Loading document...
Application No.: 07/01704/B Applicant: G J Ingham & Sons Limited Proposal: Erection of extensions to existing agricultural building Site Address: Lower Carnagrie Farm Track From Slieau Whallian Road Lower Foxdale Isle Of Man ### Considerations Case Officer: Miss S E Corlett Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee ### Written Representations ### Consultations Consulttee: S.P.M.C. & E. Notes: Strongly objects Consulttee: Highways Division Notes: Do not oppose Consulttee: Patrick Commissioners Notes: Objection made
The site represents part of a larger area which represents the curtilage of an agricultural holding situated on the northern side of the Gleneedle Road to the south west of the ford. The site accommodates two existing agricultural buildings.
The site lies within a wider area designated as of an Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance on the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982.
The site has been the subject of a number of previous applications:
There is a contemporaneous application for the re-siting of the farm dwelling - PA 07/1707, change of use of the site to a builder's yard (PA 07/1703) and retention of a farm track (PA 07/1675). Work has commenced on site and the farm dwelling is now in a different position than that permitted. It is also suggested by objectors that material has been brought to the site, the road formed and the site used as a builder's yard.
Proposed in this application is the extension of an agricultural building on the site. The building concerned is one of two on the site (with a farm dwelling currently under construction), the more southern of the two and the one first reached when one enters the site from the Gleneedle Road. The extensions proposed involve a sideward (westerly) extension of 10m across the full depth of the building and a rearward (southerly) extension of 5m. The extensions will continue the existing ridge line or slope of the roof in the case of the extension at the rear.
The application form provides no explanation as to why these extensions are required and the other applications submitted (see above) would suggest that there is no intention to use the farmyard for agricultural purposes. As such, the applicant's description of the site as "Farm" in question 9 of the application form would not appear to be accurate.
There are objections to the application from the occupants of Cronk-e-King, Hillside and Kerrowdhoo and from Patrick Parish Commissioners and The Society for the Preservation of the Manx Countryside and Environment, all of whom are concerned at the increase in traffic and the inappropriateness of the use of agricultural land for industrial purposes and the absence of need for extensions if the use of the site as a builder's yard is not considered acceptable.
The site is designated as Open Space/Agricultural on the Development Plan. The Strategic Plan sets out a raft of policies which protect the countryside, including Environment Policy 1 which 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".
There is no information submitted in this application which explains how the operation of the agricultural unit will be able to continue with a builder's yard operating in the farm yard and the other
applications which have been submitted in respect of this site cannot be ignored, despite the application site being described as agricultural, which it would not appear to be since the applicant has purchased the site. Agriculture is acknowledged in the Strategic Plan (paragraph 7.3.1) as an important activity within the countryside and one which is responsible for the management of its appearance and stewardship. The use of the site as a builder's yard will not contribute positively to either of these elements.
If the other applications are set aside and the application is judged purely on the basis of extensions to the agricultural building, there is no information to suggest why extensions are required and as such, the proposal would represent unwarranted development in the countryside. Whilst the visual impact of the proposed extensions is limited and unlikely to be objectionable, the principle of further building in an area not designated for development without any justification would be contrary to Strategic Plan General Policy 3g which states that agricultural development should be "essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry". There is no indication that the extensions are required, and therefore could not be considered to be essential.
The occupants of Hillside and Cronk-y -King are some distance from the site and whilst they would be affected by the traffic generated by the proposed use they are not directly affected by the proposal and as such should not be afforded party status in this instance.
Kerrowdhoo Farm and Gleneedle Farm are alongside the site and as such are close enough to be directly affected by the proposed use and traffic associated with the proposed use and should be afforded party status in this instance.
Lower Gleneedle is not immediately alongside the site and as such should not be afforded party status in this instance.
The Department of Transport and the local authority are, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (c) and (d), considered "interested persons" and as such should be afforded party status.
The Society for the Preservation of the Manx Countryside and Environment is not directly affected by the proposed development and should not be afforded party status in this instance.
Recommended Decision: Refused
Date of Recommendation: 22.10.2007
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
R 1.
There is no information in the application to justify the further extension of the existing agricultural buildings or to explain why these are "essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry" (General
Policy 3g of the Strategic Plan). Furthermore, it cannot be ignored that there are contemporaneous applications for the change of use of the site as a builder's yard which would cast further doubt on the agricultural need for further agricultural floor space.
Decision Made : ... Committee Meeting Date : ...
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
