131683

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                                 16/00116/B
                                 Page  1  of  4

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 16/00116/B Applicant : Lee Cain Proposal : Erection of an agricultural building Site Address : Trollaby Farm Trollaby Lane Union Mills Isle Of Man IM4 4AW

Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken : 03.03.2016 Site Visit : 03.03.2016 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE

1.1 The application site is a large area of land associated with Trollaby Farm, which is situated to the east of Glen Vine and south of the A23 Mount Rule Road. The part of the site specifically relating to the proposal is a small and tightly packed collection of farm buildings, which are more or less surrounded by trees and Manx banks. An access lane, which doubles as a public footpath, runs right through the collection of buildings and connects them with Upper Trollaby Lane to the north and Trollaby Lane to the south; these lanes then connect to Mount Rule Road and the A1 respectively. None of these buildings is visible from roads, though clearly the footpath, which widens appreciably where the farm buildings are found, provides clear views of the buildings within the site.

1.2 From the site visit it was clear that all these buildings were in active use, while storage of some plant and hay outside the buildings was also clearly apparent. Several of the barns had a number of cattle within them.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL

2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the erection of a cattle shed on the northwestern edge of the collection of buildings. The land here is flat and evidently suffers from water accumulation. To the northwest is an existing Manx bank, which the applicant - the farmer - indicates 2m of length of that will need to be moved into the adjacent field order to accommodate the new shed. Although no drawings have been provided of this, it is considered that the scale / extent of these works is not sufficient to require this level of detail.

2.2 The shed would be finished in a traditional mixture of Yorkshire boarding, concrete walling and green roof sheeting. It would measure 4m to its roof apex, which is of a shallow and asymmetric pitch, and 3.5m to the eaves. It would have a footprint of 24m by just over 9m, and would be of similar size, mass and finish as the neighbouring unit. One of the long sides of the building would have feed barriers along its full length, while, in addition to a pair of gates in one gable end, the remainder would be of solid Yorkshire boarding.

2.3 The applicant indicates that the new shed would is needed, and would be sufficient in size, to prevent cattle over-wintering outside.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                                 16/00116/B
                                 Page  2  of  4

3.1 The site has been the subject of three previous applications seeking approval for the erection of new or replacement agricultural buildings, but each of these was approved some time ago - PAs 01/01148/B, 99/01124/B and 96/01090/B were all approved. Each application carried the same family name as the current applicant, indicating a long-term interest in the site.

4.0 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN

4.1 The site falls within an area of 'white land' as zoned on the 1982 Development Plan and as such is not zoned for any particular kind of development. It is also zoned as being an Area of High Landscape Value. As such, General Policy 3 and Environment Policies 1, 2 and 15 apply to the proposal. While these policies set out a general presumption against development in areas not zoned for development (and especially so in areas of high landscape value), there is also a key exception in the case of agricultural need. Environment Policy 15 requires appropriate thought to be given to the size, mass, material and siting of the proposed building relative to any highway safety concerns; again, especial care must be taken in cases where a building is proposed to be located in an area of high landscape value. This policy also presumes that a building should be located near to the existing cluster of buildings, where one exists.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Marown Parish Commissioners offered no objection to the application on 23.02.2016, while a day later Highway Services of the Department of Infrastructure identified it as having no highway implications.

6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 As indicated earlier, the key assessment point is whether or not the building is essential for the conduct of agriculture, and thereafter whether or not the particulars of the proposed building (size, mass, material and siting) are acceptable.

6.2 The farm appears to operate in what might normally be considered a 'traditional' way in that the few buildings that do exist here sit close by one another and are also located fairly centrally in the larger farmholding, albeit that any dwelling associated with the buildings is not adjacent to these. The applicant clearly owns a significant head of cattle, and to provide for their improved care via the proposed building is welcome in principle, especially as the existing buildings were clearly being used at least close to, if not at, full capacity at the time the site visit was undertaken. The land on which the building would be sited is at present used to access the rear of some of the buildings and does not have any particular visual merit worth protecting. The fact, also, that the farm has not had any new buildings erected for well over a decade also suggests a basis on which to support the proposal in terms of enabling the growth and modernisation of the agricultural enterprise.

6.3 In view of the above, it is considered that there is a sufficient need for a new agricultural building within the application site. Moreover, any harm that might arise would be largely from visual impact rather than anything else; this is considered below.

6.4 In terms of the detail, the form, mass, finish and location of the proposed building are considered acceptable. A helpful drawing showing the scale of the proposed building relative to - and clearly reflecting - those adjacent demonstrates that it would not be out of scale with these, while the traditional finishes are welcome and will help minimise the visual impact of the building from both further afield (such as these views are) and also from close by on the immediately adjacent public footpath. The new building would, if built, be very much 'read' against those existing. That the building would reinforce the tightly-spaced nature of the Trollaby Farm buildings is particularly welcome in concentrating the buildings in one location and thus minimising their impact as far as is practically possible.

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                                 16/00116/B
                                 Page  3  of  4

6.5 The building would not have any impact on highway safety except for perhaps during the construction works, during which time the public footpath might be obstructed, though this is cannot be a material Planning consideration. The fact that there are pre-existing agricultural buildings here is such that any user of the footpath would already be keenly aware of its potential use by plant or presence of animals, and an additional building will not materially affect this situation.

7.0 RECOMMENDATION

7.1 The proposal is considered acceptable in both principle and detail, and is therefore recommended for approval. However, and as often is the case with applications such as this, a condition requiring the building's removal should it cease to be needed for agricultural use is recommended.

8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

o The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; o The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested; o Highway Services within the Department of Infrastructure, and o The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 22.03.2016

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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. The building must be used only for agricultural purposes.

REASON: the countryside is protected from development and an exception is being made on the basis of agricultural need. As such the building must be used for the purposes for which it is approved.

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                                 16/00116/B
                                 Page  4  of  4

The development hereby approved relates to the plans, elevation and plan drawings and photographs, all date-stamped as having been received 4th February 2016.

I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Senior Planning Officer in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.

Decision Made : Permitted

Date: 24.03.2016

Determining officer

Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett

Senior Planning Officer

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.