Officer Planning Report

Planning Report And Recommendations {{table:14654}}

Officer's Report

THE APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE DEVELOPMENT CONTROL MANAGER.

The Application Site

1. The application site comprises the curtilage of Swallow Beg, Gibdale Farm, Bayrauyr Road, St Marks, Ballasalla, located to the north of the Bayrauyr Road and northeast of the Ballamodha.

1. The site is accessed via a farm lane (concrete finish) which runs from the Bayrauyr Road in a northerly direction for approximately 150 metres to the application site. The site contains a recently constructed modern barn with hard surfacing fronting the barn.

1. Also within the ownership of the applicant is Gibdale Farm which comprises of the main dwelling house (agricultural tie attached) and associated converted stone barns.

The Proposal

1. The application seeks approval for the erection of an agricultural barn. The proposed barn would be sited 4.5 metres to the northeast of the existing barn, and would have a width of 18.3 metres, a depth of 9.1 metres and a maximum height of 4.8 metres.

1. The proposed barn would be used for the storing of chipping and seasoning of wood chip for the applicants personnel use as a Bio Mass fuel on the farm. The wood source is to be grown on the farm.

1. In terms of size and scale the proposal would be smaller than the existing barn which has a width of 27.5 metres, a depth of 8.9 metres and a ridge height of 5.2 metres. Approval of this barn (see planning history – 06/00256/B) included the eastern elevation being open, however from visiting the site it was evident that each bay had an individual roller shutter door with a pedestrian access within. No approval was granted for the roller shutter doors.

Planning History

1. The following previous planning applications are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application:-

1. Conversion of existing barn to self catering accommodation – Barn, Swallow Beg, Gibdale Farm – 10/01623/B – APPROVED

1. Additional use of dwelling as tourist accommodation – Swallow Beg, Gibdale Farm – APPROVED

1. Creation of a farm track - Gibdale Farmhouse, Bayrauyr Road – APPROVED
2. Variation of condition 3 of approved agricultural dwelling (01/00677B) to allow use as a separate unit of residential accommodation - Swallow Beg, Gibdale Farm - 09/01901/C – APPROVED
3. Erection of a replacement agricultural worker's dwelling - Gibdale Farm, Bayrauyr Road - 09/00703/B – APPROVED
4. Erection of replacement dwelling and garage - Gibdale Farm, Bayrauyr Road - 08/00574/B – REFUSED at appeal
5. Erection of an agricultural building - 06/00256/B – APPROVED
6. Removal of an agricultural workers occupancy condition on bungalow approved under 84/00136B - 04/01462/B – REFUSED at appeal
7. Conversion of agricultural building to agricultural dwelling - Gibdale Farm, Bayrauyr Road - 01/00677/B – APPROVED
8. Alterations and extensions - Gibdale, Ballamodha - 90/01327/B – APPROVED
9. Erection of a Dwelling (agricultural workers) - Gibdale Farmhouse, Bayrauyr Road - 84/00136/B - APPROVED

Planning Policy

1. The application site is within an area recognised as being an area of 'White Land', not zoned for development under the Isle of Man Development Plan Order 1982. The site is not within a Conservation Area, nor within an area zoned as High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance.
2. Under the Modified Draft Area Plan for the South the site is on land not zoned for development, and the Landscape Assessment indicates the site as being within an area is characterised as being "Incised Inland Slopes".
3. In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 contains one policy that is considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application.

General Policy 3 states:

"Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of:

• (a) essential housing for agricultural workers who have to live close to their place of work; (Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10);
• (b) conversion of redundant rural buildings which are of architectural, historic, or social value and interest; (Housing Policy 11);
• (c) previously developed land which contains a significant amount of building; where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environment; and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment;
• (d) the replacement of existing rural dwellings; (Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14);
• (e) location-dependent development in connection with the working of minerals or the provision of necessary services;
• (f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry;
• (g) development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative; and
• (h) buildings or works required for interpretation of the countryside, its wildlife or heritage."

1. Environment Policy 15 states:

"Where the Department is satisfied that there is agricultural or horticultural need for a new building (including a dwelling), sufficient to outweigh the general policy against development in

the countryside, and that the impact of this development including buildings, accesses, servicing etc. is acceptable, 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.

Only in exceptional circumstances will buildings be permitted in exposed or isolated areas or close to public highways and in all such cases will be subject to appropriate landscaping. The nature and materials of construction must also be appropriate to the purposes for which it is intended.

Where new agricultural buildings are proposed next to or close to existing residential properties, care must be taken to ensure that there is no unacceptable adverse impact through any activity, although it must be borne in mind that many farming activities require buildings which are best sited, in landscape terms, close to existing building groups in the rural landscape."

Representations

1. Malew Parish Commissioners would like to seek clarification from the planning office whether the proposed use of the building concurs with description of agricultural use before making comment. It is the Commissioners opinion that the use should be described as light industrial.

1. The Department of Infrastructure Highways Division do not oppose the planning application. They do not consider there to be any adverse traffic management, parking or road safety implications.

Assessment

1. The starting point for any development within the countryside (i.e. not zoned for development) is General Policy 3 paragraph F of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. 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.

1. Further to this policy, Environment Policy 15 also needs consideration, as the first paragraph of this policy requires the Planning Authority to be satisfied that there is agricultural or horticultural need for a new building, sufficient to outweigh the general policy against development in the countryside.

1. To find whether the proposed barn would have a sufficient justification to comply with General Policy 3 and the first aspect of Environment Policy 15, the Authority has consulted the Agricultural Advisor from the Department of Environment, Food and Agricultural (DEFA). They have stated that from the records held with this department, the applicant is not registered as a farm business. Some of the land appears to be occupied by neighbouring farmers.

