Loading document...
The Adviser has indicated that there are benefits for the provisions. The information within this submission has expanded on the previous refused scheme, which was in terms of needs remains the same. The question therefore is whether the new information is sufficient to meet the requirements of General Policy 3. A previous concern of the Planning Authority was the fact that the applicant was indicating that the facility is essential; but the first application submitted proposed the portakabin for ancillary living accommodation first, and not to be used as proposed now. It should also be highlighted that approval (appeal pending) has been granted for a new agricultural barn (slight smaller than existing) located to the northwest of the portakabin and the existing barn. An argument could be made that the facilities included within the portakabin could be enclosed within the barn/s. However, there would seem clear reasoning why the storage of medicines, chemicals, washing facilities is kept separate from the main barns and consequently animals within the barns. Overall, taking all matters into account and the additional reasoning, the proposed use would seem to be essential and beneficial to the farm holding in terms of bio-security, animal welfare but also preventing cross contamination. The Agricultural Advisor does support the application and therefore it is considered the need for the proposal is acceptable. When the justification for an agricultural building has been proven and accepted by the Planning Authority, Environment Policy 15 requires to be considered. This policy states that such development must be sited as close as is practically possible to existing building groups and be appropriate in terms of scale, materials, colour, siting and form to ensure that all new developments are sympathetic to the landscape and built environment of which they will form a part. The existing building is a flat roofed portakabin, which has been clad in slab wood. The main dwelling house is a traditional designed Manx farm house, finished with render and a slate pitched roof. The agricultural barn is metal clad (dark green in colour) which is one of the materials used for agricultural barns on the Island. As indicated within Environment Policy 15 any agricultural building must be appropriate in terms of scale, materials, colour, siting and form to ensure that all new developments are sympathetic to the landscape and built environment of which they will form a part. A previous reason for refusal was due to the design, size and finish of the portakabin, being out of keeping with the countryside. It is important to highlight the Inspectors Report for the previous application (09/01263/R). The Inspector stated:- "Having visited the appeal site, I found the appearance of the portakabin to be quiet alien to other forms of development locally and sited some distance from the main farmhouse. The appellant has offered to remove the cladding, but even then the remaining building would still be out of character and in my opinion, objectionable in visual terms." To overcome these concerns the applicants have proposed to clad the portakabin in metal green sheeting to match the existing agricultural barn and the approved barn. Furthermore, the applicants proposed a lean-to roof design. These proposals would certainly help the building to blend in with the farm complex and adjacent farm building/s. The design and finish of the building would be what you would expect to see within a farm complex. Therefore, it is considered the proposed finish and design would comply with Environment Policy 15. RECOMMENDATION In conclusion, given the additional reasoning's for the agricultural need of the proposal and given the proposed design and finish of the proposal, the proposal would comply with General Policy 3 and Environment Policy 15 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. Accordingly, it is recommended that the planning application be approved. PARTY STATUS It is considered that the following meet the criteria of Government Circular 1/06 and should be afforded interested party status: - Lezayre Parish Commissioners - The owners/occupiers of 11 Mull View, Kirk Michael The Department of Transport Highways and Traffic Division is now part of the Department of Infrastructure of which the planning authority is part. As such, the Highways and Traffic Division cannot be afforded party status in this instance. --- Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 27.01.2011 ---
Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal C: Conditions for approval N: Notes attached to conditions R: Reasons for refusal O: Notes attached to refusals
C.
Prior to the occupation of the proposed agricultural building for the uses approved under this application (agricultural storage, washing/changing facilities & farm office) the metal sheet cladding (all elevations) and lean-to roof must be erected as proposed in drawings 8, 9 & 10.
C.
The building must be used only for agricultural purposes.
C.
The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
C.
This approval relates to the erection of a portakabin for agricultural use (Retrospective) as proposed in the submitted documents and drawings 8, 9 and 10 all received on 17th November 2010.
The retention of the portacabin type building for the proposed use is not considered essential for the conduct of agricultural activities on the site, and that the facilities it provided could be located in other existing or approved buildings within the farm complex consequently the proposal would be contrary to General Policy 3 and Environmental Policy 15 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan.
15 March 2011
10/01696/B
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Authority in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the Town and Country (Development Procedure) 2005
Decision Made: Refuse Authority Meeting Date: 10/3/11 Signed: Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Authority an additional report/condition reason is required. Signing Officer to delete as appropriate YES/NO
After discussion the Planning Committee reversed the recommendation and refused the application. The Committee where concerned of the agricultural justification of the proposal given the existing barn and the recently approved barn, and questioned why the storage proposed for the portakabin could not be incorporated within.
The Planning Committee where happy with the proposed design and finish (i.e. cladding) to overcome any concerns of design issues as the previous application.
Overall the application was refused on the following grounds:- "The retention of the portacabin type building for the proposed use is not considered essential for the conduct of agricultural activities on the site, and that the facilities it provided could be located in other existing or approved buildings within the farm complex consequently the proposal would be contrary to General Policy 3 and Environmental Policy 15 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan."
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown