large loose aggregate hardstanding area measuring approx. 38m x 42m. This area is explained in the applicants supporting statement to have been used for the compound storage of building materials and steels as well as the parking and manoeuvring of a crane in the construction of the indoor arena.

- 2.0 THE PROPOSAL

2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the retention of the compound hardstanding area and the change of use of the land from agriculture to a car park associated with the equestrian facilities. - 2.2 It is recognised that there are also a number of works to the access route and hardstanding areas nearest the stables and tack room also seek retrospective approval for changes made beyond those details approved as part of 15/00166/B including extension of the access route, removal of parking area, reduction to hardstanding and changes to landscaping beyond C3 of 15/00166/B. - 2.3 Additional information justifying the car park area was submitted dated 20/11/2023.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The site has been subject to a number previous planning applications in the evolution of the stables and the creation of the indoor arena and manege. There have also been two Certificates of Lawfulness in the use of the stables and yard as a livery business and the building of part of the stable building not in accordance with the approved plans. The most relevant applications being:

• o 95/01611/B Erection of horse stables, tack room and hay store - Approved
• o 96/01336/B Erection of additional horse stables to the rear of existing stables Approved
• o 08/01437/R - Erection of extension to stables / implement store and creation of manège - Approved
• o 13/00701/LAW - Certificate of Lawful Use for the running of a Livery Stable Yard business - Approved (stables and yard only, does not include manege)
• o 13/90994/C - Removal of condition 2 of PA 08/01437/R regarding the usage of the manège - Approved
• o 13/91540/B - Construction of a new vehicular access to serve equestrian stables complex - Approved
• o 14/00005/B - Alterations and extensions to stables and conversion of feed store and
• open bay to create two additional stables (partial retrospective) - Approved
• o 15/00166/B - Erection of an equestrian building to provide an indoor riding school, stables and feed, tack and equipment store with associated car parking - Approved
• o 18/00546/B - Extensions and alterations to equestrian facilities to provide storage Approved
• o 19/01012/B - Alterations to existing equestrian store structure to form drying room Approved
• o 21/00438/B - Creation of living accommodation - WITHDRAWN
• o 22/01208/LAW - Certificate of lawful development for erection of a tack room and feed store- Approved

3.2 15/00166/B for the indoor arena was approved at appeal subject to a number of conditions relating to the external cladding colours, no external lighting and the need for landscaping to be submitted and carried out in accordance with the plans as it was considered to be an integral part of the scheme. Throughout this application car parking was to be provided just east of the existing stables. DOI initially raised concerns that the space sized shown would be too small and unsuitable for types of vehicles to be expected. Reading through planning history, including the officer report, planning committee minutes, appeal statements from the applicant and appeal documents and reports that DOI changed their comments to do not oppose on the basis that the applicant indicated the spaces to be indicative only and wouldn't be marked out so that the area could accommodate the larger vehicles. A drawing submitted as part of the landscape condition demonstrates turning circles for larger vehicles into and out of the approved parking area and stable yard.

- 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 within a conservation area and is not recognised as being at any flood risk. The soil classification map indicates the site as being Class 3/2. - 4.2 Established policies within the IOM Strategic Plan 2016 make clear that there is a general presumption against any kind of development across the countryside and new development should be directed to existing settlements (Strategic Policy 2, Spatial Policies 1-5, Environment Policies 1 and General Policy 3). However in the same strategic plan there are a number of paragraphs and policies that specifically relate to and offer support to the development of new equestrian-related development (Paragraph 7.15.1 and Environment Policies 19, 20 and 21) so long as they do not result in the loss of any high quality agricultural land, harm highway safety, or, by reason of their design detriment the character, appearance and quality of the countryside. These policies also state that there will be a presumption against large scale equestrian development including new buildings and external arena's in AHLV unless there are exceptional circumstances. While there is no strict definition of high quality agricultural land, it is categorised into Classes and Environment Policy 14 seeks to avoid the permanent loss of important and versatile agricultural land and specifies what land this is applied to. Paragraph 11.5 of the Strategic Plan also covers car parking and Transport Policy 7 requires development to be provided with suitable parking provision.

5.0 REPRESENTATION Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.

5.1 Marown Parish Commissioners - no objections (21/10/2022). - 5.2 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services - Do Not Oppose (12/10/2022).

- 6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 Established planning policies seek to protect the countryside for its own sake, and only in exceptional circumstances is development to be considered. In this case there are no specific policies relating to the creation of car parks in the countryside, although this proposal is to be linked to an existing equestrian facility at the site, and so it would be most relevant to have regard to those wider policies that seek to protect the countryside for its own sake and direct development to existing settlements EP1, SpP5 as well as EP's 19, 20 and 21 which relate to equestrian development, EP 14 in protecting high quality agricultural land and TP7 in respect of highway safety. Principle - 6.2 The site is not designated for development and is outside of any settlement, and so in the first instance there's a general presumption against any kind of development. Planning history for this site sets out how these equestrian facilities have evolved over time and it is evident from the original approval of the indoor arena (15/00166/B) that there was some need for car parking to facilitate the development and this remains the case now in order to keep the associated vehicles and users of the facility off the main road. Therefore it is accepted that there still remains a principle of needing some form of car parking for the equestrian facility. Planning Background - 15/00166/B - 6.3 Planning Committee minutes and applicant's appeal statement for 15/00166/B said that it wasn't intended to have horse competitions at the site but rather to provide all weather facilities for single and group riding, practise sessions and riding, show jumping and dressage activities so it is likely that the original parking area proposed for the site was sized on this basis. The 2015 application was approved but there were no conditions to prevent any competitions or event use. - 6.4 The current supporting statement indicates that the top compound area was formed to help with the construction of the equestrian facilities and allow storage of materials and crane parking and operating for lifting materials. It also indicates that the originally approved car

• park was also simultaneously constructed (although there are questions about whether the car park was built in accordance with the approval which is addressed later in this report). The statement indicates that on completion of the arena and its coming into use that it became clear that the types of vehicles visiting were larger pantechnicon type rather than horsebox trailers and that the approved 2015 car park would not provide sufficient space for manoeuvring and parking. Consequently they used the 2015 car park as drop off and pick up and the compound for parking.
• 6.5 As referenced in 3.0 of this report, the DOI had initially objected to the 2015 application due to the small parking spaces shown and the insufficient parking for larger vehicles which would be expected at the site. Evidence in documents of 2015 application indicate that this objection was overcome by the applicant liaising with DOI stating that the car park would not be formally marked out and so could accommodate the larger vehicles. A subsequent drawing submitted as part of a landscape condition shows the turning circles and parking outlines for both pantechnicon's and horse trailers measuring between 8m-9m long in the 2015 approved car parking area.
• 6.6 Detail in the 2015 application makes clear that landscaping was a vital part of the approval and Condition 3 addressed this. Aerial images indicate that parts of the approved landscaping do not appear to have been implemented including sod banks which were required to enclose the approved car park on three sides, the construction of which as per the approval would have naturally prevented through access up to the compound, and so it is questioned whether there was ever an intention to build the car park in accordance with the approval. 15/00166/B vs Current Application
• 6.7 The supporting statement indicates that overtime the top compound became the 'de facto' car park, and as such the width of the original car park was reduced and tree planting instated. On review of drawings and aerial images there appears to have been a 3m reduction to car park width.
• 6.8 There appears to be conflicting information between the 2015 and current application, with 2015 claiming that the original car park was large enough to facilitate the equestrian development, whereas the current application argues the same area to be insufficient (although understood not to have been built as originally approved). Proposal and Need
• 6.9 There needs to be a careful planning balance between the justified need for the size of the parking area against the wider policies that seek to protect the countryside from harm and unwarranted development, and to ensure no loss of high quality agricultural land.
• 6.10 Proposed is the retrospective approval for the installation and creation of the compound hardstanding and for its use as a car park in association with the equestrian facilities. The area proposed measures approx. 38m x 42m. Also within the red line is part of the access route to the compound area parts of the original 2015 car park which was not built in accordance with the 2015 approval.
• 6.11 Whilst the applicant's reasons for the works is understood what wasn't clear as part of the original submission was whether there was a true need for the full extent of the large compound area to be retained or whether the area could in fact be made smaller resulting in less high quality agricultural land being lost whilst still meeting the needs of the equestrian facility. Information has now been submitted to demonstrate the average number of vehicles coming to and from the site, how many events take place on average per week/month/year as well as details of turning circles and movement of vehicles within the compound all which seeks to support why the full extent of the area is required for the facility and to accommodate the size of vehicles along with their anticipated frequency. Whilst it is agreed that formal marking out of parking spaces would be difficult on the surfacing, a more pragmatic or formalised

• zoning approach could make more efficient use of the area rather than having ad hoc parking potentially impacting efficiency but this would be for the applicant to manage.
• 6.12 On principle of need, there is now considered to be sufficient justification to warrant retaining the compound of this size for use as a car park associated with the equestrian facility in this specific location. Whilst resulting in the permanent loss of some high quality agricultural land the need in this specific case weighs in favour of the proposal. Visual, Amenity and Highway Safety Impact
• 6.13 Environment Policies 1 and 2 make it clear that the countryside should be protected for its own sake and that in AHLVs the protection of the landscape's character should be the most important consideration. Environment Policy 20 indicates a presumption against large-scale equestrian developments in AHLVs unless there are exceptional circumstances to override such a policy. "large-scale" is not defined and the site is not an AHLV, also noting that the existing arena and stables have already been approved and the car park is to further facilitate these buildings and equestrian use. In terms of public view the location of the car park is behind the existing arena building and behind vegetation along the road and surrounding the car park and so there are limited public views from the main road and surrounding area due to the distance and topography.
• 6.14 From an amenity point of view, the distance between the existing site and surrounding neighbours is as such as to limit any noise impacts on their living conditions, and so there are no issues in this respect.
• 6.15 The access into the site from the main road is to remain unchanged and the proposed parking off the road will ensure no new or increased adverse impacts on highway safety or on the surrounding highway network to cause any concerns.

CONCLUSION

7.1 There is a presumption against development here set out in General Policy 3 and Environment Policies 1 and 2, however Environment Policies 19, 20 and 21 make it clear that equestrian related development can be considered acceptable subject to certain conditions and ensuring that its style, design and finish is appropriate for its use and does not harm any AHLV.

7.2 The main equestrian buildings and facility already exist and from a visual, amenity and highway safety perspective the proposed car park would not result in any unacceptable issues, and by reason of the late provision of justification and evidence to support the need for a car park of such a significant size and scale in this location, that this specific need is considered to outweigh the loss of area recognised as high quality agricultural land (zoned as Class 3/2) and overall considered on an exceptional basis to be acceptable. Conditions ensuring the car park remains for use by the equestrian facility only and the car parks removal and return to agricultural land should the equestrian facility no longer be operational. - 8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

8.1 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. 8.2 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
• o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should 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.

Decision Made : Permitted Committee Meeting Date: 29.01.2024

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.