1. Whilst not indicated within this submission, as part of a previous application (09/01901/C) the applicant indicated that the farm holding is only 60 acres, 21 acres of which are woodland and/or bog. The red/blue line submitted with this application is the same as indicated under application 09/01901/C, therefore it is reasonable to consider the acreage remains the same.

1. Advice was also sort from the advisor regarding the existing barn and its current use. The advisor indicates he does not know the usage of the barn, but if it was to be utilised for agricultural purposes then it would be most likely to be for storage only as it would not be suitable for the housing of livestock.

1. A concern the planning authority has is the use of the existing building. Visiting the site there appears to be little evidence of any agricultural activity. Outside the barn (hardstanding area) a portakabin, a bio disc, two vans and what appears to be building rubble/surfacing material was stored. No inspection was made inside the barn.

1. It is reasonable when the planning authority is considering an application for a further barn, that adequate justification for new barn is provided, especially given any development in the

countryside is an exception to planning policy. For this reason the planning authority has contacted the applicant asking for further justification and clarification regarding the use of the existing barn. The applicant initially advised that: "The current agricultural barn is used for purposes in relation to Gibdale Farm. The proposed barn is to be used for the seasoning, drying and storing of timber for use in the bio mass boiler for the farm heating. The proposed barn must be detached from the existing barn to reduce the risk of fire. The proposed barn will be open at the front as shown on the plans to allow the natural seasoning of the timber.

1. The planning authority asked for further clarification for the "purposes in relation to Gibdale Farm". The applicant responded by stating that "...the current agricultural barn is used for agricultural related activities. Due to the exposed nature of the farm and the loss of a MF 250 tractor and JCB through exposure in the past, all tools, machinery, tractors and implements must be covered, especially in the winter months. The applicant also reiterates the previous reasons in paragraph 6.10, but also states that; "The proposed barn must be detached from the existing barn to reduce the risk of fire and to conform to insurers policy conditions."

1. There remains concern over the use of the existing barn for agricultural activities and the need of a further barn. The existing barn is substantial in relation to a relatively small agricultural holding (60 acres), which is not currently registered as a farm business with the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture. Allowing a further barn is considered inappropriate given the proposal to store chipping and seasoning of wood chip for use as a Bio Mass fuel on the farm could be potentially accommodated within the existing barn.

1. A concern also arises in terms of the source of the fuel which would be used by the bio-mass boiler. The applicant has indicated that the wood source is to be grown on the farm. This seems to indicate that the wood source has yet to be planted. Due to this it is reasonable to consider it would be a number of years until the trees (e.g. Harvest periods for Willow trees 3 to 5 years and Poplar 4 to 5 years) have grown sufficiently to be used as a fuel source. Therefore, there is concern that there is no real agricultural need at the moment for the proposal given there is only an intention to grow the wood source on the farm. It is therefore considered wrong to permit a new building before the proposed tree planting exists. If for any reason the tree planting did not start, or failed, this would leave a new building in the countryside for which there is no special need. Therefore it follows that the proposed barn is unacceptable at this stage, partially given that a larger barn exists within the site which potentially could accommodate the proposal.

1. The applicants have indicated that the proposed use cannot be accommodated within the existing due to the concern of the risk of fire and to conform to insurer's policy conditions. Due to this the Senior Building Control Officer was asked whether the existing building could be utilised whilst still retained its original use. He indicates that: "The existing barn can be utilised to house the proposed new heating system. Fire separation walls can be built (compartment wall) to standard of minimum of 240 minutes fire resistance which conforms to with insurance companies rules (Loss Prevention Council – LPS 1208 issue 2.1 September 2005 – Fire resistance requirements for elements of construction to provide compartmentation)." He goes on to state that: "Many large industrial type buildings with very high fire loadings are only required under Building Regulations to be separated with party walls of 60 minutes fire protection and such walls can be built in block works which would increase the level of fire resistance up to four hours depending on its thickness."

1. The next aspects of Environment Policy 15 which needs consideration are is regarding the siting and size and the design (materials & colour) of the proposal and whether the proposal would be a sympathetic to the landscape and built environment of which they will form a part.

1. The design, finish, form and scale is of a standard agricultural barn which is common throughout the Island. A condition should be attached requiring the 'profile coated metal sheeting' being a dark green colour to ensure the building blends with the countryside and existing buildings.

1. The proposal from the Bayrauyr Road and the Ballamodha Straight would be well screened given the distance the barn would be from the highways, but mainly due to the roadside landscaping and landscaping between the highway and the application site. The proposal would be sited next to the existing barn and would not be in an isolated position. This siting is what Environment Policy 15 seeks to ensure development does not result in sporadic and isolated buildings in the countryside. Consequently, views from the public highways of the proposal would be from distance and therefore the proposal would not have a significant impact upon the visual amenities of the area.

Recommendation

1. It is considered that the proposal would not comply with the relevant planning policies of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (20th June 2007), and for the reasons set out in this report, it is recommended that the application be refused.

Party Status

1. It is considered that the following meet the criteria of Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (d) and should be afforded interested party status:

Malew Parish Commissioners; and The Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture.

1. 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: Refused

Date of Recommendation: 12.03.2012

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

R 1.

The Planning Authority is not persuaded that there is sufficient justification for the proposed building to warrant setting aside the presumption against development outside of areas zoned for development. As such, the proposal is concluded to represent unwarranted development that is detrimental to the amenity of the countryside contrary to the provisions of General Policy 3 and Environmental Policy 15 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007.

I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the Town and Country (Development Procedure) 2005

Decision Made: [Handwritten signature] Committee Meeting Date: 19/3/12

Signed: [Handwritten signature] Presenting Officer

Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason is required. Signing Officer to delete as appropriate

YSS/NO