DEC Officer Report

Application No.: 22/00532/B Applicant: Mr Peter Leonard Proposal: Erection of agricultural building Site Address: Field 624395 Ballavelt Farm Cornaa Ramsey Isle Of Man Planning Officer: Mrs Vanessa Porter Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 03.10.2022 _________________________________________________________________ Reasons for Refusal R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons - R 1. The erection of the building and the large amount of hardstanding in an area not zoned for development would result in an inappropriate development in the countryside, and there is no over-riding national need in land use planning terms for the proposed building which would outweighs the requirement to protect these areas contrary to Environment Policy 1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. - R 2. There is insufficient agricultural justification for the siting of the building to outweigh the presumption against development here or enough to exempt the development as having sufficient agricultural need to pass as being essential for the conduct of agriculture. As such, the proposed development would fail to comply with General Policy 3 (f) and Environment Policy 15 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. - R 3. The proposed stables and hardstanding all within an isolated and open position within the countryside, and within close proximity to the highway where it would be particularly prominent would have a detrimental impact upon the character and appearance of the countryside contrary to Environmental Policy 21 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. _______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report THE APPLICATION SITE

1.1 The application site is field 624395, Ballavelt Farm, Cornaa, Ramsey which is a field situated within approximately 81 acres which is associated with Ballavelt Farm, which is situated to the East of Maughold Road. - 1.2 The field is accessed via a farm gate to the South of the site. THE PROPOSAL

2.1 The current planning application seeks approval for the erection of an agricultural barn measuring approximately 18.2m by 13.7m with an overall height of 5.05m. To the South East elevation there is proposed to be an approximate 4m sliding door and there is proposed eight rooflights to the roof. - 2.2 The barn is to have six boxes measuring 3m by 3m with a tack room and a feed room. - 2.3 Also included within the application is a large parcel of hard standing which is to surround the barn by 3 metres to the North, South and West elevations measuring 3m wide and to the East elevation approximately measuring 16.6m by 19.6m. PLANNING HISTORY

3.1 There are no previous Planning Applications associated with the application site. PLANNING POLICY - 4.1 The site lies within an area zoned as "not for development" on the 1982 Development Plan, North Map. The site is not within a Conservation Area, Flood Zone, nor an area zoned as High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance.

4.2 Given the nature of the application it is appropriate to consider General Policy 3 (f) which sets out exceptions to development in the countryside including operations essential for conduct of agriculture, Environment Policy 1 which seeks to protect the countryside from unwarranted development and Environment Policy 15 which outline the general design criteria for agricultural buildings.

4.3 The Town and Country Planning Act 1999 states "agriculture" includes 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." - 4.4 Reference is made within the application for the keeping of horses as such Environment Policies 19, 20 and 21 which seek that the development of equestrian activities and buildings will not result in a loss of local amenity and/or high quality agricultural land, that the proposed structure can satisfactory accommodate an increase in traffic and that the building is reflective of its purpose with no cavity walled construction. REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 The following representations can be viewed online in full;

5.2 Highway Services have considered the application and state, "After reviewing this Application, Highway Services HDC finds it to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and /or parking." (19.05.22)

5.3 Garff Commissioners have considered the application and state they have no objections. (25.05.22) - 5.4 Manx National Heritage have considered the application and recommend that any works are taken outside of the bird nesting season. (18.05.22) ASSESSMENT

6.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application is its principle

- 6.2 PRINCIPLE

• 6.2.1 First it is relevant to note that the application form and the almost all the information provided states that the proposal is for an agricultural building, whilst this is the case reference is made within the covering letter and also within the labour calculation given to horses. As such, the principle of the development is assessed under both the policies for agricultural use (GP3 f, EP1 and EP15) and then under the policies for the keeping of horses (EP19, 20 and 21).
• 6.2.2 When looking at the principle of agriculture in applications such as this where there is a proposed new agricultural development within the countryside, it is necessary to assess whether the principle of the development prior to any other material matter is acceptable, with the starting point for this development being General Policy 3(f) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan.
• 6.2.3 This policy states that development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of those buildings which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry.
• 6.2.4 The planning letter with the application states that the property extension to "approximately 81.17 acres" and that the labour calculation is based on 8 horses, 50 breeding ewes, 30 rearing lambs and 40 free range chickens, with plans to increase the stock in future.
• 6.2.5 With the reasoning for the proposed barn being the evidence provided with the space calculations and that the existing structures on site are either unsuitable for the "housing of living stock and modern agriculture due to the lack of suitable ventilation and restrictive access" and that "the existing stone buildings have the potential to be converted in the future and although there is no current desire to do so, siting an agricultural shed in close proximity will limit the future potential." The planning letter also states that there is a steel framed building on site measuring 18.28m by 6.096m which would require some attention prior to its use.
• 6.2.6 The existing site as a whole has several structures upon the site, including the stone buildings and the steel framed building mentioned above. The information provided in itself is contradictory, by stating that the stone buildings are not suitable for livestock or modern agriculture but are capable of being converted in the future, does not make the structures redundant from their use or incapable for the storage of bedding, feed or machinery, neither has the agent on behalf of the agent provided adequate justification to the contrary.
• 6.2.7 Moving onto the evidence provided from the agent on behalf of the applicant, the planning statement provided stated that the owners are a registered agricultural business with DEFA and a registered keeper of livestock, as such confirmation was sought from DEFA.

• 6.2.8 The confirmation back from DEFA did state that the owners are part of the Agricultural Development Scheme (ADS) of which it is relevant to note, the planning application was received in April and the application form for the ADS scheme was received in May, as such the numbers should match or be very close. There is a complete discrepancy from the numbers given for the Planning Application and for the ADS scheme of which the application for states that they have 50 breeding ewes and 30 rearing lambs and the ADS scheme states 20 ewes and 22 lambs, this is a discrepancy of 30 breeding ewes and 8 lambs. This is also different to the Building Justification sheet which states that they have 50 breeding ewes and 50 ewe lambs.
• 6.2.9 Whilst it is relevant to note the above as it makes up part of the justification for an agricultural barn, the part of information received for the application and the information received as part of the ADS scheme which is the most telling is the discrepancy within the land used for agricultural purposes. The application states that the property extends to 81.17 acres, of which this is also stated within the planning information and the Labour Calculation, of which the information provided for the ADS scheme was that only 33.99 acres were farmed with the rest of land being used for non-agricultural uses. This once again is a discrepancy between the information provided and it is unlikely that a reduced amount would have been provided to the ADS scheme as the payments are based upon the land used for farming.
• 6.2.10 Generally there is often a chicken and egg situated when it comes to agricultural need and agricultural buildings, without an established operation in place it can often be difficult to demonstrate a need for a building.
• 6.2.11 Often agricultural enterprises are the sole income of farmers and their livelihood is heavily dependent on their continued and efficient operation. The bigger and more established the farming operation the easier it's likely to be to demonstrate an agricultural need for a new building to continue the farming operation. This is not to say that smaller farm holdings or start up hobby farms should be discouraged as these can also help contribute to local economy and sustainability, but rather that their agricultural justification is proportionate to the size of the operation and that they can provide detailed evidence to support the need for any building.
• 6.2.12 The risk is that any ad hoc decisions taken on agricultural buildings without sufficient justification of need could lead to a proliferation of unwarranted large permanent buildings across the countryside which may become obsolete if the intended farming operation had not materialised as expected.
• 6.2.13 It is increasingly apparent from the information provided that there is not sufficient justification or evidence or need has been demonstrated for a building of this size and footprint within this location for agricultural purposes, with a high amount of the labour calculation being used for horses.
• 6.2.14 The definition of agriculture is "agriculture" includes 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."
• 6.2.15 No information has been given on whether the horses are going to be used for agricultural purposes e.g. slaughter or working the horses on the land, as such it is taken that the horses suggested within this application are hobby horses.
• 6.2.16 When looking at development for equestrian purposed, demonstrating need is less than what it would be for agricultural purposes as per the wording of the policies, with the test as to

• what level of development could be considered acceptable perhaps falls to a demonstrable evidence of need, for example a new stables or a ménage at an existing equestrian centre could be evidenced by the existing number of horses at the site and the established operation of the equestrian business. Limited justification could weaken an argument for equestrian development.
• 6.2.17 Firstly in terms of the potential visual impacts upon the countryside, the building would not be significantly apparent from public views, whilst there will be minimal views from the main road, this would be fleeting due to its location within the site, accordingly, this goes in favour of the application.
• 6.2.18 However, just because something can't be seen from public view does not make it acceptable. Allowing such development would set a significant adverse precedent that just because a development cannot be seen it is acceptable. Such an approach would lead to substantial amount of unacceptable development within the Manx countryside.
• 6.2.19 Not all horses need stabling although most need some form of shelter from wind, driving rain, sun and flies, protection from excessive cold or hot temperatures can also be necessary. Such shelter can be provided naturally by nearby trees or hedges or by man-made structures, and there are a number of various shelters visible around the Island some simple open fronted field shelters and others a typical low level closed timber stable with an overhanging eaves. At larger livery or riding centres there are larger equestrian buildings stabling multiple horses.
• 6.2.20 DEFRA British Standards for horse stables requires a minimum stable size of 3.65m by 3.65m for horses and a minimum clear space to the eaves of 60-90cm (2-3ft) above the ears of the horse in its normal standing position, requiring an internal height between 2.8m - 3.3m. The lowest height of the proposed stables would be 3m and the floor area of each stable compartment would be almost twice that of the recommended standard.
• 6.2.21 Whilst the living environment for horses, is not a planning issue, it is relevant to note that the proposed stabling measures at 3m by 3m which is 0.65m each way smaller than what is recommended for a horse. It is also noted that the information provided states they have 8 horses but the barn is only large enough for 6 horses, which would suggest that housing is not provided for 2 horses. There is also no ventilation provided to the barn which would be necessary.
• 6.2.22 In respect of the proposed design and finish of the building, it appears as an agricultural barn, rather than a stable building, with the structure being rendered blockwork, which is not an acceptable material for a stable block within the countryside. The location of the building is in an isolated position and would be read as being separate from any other parts of the holding. Whilst the applicants have outlined why the site was chosen and why the proposal could not be located within any of the existing structures on site, whilst this is the case as stated previously, this is not enough justification to require an additional structure and ideally, a building should be located where existing structures are to limit the impact of the proposal. There are concerns that the building is in isolated position and again contrary to EP 1 & 21. CONCLUSION

7.1 On balance, there is no overriding need for the proposed building, as has been assessed in the preceding sections of this report, no exceptions can be justified within the submission, with there being a conflict in the information provided and the information from DEFA ADS scheme, for the proposed building as required by General Policy 3.

7.2 With the above reasons, the application is recommended for refusal as the Department is not satisfied that there is sufficient justification for the proposed building to warrant setting

aside the presumption against development outside areas zoned for development. Furthermore, the proposed size and isolated position within the countryside is not considered appropriate and would harm the character and quality of the landscape.

7.3 As such, the proposal is concluded to represent unwarranted development that is detrimental to the amenity of the countryside contrary to the provision of General Policy 3(g) and Environment Policies 1, 15 and 21 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. 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 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.

Decision Made : Refused Date: 07.10.2022 Determining officer Signed : J SINGLETON Jason Singleton Principal Planner

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.