Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
17/00033/B Page 1 of 7
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 17/00033/B Applicant : Andrew Qualtrough & Andrea Qualtrough Proposal : Variation of conditions 4, 5 of 01/02440/A and 4 of 02/02584/REM to remove personal and agricultural occupancy conditions to the dwelling Site Address : Cronk Mooar Andreas Road Ramsey Isle of Man IM7 4EF
Case Officer : Miss Abigail Morgan Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 18.10.2017
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. Insufficient evidence has been submitted to demonstrate that the property is no longer required for occupation by an agricultural worker in the Island. Accordingly the removal of the agricultural occupancy condition is insufficiently justified. The proposal therefore fails to accord with policies in the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 that seek to control development in the countryside, having particular regard to General Policy 3f, Environment Policy 14, Housing Policy 8 and paragraph 8.9.4, which states that agricultural occupancy conditions should '...not usually be removed on subsequent applications unless it is shown that the long-term need for dwellings for agricultural workers, both on the particular farm and in the locality, no longer warrants reserving the dwelling for that purpose.'
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the following persons should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):
o Owner of tenanted farmland at Regaby, given address 4 Priory Park, Nottinghamshire.
==== PAGE 2 ====
17/00033/B Page 2 of 7
While providing information pertinent to the application the comments primarily relate to land ownership and his intentions with his land
__
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE PROPOSAL
0.0 UPDATE SINCE CONSIDERATION BY PLANNING COMMITTEE ON 21 AUGUST 2017 0.1 The application description has been amended to variation of conditions 4, 5 of 01/02440/A and 4 of 02/02584/REM to remove personal and agricultural occupancy conditions to the dwelling. This was done to ensure that the application achieved the aims of the applicant, which is to be able to remove all restrictions in order to access a mortgage. As result of this the application was readvertised for a period of 21 days.
Additional Information
0.2 As part of the readvertisement the applicant provided additional information. This information sets down the background to the applicants' building at Cronk Mooar and the current situation with regards to loss of land and their future ambitions. In essence during the time taken for consideration of the application they lost apx 100acres of land which resulted in them having to sell the majority of their stock as they no longer had sufficient space for them. Their remaining land is a secure tenancy on 47 acres at Cronk Aust and 10 acres at Ballanoa (short term 11 month let). In order to have money to purchase land and secure their future in farming they need the conditions removed.
Further Representations
0.3 On readvertisement of the application only Lezayre Commissioners have responded with the following comments; 'Although the Commissioners agree that the condition can be removed, they would like to see an alternative conditon that the property cannot be sold for a period of time, they suggest 15 years. This would allow the farm to continue. Further the Commissioners are of the opinion that the agricultural condition policy should be reviewed as it is not fit for purpose'.
Assessment
0.4 While sympathetic to the applicants' position, as previously reported it is difficult to conclude other than the application does not comply with the requirements of the policy. While the applicants' personal circumstances could be a material consideration, if considered exceptional, it is a perverse situation that in order to further their agricultural ambitions they need remove the condition that links the dwelling to farming, a decision that could ultimately result in the loss of an agricultural dwelling. The wish to provide an uplift in value to raise funds is understandable, but it would be an inappropriate use of the planning system. Many could argue that if planning approval was granted for development, they would have the equity to invest in something else. That is not a reason to grant planning approval. A decision should be made on the merits of the proposal itself, and approval for the dwelling was predicated on the basis that the dwelling was needed for agricultural workers.
0.5 With regards to the comments made by the Commissioners a condition of this nature would not be lawful and in any event would be unlikely to achieve the aims of the applicant.
0.6 The rest of the report remains the same as previously circulated.
==== PAGE 3 ====
17/00033/B Page 3 of 7
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The site is the curtilage of Cronk Mooar, Andreas Road. The principle and reserved matters for the dwelling were approved in 2002 (01/02440/A) and 2003 (02/02584/REM) and the property was approved as an agricultural worker's dwelling. This approval allowed for a second dwelling at Cronk Aust farm, which was owned and run by the then applicant's parents who were to retire and did not wish to leave the current farm house.
1.2 The condition on both decision notices states; 'The subsequent occupation of the dwelling by any person(s) other than Mr A Qualtrough or his immediate dependents is limited to those employed in or last employed and retired from full-time agricultural work'.
1.2 The dwelling was approved on the basis that the intended occupants, the current applicants, wanted to work full time in agriculture. Supporting information was submitted as part of the planning applications setting out that Mr and Mrs Qualtrough worked for more than 1300 hours per annum, which at the time exceeded the draft Agricultural Holdings Scheme definition of an agricultural business which was working at least 1100 hours per annum. The committee accepted the justification for the second dwelling at the holding.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the removal of the agricultural occupancy condition. The applicants have stated that they have no intention of selling the house or leaving it but are aware as tenant farmers that the land they farm (apx 200 acres) could be sold leaving them with no land to farm. Apx 75% of the land they farm is rented.
2.2 In support of their application they state that potentially two of their landlords have a desire to sell their land and they would like to be in a position to purchase. They have been to a number of banks who are unwilling to lend any money against a property with an agricultural occupancy condition.
2.3 They are seeking to remove the condition in order that could borrow money to buy the land they currently rent.
2.4 The applicant has provided in support of their application a letter from Charles Garside MRCIS, RICS Registered Valuer of Deanwood Management which states that historically having the tie on a property can reduce its value in the region of 33%, now a property of in excess of 2500 sq ft, it could be in region of 40-45%.
2.5 The applicants also refers to 21 other applications, since 1988, where an agricultural occupancy condition has been removed and 6 where the condition has been varied, either by non-compliance with the condition or in 2 cases a change to equestrian or holiday accommodation.
2.6 They have also carried out an exercise identifying other farmhouses within a mile radius of the application property that could be occupied demonstrating there is no agricultural need for their property.
2.7 As part of the submission the applicants also question the validity of the condition and refer to recent certificates of lawfulness relating to other sites, which were permitted on the basis that they occupiers had not worked in agricultural and stating that as Mr Qualtrough has another job they have been in breach of the condition for 12 years.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area which is not designated for development on The Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982 and as such there is a presumption against development in such areas and if there were no house there at present, any new dwelling
==== PAGE 4 ====
17/00033/B Page 4 of 7
would have to pass the test of agricultural need to have a chance of being approved. The Strategic Plan offers the following advice regarding the removal of agricultural occupancy conditions:
"7.13.3 In terms of new agricultural dwellings, permission will not be granted unless real agricultural need is demonstrated and will in every case be assessed in terms of need, sensitive siting, design, and size, and be subject to an agricultural occupancy condition."
"Housing Policy 8: Where permission is granted for an agricultural dwelling, a condition will be attached restricting the occupation to a person engaged or last engaged solely in agriculture; or a widow or widower of such a person, or any resident dependants."
"8.9.4 Such a condition will not usually be removed on subsequent applications unless it is shown that the long-term need for dwellings for agricultural workers, both on the particular farm and in the locality, no longer warrants reserving the dwelling for that purpose."
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 As stated above, the dwelling was approved in 2003. The planning history of the dwelling is set out above but of equal relevance is the history of the other properties within the vicinity.
10/01090/LAW - Certificate to make lawful the residential use of property in contravention of planning condition restricting occupancy to agricultural workers at Ballavilley, Dhoor, Ramsey. Approved as the submitted evidence was sufficient to demonstrate that, for a period of time in excess of ten years, the dwelling had been used in contravention of a planning condition restricting occupancy to agricultural workers.
Ballacannell (formerly Bolivia), Dhoor, has an agricultural occupancy condition
Slightly further afield there is a reserved matters application for the erection of an agricultural worker's dwelling (17/00798/REM) at Field 114374, Nassau Road, Dogmills. The principle was approved by planning committee under 16/01130/A as there was considered to be sufficient justification of an agricultural workers dwelling on the holding.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 DoI Highway Services do not oppose. 10.02.2017.
5.2 Lezayre Commissioners have objected as the property was built for agricultural purposes and should continue as such. 13.02.2017.
5.3 Comments have been received from landlord of c. 100 acres of the tenanted land at Regaby, stating that these are not for sale and nor does he plan to sell them as they are very much part of his plans going forward. 10.02.17.
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 It would appear that at least some of the dwellings which were approved on the basis of agricultural justification seem to have had less than robust tests of long term need before having been approved. In this current case the dwelling was approved so that the long term owner of Cronk Aust could remain in the associated farmhouse while their daughter and husband could grow an agricultural holding.
6.2 The test is whether there is still a need for this dwelling in agricultural terms. The applicants state that they work in farming and need to release equity in order to be able to buy some of the land they currently tenant. This would suggest that the dwelling is still needed for agricultural purposes.
==== PAGE 5 ====
17/00033/B Page 5 of 7
6.3 When considering applications for the removal of such a condition, the over-arching consideration is whether the long-term need for that particular dwelling for agricultural workers, both on the particular farm and in the locality, no longer warrants reserving the dwelling for that purpose. The policy does, therefore, allow for the removal of such conditions or 'ties'.
6.4 The issue in this case is challenging as generally the policy only allows for it to be removed unless it is shown that the long-term need for dwellings for agricultural workers no longer warrants reserving the dwelling for that purpose. The applicants in this instance want the tie removed in order to grow their agricultural holding should land be made available to sell to them. On the evidence submitted and the representations received from the current owner of apx 50% of their holdings there is insufficient evidence to suggest that the land the currently rented is likely to come forward for sale in the near future.
6.5 It is difficult to conclude other than that there is still a requirement for an agricultural dwelling in this location and as such it is recommended that the condition is not allowed to be removed.
Other matters
6.6 As part of the supporting information the applicants refer to a recently permitted Certificate of Lawfulness where the occupants had occupied the property for more than 10 years in breach of the condition and intimate that as they have other jobs they have also have been in breach of their condition. The condition on this dwelling is not the usual condition and only restricts subsequent occupation other than Mr A Qualtrough and his immediate dependents to those employed or last employed and retired from full-time agricultural work. So in this instance, the occupation by Mr Qualtrough if he were not employed in agriculture would not be in breach of this condition.
7.0 PARTY STATUS 7.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
(a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; (b) 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; (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material, in this case Department of Infrastructure Highway Services and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
With effect from 1 June 2015, the Transfer of Planning & Building Control Functions Order 2015 amends the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 to give effect to the meaning of the word 'Department' to be the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture unless otherwise directed by that Order.
__
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.
==== PAGE 6 ====
17/00033/B Page 6 of 7
Decision Made : Permitted
Committee Meeting Date: 30.10.2017
Signed : A Morgan Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report was required
YES/NO See below
PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 30.10.2017
Application No. :
17/00033/B Applicant : Andrew Qualtrough & Andrea Qualtrough Proposal : Variation of conditions 4, 5 of 01/02440/A and 4 of 02/02584/REM to remove personal and agricultural occupancy conditions to the dwelling Site Address : Cronk Mooar Andreas Road Ramsey Isle of Man IM7 4EF
Presenting Officer : Miss Abigail Morgan
Addendum to the Officer’s Report
The Members indicated that they were inclined, by majority, to overturn the recommendation of the case officer and approve the proposal based upon the unique and exceptional circumstances of this application and the personal circumstances of the applicant. They considered that in this instance the removal of the conditions upheld the spirit of the policy which was to further agricultural enterprises.
They also took into account conditions applied to the previous planning approvals for PA01/02440/A and PA02/02584/REM and determined that should the application be approved, and subject to the following conditions, the standard 4 year time constraint and the suspension of Permitted Development rights.
Conditions of Approval
C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.
==== PAGE 7 ====
17/00033/B Page 7 of 7
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. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no garages or other free standing buildings shall be erected within the curtilage of the dwelling known as Cronk Mooar, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, without the prior written approval of the Department.
Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.
Plans/Drawings/Information
This approval relates to drawings AQLP1 and AQSP1 received on the 11th January 2017 and the supporting information submitted on the 11th January and 5th September 2017.
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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal