Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
24/00001/B Page 1 of 25
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. 24/00001/B Applicant : Mr Ian Kelly Proposal The erection of a new farmhouse and agricultural barn. Site Address Fields 324673, 321756 And 324674 Braaid Road Braaid Isle Of Man
Case Officer :
Toby Cowell Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation 04.11.2024
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 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 2. No development shall commence until a schedule of materials and finishes to be used in the construction of the external surfaces, including all hardsurfacing, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.
C 3. Prior to the commencement of development, a soft landscaping plan incorporating native species shall be submitted to the Department for approval in writing. The landscaping plan shall be implemented in full as per the approved details prior to the occupation of the development. Any new planting which is removed, becomes severely damaged or diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced. Replacement planting shall be in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure the delivery and retention of an appropriate landscaping scheme, in the interests of the visual amenity of the locality.
C 4. The agricultural barn hereby approved 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 buildings must be used solely for the purposes for which they are approved.
==== PAGE 2 ====
24/00001/B Page 2 of 25
C 5. In the event that the agricultural barn hereby approved is no longer used or required for agriculture they shall be removed and the ground restored to its former condition within 18 months of the date the use ceased.
Reason: The countryside is protected from development and an exception is being made on the basis of agricultural need.
C 6. The occupation of the dwelling hereby approved shall be limited to a person engaged or last engaged solely in agriculture on the Isle of Man, or a widow or widower of such a person, or any resident dependents.
Reason: The site is in an area where new dwellings are not normally approved except where an agricultural need has been established and accepted by the Department.
C 7. No external lighting may be installed without the prior consent of the Department in writing.
Reason: To prevent light pollution and impact on wildlife.
C 8. 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 extension, enlargement or other alteration of the dwelling, and no garages or other free standing buildings shall be erected within the curtilage of the dwelling hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, shall be carried out, without the prior written approval of the Department.
Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.
C 9. All areas within the visibility splays shown on the approved block site plan (dated 13.09.24) shall be reduced to a maximum height of 1.05m prior to the occupation of the development and maintained thereafter for the lifetime of the development.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
C 10. The garage hereby approved shall at all times be made available for the parking of private motor vehicles(s) and shall be retained available for such use.
Reason: To provide adequate parking provision to the dwellinghouse.
C 11. 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 development shall be undertaken under the following classes of Schedule 1 of the Order at any time:
Class 26 - Garage doors
Reason: To control future development on the site.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposed development is considered to be acceptable in principle having demonstrated a clear agricultural need for the new dwelling and barn, without sufficient detriment to the visual amenities of the immediate locality and wider landscape. The proposals are therefore considered to be in accordance with Strategic Policy 5, Spatial Policy 5, General Policies 2 and 3, and Environment Policies 1 and 15 and Housing Policies 7-9 of the Strategic Plan (2016).
Plans/Drawings/Information;
==== PAGE 3 ====
24/00001/B Page 3 of 25
This approval relates to the following drawings and documents referenced;
Proposed block site plan - PBSP 03 Proposed block site plan (enlarged) - PBSP 03E Received 17.09.24
Proposed barn floor plan - PBFP 01 Proposed barn elevations 1 - PBNESWE 01 Proposed barn elevations 2 - PBSENWE 01 Farm land map 1 Farm land map 2 Farm land map 3 Farm land map 4 Tenancy agreements notes document Received 23.08.24
Proposed block site plan (enlarged) - PBSP 02 Received 09.07.24
Site location plan - SLP 01 Existing block site plan - EBSP 01 Proposed dwelling ground floor plan - PGFP 01 Proposed dwelling first floor plan - PFFP 01 Proposed dwelling attic plan - PAFP 01 Proposed dwelling north-west elevation - PNEW 01 Proposed dwelling south-east elevation - PSEE 01 Proposed dwelling section view - PSV 01 Proposed dwelling roof plan - PRP 01 Planning statement Agricultural planning statement Letters of support x 5 Received 08.01.24 __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the following should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings:
Holmlea, Braaid Road, Braaid Deerae, Braaid Road, Braaid White House, Braaid Road, Braaid Bluebell House, Braaid Road, Braaid
as they have explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy.
It is recommended that the following 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 4(2):
Upper Howe Farm, Old Castletown Road, Douglas Corvalley House, Braaid Road, Braaid
==== PAGE 4 ====
24/00001/B Page 4 of 25
Hazeldene 2 Ballaquinnea Cottages, Braaid
as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy __
Officer’s Report
THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO PLANNING COMMITTEE FOR DETERMINATION DUE TO THE OBJECTION RECEIVED FROM THE LOCAL AUTHORITY
0.0 PREAMBLE
0.1 This application was originally brought to planning committee for determination on 30th September 2024, however was subsequently deferred on the advice of officers due to unresolved highways issued which had arisen since the publication of the agenda.
0.2 At the planning committee, as well as accepting the recommendation of officers to defer the application to a later date, it was further agreed that a site visit should be undertaken. This was conducted on the 24th October 2024, with Members taking a particular focus on the location and width of the new and amended access, the size and scale of the proposed development and queries of the location of the proposed barn.
0.3 Amended plans for the scheme detailing a revised location for the new access to serve the development were formally submitted on 11th October 2024 and publicised. Highway Services provided the following comments on the 24th October 2024:
"Previous correspondence from Highways had to retract our acceptance of the proposal due to the visibility splays crossing over third party land. The alterations shown in the amended submission now addresses this highway concern.
The new proposal has altered the location of the access southwards. This has allowed the visibility splays to be provided over the applicant owned land and the highway. There is slight encroachment of the splays in the north-east corner of the site boundary, however it is expected that this area encroached on is verge and will not be altered in any adjacent development.
The splay distance provided in the north direction is 70m to the nearside edge of carriageway and 90m with an offset into the carriageway. This is acceptable for the estimated oncoming speeds and likely driver behaviour.
To the south, 70m has been provided with an offset in order to retain the splay within applicant land. 90m has been provided to the centreline. In this direction vehicles are coming off the roundabout where speeds are expected to be lower and will be unlikely to travel close to the nearside edge of carriageway. The splays provided are acceptable for the development.
Access alterations have also been made to ensure the movement of agricultural vehicles can be achieved. An access width of 9m may be excessive for the development scale, but in this instance poses no increased road safety risk, and acts as the 2m x 2m entry splay that may be required for a narrower access. The access proposal would benefit movement by reducing the extent of opposing carriageway overhang. The access width paired with the 19m setback of the field gate should ensure that agricultural vehicles with trailers can make the movement required without reversing in to the highway or multiple movements needed.
==== PAGE 5 ====
24/00001/B Page 5 of 25
There is sufficient parking within the site to meet parking standards for the dwelling. Highways have no objection to the proposal subject to all access arrangements including visibility to conform to drawing 'Proposed Block Site Plan'. The applicant is advised that a section 109(A) will be required post planning consent."
0.4 On the basis of the above, the revised proposals are considered to be acceptable. It is therefore recommended that the revised drawing and documents list should read as follows:
Proposed block site plan (visibility splays) Proposed block site plan - PBSP 03 Proposed block site plan (enlarged) - PBSP 03E Received 11.10.24
Proposed barn floor plan - PBFP 01 Proposed barn elevations 1 - PBNESWE 01 Proposed barn elevations 2 - PBSENWE 01 Farm land map 1 Farm land map 2 Farm land map 3 Farm land map 4 Tenancy agreements notes document Received 23.08.24
Site location plan - SLP 01 Existing block site plan - EBSP 01 Proposed dwelling ground floor plan - PGFP 01 Proposed dwelling first floor plan - PFFP 01 Proposed dwelling attic plan - PAFP 01 Proposed dwelling north-west elevation - PNEW 01 Proposed dwelling south-east elevation - PSEE 01 Proposed dwelling section view - PSV 01 Proposed dwelling roof plan - PRP 01 Planning statement Agricultural planning statement Letters of support x 5 Received 08.01.24
0.5 It is recommended that the wording of Condition 9 be amended to the following to reflect the new plans which have been submitted in relation to access and visibility:
All areas within the visibility splays shown on the approved block site plan (dated 26.09.24 and received 11.10.24) shall be reduced to a maximum height of 1.05m prior to the occupation of the development and maintained thereafter for the lifetime of the development.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
0.6 It is further recommended that the following conditions be added to the decision notice in the event planning permission is granted, and in addition to those which have already been recommended:
C12. Prior to the occupation of the development, the new access shall be completed in accordance with the approved drawings and the existing access shall be blocked off. The 1m high boundary wall as detailed on the approved drawings shall be constructed and completed prior to the occupation of the development.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
==== PAGE 6 ====
24/00001/B Page 6 of 25
C13. The approved barn shall be used solely in connection with the approved dwelling and shall at no point be sold off separately or segregated from the dwelling.
Reason: The development has been permitted solely on the basis of the dwelling and barn forming part of a single agricultural holding.
0.7 Finally, a further 4 letters of representation have been received from neighbouring properties who have previously comments on the application. Full details of their comments can be found online (dated 21.10.24). The following provides a brief summary of their comments and concerns:
Absence of detail with respect to surface water run-off and drainage details in general.
0.8 The recommendation with respect to those to be afforded Interested Party Status remains unchanged.
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site comprises Fields 321756 and 321758 which is situated on the north- west side of Braaid Road within the small village of Braaid, with the closest part of the site located approximately 48m to the north-east of the crossroads. The red line area extends to circa. 3.74 acres and includes a 58m boundary along the main road.
1.2 The site is effectively entirely undeveloped, but does includes a recently modified and enlarged gated access at the site's most easterly point off Braaid Road with a track extending to the west/north-west along the edge of Field 321758 to the edge of Field 321756.
1.3 The topography of the site is slightly elevated relative to the main road as it extends further back (westward), whilst being largely enclosed by a sod bank along its perimeter. The field closest to the main road is bordered by a neighbouring residential property, Holmlea, to the immediate south-west, with a disused agricultural barn bordering the site in the adjacent field to the north-east. A row of 3 properties are further located directly opposite the site to the east on the other side of the main road.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Planning permission is sought for the erection of a two-storey detached dwellinghouse on the basis of comprising an agricultural workers' dwelling, together with a detached agricultural barn. The proposals therefore comprises two fairly distinct elements, which are broken down as follows:
The dwelling would include an attached dual-pitched single storey element incorporate a single garage and store room.
==== PAGE 7 ====
24/00001/B Page 7 of 25
The proposals include the planting of a new boundary hedge along much of the perimeter of Field 321758.
2.2 The second element of the proposals relates to the erection of a detached agricultural barn in the southern corner of the adjoining Field (321756) which would be accessed via the existing track/driveway. The barn would comprise a dual pitched roof for the principal element, effectively extending into a cat-slide roof for a portion of the barn. The new barn would primarily consist of a dedicated lambing shed, together with a hay and feed store, implement storage area and workshop. The barn was initially proposed to be sited directly to the rear of the proposed dwelling, however was moved to its present location on the advice of officers to provide a more clear distinction between the residential and agricultural areas.
2.3 The applicant has provided details of the standard labour unit requirements which suggests that the farm is a substantial farm that would benefit from a farm workers dwelling to cater for the applicants who are engaged in agriculture. The land available to the main applicant to farm amounts to 328 acres (5 acres owned). Of which, 20 acres of forage crop are sown annually and 20 acres of reseeding takes place. The applicant owns 480 breeding ewes, 80 replacement ewes and 10 rams. The majority of the lambs are sold as fat to Isle of Man Meats with some stock sold as breeding stock to other farmers. His labour requirement of 2.2 standard labour units.
2.4 The applicant's son who operates a separate business but shares resources with the main applicant operates a farm business that extends to 139 acres. He owns 250 breeding ewes, 30 replacement ewes, 8 rams and 6 cattle. He has a standard labour requirement of 1.09 (SLU's).
2.5 The following provides a summary of the applicant's position as articulated in the officer report for the previous application:
The proposed agricultural building would provide 167m2 to house ewes. Mr Ian Kelly currently has a leased building at Ballacorris available to him which is 418m2. Housing the ewes would require 1325m2 leaving a shortfall of 727m2 between both buildings.
==== PAGE 8 ====
24/00001/B Page 8 of 25
The reduced traveling would not only save on fuel bills but also reduce the businesses carbon footprint.
2.6 With respect to the present submission, the following provides a general overview of the justification put forward by the applicants contained within the submitted planning statement for the proposed dwelling and barn which builds on the previous information provided:
The applicants have been tenant farmers for the majority of their working lives and currently live in private rented accommodation which belongs to the applicant's cousins. They have no security for the future and moved into their present accommodation on what was a short term basis some 22 years ago, however there is no security for the future as they themselves have grown up children with a keen interest in farming.
The applicant's current residence is some distance away from any of the land they farm, and it has no outbuildings or indeed any off-road parking, which is not ideal for machinery and tractors on the narrow road when they need to be maintained and repaired.
The applicants are sheep farmers and have no facilities close to their current residence which they can utilise for lambing and therefore must spend a great deal of time driving back and forth to the sheep, bringing home lambs that need nurturing which requires an electricity supply so they can be revived before returning to their mothers as and when ideally timed. This must happen any time of day and throughout the night.
Having been unable to secure an affordable property on the open market, over the years it became clear that to the applicants that a way forward would be to purchase some land which may be appropriate to build a farmworkers house on. The applicants have approached at least twelve landowners (including some of their landlords) in the hope of buying some land but their requests have always been turned down.
It has been very evident that the applicant's son will naturally succeed his father in the family farm, and hence would continue to require the house and the barn. It also worth noting that his children are clearly already interested in farming indeed they all 'own' a small flock of Loaghtan sheep and one of them has goats of her own, so from what we can tell they will in turn succeed their father.
The house would be occupied by two farming families (Mr and Mrs Ian Kelly and their son Darren Kelly and his children). The applicants have explored other options without success. In 2020 they attempted to buy a house at a public auction adjoining their land at Newtown, Santon, but were unsuccessful. They also attempted to buy an agricultural worker's house in Greeba around four years ago, however after much wasted time they managed to raise the funds to buy the property only to find that the vendor had no intention of selling the property, as the house had only been placed on the market in an attempt to support an application to remove the agricultural occupancy condition. Furthermore, the applicants have looked at numerous other parcels of land over recent years that have come on to the market but have declined from pursuing them as they felt that it would be unacceptable to expect to build a house and barn on them mainly because of their isolated geographical locations.
==== PAGE 9 ====
24/00001/B Page 9 of 25
- The house and barn are both essential for the acreage that the applicant and their son currently farm. The proposed development would be on their own land and is approximately one mile from the nearest part of the rest of the applicant's farming operation.
The applicant's sheepdogs are currently kept in a rented barn that has no power supply, 3.6 miles away (which entails a 7.2-mile round trip to tend to them at least twice a day) in an isolated location which is not ideal for their welfare. The applicant also trains sheepdogs for other farmers, which again entails a 7.2-mile round trip to undertake the training sessions, this work would be done on the fields surrounding the proposed new farmhouse on their land at the Braaid.
Addressing remarks in the previous application report by Planning Officer that the applicant only owns five acres whilst the rest of their land is rented which could be lost: (a) The applicants have rented most of that land for many years and have a total of nine different landlords. This therefore provides a greater security for the wider holding as opposed to if the entirety of the land was rented from a single landlord. (b) In order to buy around 500 acres this would require an investment of circa. £4,500,000 to £5,000,000, which is not a realistic or affordable figure.
The reason other parcels of land rented by Mr Kelly and his son do not have buildings available is that these are not for sale or available for purchase by Mr Kelly, therefore the only use possible is on a rental basis. Whilst Mr Kelly does have the use of one rented barn, it has numerous deficiencies. (a) It is 3.6 miles away from their current residence, which obviously involves a 7.2 mile round trip to attend to the dogs or any livestock needing attention which could be at any time of day or night (b) It is in a very isolated position, which makes it almost impossible to keep secure. (c) It has no electricity supply, which renders it unsuitable for carrying out repairs to machinery and for livestock welfare particularly at lambing time. Machinery is currently repaired in the event of a breakdown, which is wholly unsuitable and dangerous for both the applicants and passing traffic.
2.7 As part of the application submission, 6 letters of support have accompanied the application, including 2 from separate veterinary practices, the MHK for Middle, and 3 additional landowners.
2.8 The content of the letters of support primary centre of the need to support Manx agriculture and farmers in general, whilst further noting the importance of ensuring the welfare of animals, including the conditions in which they are housed and the farmer's ability to tend to their care in an efficient and timely manner. Full details of the submissions are available on the online planning portal for the application. Such letters of support should be noted as technically forming part of the planning submission and were not submitted as representations during the course of the application. Therefore, no assessment for Interested Party Status has been undertaken with respect to these submissions.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 Permission was most recently granted for the widening of the existing vehicle entrance and associated works, which is noted as having been implemented and completed (PA 22/01148/B). Prior to this, permission was previously sought for an agricultural worker's dwelling and agricultural barn at the site, which was ultimately refused at planning committee in 2022 (PA 21/01444/B). The scheme however included a non-traditional designed dwelling which was proposed to be sited in the rear field away from the main road within close proximity to the new barn.
3.2 The application was refused largely on the basis that it was not considered by the case officer or indeed the planning committee that sufficient evidence had been presented fully
==== PAGE 10 ====
24/00001/B Page 10 of 25
justifying the need for a new agricultural worker's dwelling and associated barn, with further concerns also held with respect to the design and siting of the proposed development. The application was refused for the following 5 reasons:
"R1. Housing Policy 7 part (a) of General Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 allow for the construction of new dwellings for agricultural workers where an essential need for such dwellings is established. It is concluded that such an essential need has not been demonstrated in this case such that the application is contrary to these two policies.
R2. The isolated position of the dwelling within the countryside is not considered appropriate and would harm the character and quality of the landscape. As such, the proposal is concluded to represent an unwarranted development that is detrimental to the amenity of the countryside contrary to the provision of Environment Policies 1 and Housing Policy 9 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
R3. Given the limited amount of acreage owned by the applicant, the fact that the occupant would be a tenant farmer with limited term security of tenure and where the tenant farmer would not appear to be in need of a dwelling, in addition to the fact that there have been farm dwellings previously associated with some of the farmland being farmed by the applicant, the proposal would fail to accord with General Policy 3, Paragraph 8.9.3, and Housing Policy 7. No justification has been made in the application to explain why an additional agricultural workers dwelling should be provided to service the farms currently operated by the applicants, given that significant proportions of the acreage available to the applicant are already associated with farm dwellings.
R4. In the absence of agricultural need sufficient to justify the proposed development, the proposed dwelling and barn, and particularly the proposed access lane leading to them and hardstanding area of farm yard would introduce built development in an area not currently so characterised, in conflict with the Landscape Character Appraisal for Braaid (D10) contained within the Area Plan for the East - which refers to the need to conserve and enhance the character, quality and distinctiveness of the area, with its open large pastoral fields. In addition the development would be contrary to Environment Policies 1 which protect the countryside for its own sake and where the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration and Environment Policy 15 and Housing Policy 9 which require new development to be built within or next to existing development.
R5. The design of the dwelling proposed does not reflect the wording of policies 1-7 of Planning Circular 3/91 ('Guide to the Design of Residential Development in the Countryside'), and also fails to comply with the wording of Housing Policy 10 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, which requires agricultural dwellings to generally follow those seven policies of the Circular. Insufficient justification has been made in the application to explain why the policies of the Circular or Housing Policy 10 should be set aside."
3.3 In response to the previous reasons for refusal, the current submission has sought to change the design and siting of the proposed dwelling, whilst providing further information with respect to the nature and operation of the agricultural enterprise, the location of the total quantum of land farmed by the applicant and his son, further detail on the various tenancies for each of the parcels of land, together with additional clarification over the lack of suitable alternatives with respect to the dwelling and barn.
4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the East as land not zoned for a particular purpose. The site is not within a Conservation Area or prone to flood risks. There are no registered trees on the site, and the site is not within a registered tree area.
==== PAGE 11 ====
24/00001/B Page 11 of 25
4.2 The following sections of the Area Plan for the East (2020) are considered relevant in the determination of this application:
4.2.1 Landscape Character Assessment - Braaid (D10) "Landscape Strategy - Conserve and enhance: a) the character, quality and distinctiveness of the area, with its open large pastoral fields; b) its Manx hedges; c) its scattered farm houses fringed by trees; d) its sunken and enclosed rural road network and its numerous archaeological features.
Key Views: Extensive uninterrupted panoramic views from higher points over large open fields and Greeba Valley and the northern Uplands and eastwards to the built-up edge of Douglas. Some glimpsed views over fields from most sections of roads, which are enclosed by high grassed Manx hedgerows for the most part."
4.3 Given the site location and nature of the proposed scheme, the following sections and policies of the Strategic Plan (2016) are considered material to the determination of this application:
4.4 Environment Policy 1: "The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. For the purposes of this policy, the countryside comprises all land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 at A.3.6 or which is not designated for future development on an Area Plan. Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative."
4.5 General Policy 3 sets out a presumption against development in the countryside but includes instances where provision of new housing may be acceptable, including "(f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry." Further advice on agricultural development is provided as follows:
4.5.1 Paragraph 7.3.13 "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."
4.5.2 Paragraph 7.13.4 "It is recognised that there have been considerable changes in the economy in the last twenty years. The number of people in full time agricultural employment has reduced for a number of reasons including increased mechanisation, reductions in the number of farms; and increases in the size of farm holdings. In many cases smaller farms have been amalgamated into larger units to increase economic viability. This has often been accompanied by the sale of former farmhouses and cottages to those who do not earn their employment in agriculture. At the same time there has been an increase in part time involvement in farming either where the income from agriculture is supplemented by other employment or where the person's main employment is not in agriculture but they farm on a part time basis. In considering the applications for new houses in the countryside the Department will give careful consideration to agriculture justification based on full time employment in agriculture. See also Section 8.9 in Chapter 8 - Housing."
4.6 Environment Policy 15: "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,
==== PAGE 12 ====
24/00001/B Page 12 of 25
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."
4.7 "8.9 New Agricultural Dwellings 8.9.1 As is indicated in Chapter 7 (at Section 7.14), permission will not be granted for new agricultural dwellings in the countryside unless there is real agricultural need demonstrated sufficient to off-set the general planning objections to new dwellings in the countryside.
8.9.2 Agricultural need should be established having regard to: (a) what living accommodation has been built on, or in association with the farm holding in the past, and how it is now occupied; and (b) who will occupy the proposed dwelling, and what role they will play in the operation of the farm; in some circumstances, there will be a legitimate need for a dwelling for a retiring farmer who proposes to vacate the farmhouse but to continue to assist on the farm."
4.8 Housing Policy 7: "New agricultural dwellings will only be permitted in exceptional circumstances where real agricultural need is demonstrated."
4.8.1 Paragraph 8.9.3: "In judging whether the need is sufficient to over-ride other policies, particular regard will be had to:- (a) the previous or proposed severance of land and buildings; (b) the agricultural justification for sub-division of a farm; (c) the long-term viability of new or unproven agricultural enterprises such as smallholdings, market gardens, or horticulture; (d) the extent to which the applicant's employment in agriculture is only part-time; and (e) in the case of a retiring farmer, whether the proposal would result in vacation of an existing farm dwelling for agricultural use, and whether the applicant would continue to assist in the operation of the farm."
4.9 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."
4.9.1 "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."
4.9.2 "8.9.5 If it is not possible for the farm worker to live in the nearest village, the siting of the proposed dwelling should be selected having regard to the various landscape policies in Chapter 7. In particular, the dwelling should self-evidently form part of the farm group."
4.10 Housing Policy 9: "Where permission is granted for an agricultural dwelling, the dwelling must be sited such that; (a) it is within or immediately adjoining the main group of farm buildings or a group of farm buildings associated with that farm, (b) it is well set back from any public highway, and
==== PAGE 13 ====
24/00001/B Page 13 of 25
(c) it is approached via the existing farm access."
4.10.1 "8.9.6 The design of the building should also have regard to the various landscape policies, such as to preserve the character of the local landscape."
4.11 Housing Policy 10: "Where permission is granted for an agricultural dwelling, the dwelling should normally be designed in accordance with policies 1- 7 of present Planning Circular 3/91 which will be revised and issued as a Planning Policy Statement."
4.12 Environment Policy 4 protects biodiversity (including protected species and designated sites).
4.13 Environment Policy 14: Development which would result in the permanent loss of important and versatile agricultural land (Classes 1-2) will not be permitted except where there is an overriding need for the development, and land of a lower quality is not available and other policies in this plan are complied with. This policy will be applied to (a) land annotated as Classes 1/2 on the Agricultural Land Use Capability Map; and (b) Class 2 soils falling within areas annotated as Class 2/3 and Class 3/2 on the Agricultural Land Use Capability Map.
4.14 Transport Policy 1: New development should, where possible, be located close to existing public transport facilities and routes, including pedestrian, cycle and rail routes.
5.0 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 Planning Circular 3/91 'Guide to the Design of Residential Development in the Countryside.
5.1.1 Policy 2: "New buildings are to be integrated with the landscape and where in groups, with each other. Single buildings in prominent locations can only be considered if they are satisfactory in all reports and include landscape proposals."
5.1.2 Policy 3: "The shape of small and medium sized new dwellings should follow the size and pattern of traditional farmhouses. They should be rectangular in plain and simple in form. "
5.1.3 Policy 4: "External finishes are expected to be selected from a limited range of traditional materials."
5.1.4 Policy 5: "Doors and windows together with their size and relationship with each other and the wall face should follow traditional rural forms."
5.2 DEFA's Residential Design Guide (2021) is a material consideration in the assessment of this application as, "It is intended to apply to any residential development within existing villages and towns, including individual houses, conversions and householder extensions. It is envisaged that separate guidance will be provided for dwellings in the countryside, although some of the broad principles set out within this document may still be relevant to such proposals". Sections 2.0 on Sustainable Construction, 3.0 on New Homes, and 5.0 on Architectural Details are particularly relevant.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Marown Parish Commissioners - The Commissioners resolved to oppose the application on the following grounds:
Attention is drawn to the previous planning application. It appears that the reasons for refusal in that instance and previous comments made by the Commissioners in that case remain largely valid;
==== PAGE 14 ====
24/00001/B Page 14 of 25
- The area is not zoned for residential use within the Area Plan for the East though it is noted that the site is adjacent to Braaid hamlet. This is an improvement on the previous proposed siting though the current proposals relate to a two-storey dwelling which is too large for the locality, as opposed to a bungalow, whilst also representing an extension to Braaid hamlet;
The submitted agricultural statement makes reference to the applicant farming various areas including with Santon and Onchan. It further states that the family live in a nearby properties which is not stated as being unsuitable aside from that it is leased rather than owner. There is no right to ownership of a property, and there are several farm enterprises where both land and dwelling are part of a tenancy agreement. There is therefore no requirement for an additional dwelling in the countryside;
There is no justification shown for the barn;
General Policy 3 states that 'essential housing' for agricultural workers may be permitted under certain conditions. It is submitted that the proposed dwelling is not essential for the reasons stated above;
If it is determined that the preceding test is passed, it is essential that the dwelling be subject to an agricultural tie. The Commissioners however would view such a pass as questionable. The applicant has provided numerous examples of dwellings subject to agricultural ties where this has been removed to enable a sale on the open market. Were this policy not to have been pursued, any of these properties would have been convenient to the applicant's land and might have been available to them. For this reason the Commissioners routinely oppose the removal of an agricultural tie. (18.01.24)
5.2 Highway Services - The site is subject to two relevant planning applications, 21/01444/B and 22/01148/B. 21/01444/B for the erection of a bungalow, barn and internal road was refused. Highways DC did not oppose this application subject to further plans and details provided for approval. 22/01148/B to widen and improve the exiting access was permitted, and accepted by Highways DC due to the extensive access improvements with no intensification.
This application would seek to use the above permitted improved access and erect a farmhouse and barn on the land behind.
Planning application PA 22/01148/B provided visibility splays for the improvement of the access. The splays (particularly to the left on exit) did not meet the full Manual for Manx Roads requirement and were not drawn correctly, however, Highways accepted the proposal as the development would see the improvement of an existing field/farm access with no associated intensification or change in the use of the access. Now that a proposal is presented to increase the use of the access to daily residential/agricultural use, new considerations must be made to the suitability of the existing access. The application should provide revised visibility splays from the access showing the maximum extent of visibility to the nearside edge of carriageway.
If the proposal is permitted, the Applicant is advised that a S109(A) Highway Agreement is needed after the grant of planning consent for the alteration of the highway.
The access geometry of the proposal is acceptable to highways. Under the previous planning approval the access was widened to approx. 6m which is suitable for the type and volume of vehicle movements expected from this proposal, and can accommodate pedestrian and emergency vehicle access also. A drainage channel was proposed under the previous application, this should be replicated in the plan drawings provided to demonstrate that surface water will not be discharged onto the highway.
==== PAGE 15 ====
24/00001/B Page 15 of 25
Internal arrangements are also acceptable to Highways. The minimum required two parking spaces have been provided, with additional provision given due to the expected number of occupants. There is space internally to ensure vehicles exit the site in a forward gear. The garage does not meet the Manual for Manx Roads minimum dimension requirement, however it is not essential to meet the parking standards and is therefore accepted as drawn. (18.01.24)
As established in the previous Highways responses, there were no concerns with the access arrangements or internal layout of the site so that it could not support the increased development of the farmhouse and garage. However, the development would constitute intensification of use of the access, in which visibility needed to be provided to assess potential impact. The required splays have now been provided.
Form a 2.4m setback distance, splays of 70m to the nearside edge of carriageway can be achieved. This is sufficient for speeds of up to 30mph in non-built-up areas. Further splays of 90m are achieved with an offset. To the right on exit, vehicles are approaching after negotiating the roundabout, so speeds will be lower. The 70m to edge of carriageway is sufficient for this direction. To the left on exit, approach speeds will be higher, however it is still located within a 40mph area. 90m is sufficient for speeds of 40mph. The offset of the edge of carriageway for the 90m splay means there is a risk that overtaking manoeuvres from motorcycles can be obscured, however the offset is approx. 1.5m so obstruction would be instantaneous before returning within the field of vision. The offset also allows for the majority of the field boundary hedgerow to be retained, not effecting the character of the landscape significantly.
The areas within the visibility splays must be reduced to a max. height of 1.05m and maintained thereafter for the lifetime of the development. Highways DC have no significant road safety or network efficiency concerns. Accordingly Highways raise no objection to the proposal. (20.09.24)
5.3 Highways Drainage - Allowing surface water runoff onto a public highway would contravene Section 58 of the Highway Act 1986 and guidance contained in section 11.3.11 of the Manual for Manx Roads. Recommendation: The applicant should be aware off and comply with the clauses above. (12.01.24)
5.4 Agriculture and Lands Directorate -
Assessment - does the existing/proposed business justify at least 1900 man hours per year per agricultural dwelling using standard labour data?
Based on the worksheet for the calculation of standard labour unit requirements, the Kellys' farming operations justify the need for a new agricultural dwelling. The calculation details the following;
Total Livestock Hours: 3,570.8 hours per year o Total Crops Hours: 468.0 hours per year o Overhead Assumption: 201.9 hours (assuming 5% overheads allowance) o Total Standard Man Hours per Year: 4,240.7 hours
Darren Kelly, the applicant's son will also reside and operate his farming business from the proposed development.
Total Livestock Hours: 1,600.9 hours per year o Total Crops Hours: 195.1 hours per year o Overhead Assumption: 89.8 hours (assuming 5% overheads allowance) o Total Standard Man Hours per Year: 1885.80 hours
==== PAGE 16 ====
24/00001/B Page 16 of 25
Combined Total: o Total Standard Man Hours per Year: 6,126.5 hours
This calculation confirms that the Kellys' agricultural operations equate to 3.06 full-time labour units, exceeding the minimum requirement of 1 full-time labour unit (1900 hours/year). Thus, the proposed business justifies the need for at least one agricultural dwelling based only on the labour requirement calculation.
Functional Requirement
Assessment - what reasoning is there for the house being on the agricultural unit itself rather than a nearby village/town?
The proposed farmhouse and barn would service the functional requirements for the Kellys' farming operations, which include: o Proximity to Livestock: The applicants currently face logistical challenges, especially during lambing season, due to the distance between their current residence and their broken up farming land. An on-site dwelling with a sufficient livestock housing base will allow for immediate and effective care of livestock, enhancing animal welfare and operational efficiency.
o Efficient Operations: The new agricultural barn will centralise the storage of farm materials and maintenance of equipment, which is currently scattered across rented, locations. Centralising these facilities will reduce travel time at key handling times.
o Security and Welfare: The on-site barn will provide better facilities for livestock management during key handling times.
Many farmers manage numerous dispersed parcels of land all across the island and do not reside directly on-site, instead utilising remote CCTV, changes to farming practices e.g. changing lambing patterns and block sizes, and using out-of-hours contracted labour, however, most do still operate from a single base or farm yard. In my experience this nearly always includes livestock handling facilities and a central livestock shed capable of meeting the farms stocking requirements at key times, e.g. lambing time. The Kellys proposed barn and housing will enable this to be done from a central location.
Assessment - Business Requirement
Is there evidence of the business/proposed business being financially secure and viable? This would normally only be considered if the other two considerations appeared marginal.
The financial viability and security of the Kellys' farming business are evident from their detailed planning statement and the long-term commitment to agriculture. Key points include:
o Historical Context: Department records indicate the Kellys have been active farmers for most of their working lives, demonstrating experience and dedication to farming. They indicate they own a section of their farmed land which is the location this planning application relates to.
o Succession Planning: The Kellys have indicate to the Department that they have a clear succession plan, with their son poised to take over farming operations when they retire. This ensures the long-term viability of the farm, as future generations are already involved and committed to agriculture.
o Operational Expansion: From the information provided proposed farmhouse and barn will support the expansion and centralisation of farming operations, making the business more efficient and sustainable.
==== PAGE 17 ====
24/00001/B Page 17 of 25
Conclusion
Assessment - the validity of the application:
Noting only a small element reaching approximately 5 acres or 3 fields of the applicant's holding is situated adjacent to the site the planning application relates to I still consider the farming enterprise as a whole business unit as it is operated under one farm holding business number and has one livestock holding number associated to it, because of this the application indicates this will function as the primary farming location for the whole business.
The application meets the key requirements of the Departments considerations for the proposed development which states businesses are expected to justify at least 1 full time labour unit (=1900 hours/annum, equivalent to 39 hours per week) for each dwelling house, whilst also taking into account all of the dwellings currently available to the business.
In the Kellys case, they achieve a total of 6126.5 hours based on the 2024 agricultural census returns received by the Department in May 2024
A farmhouse with an attached garage and an agricultural barn is in line with the Agriculture and Food Directorate's calculation for need based on standard labour units and agricultural practices. (04.07.24)
5.5 Ecosystems Policy Officer - The Ecosystem Policy Team can confirm that we are content with the updated hedge planting details contained in the updated Proposed Block Site Plan (Ref: PBSP 02). We request that his landscaping is secured via a condition. The Site Plan now also shows the area of the new garden and drive which clarifies this aspect of the application.
In line with our original response, we still also request that the following condition is secured via approval:
Prior to the commencement of the development, a Precautionary Working Method Statement for breeding birds and common lizards, written by a suitably qualified ecologist, shall be submitted to Planning and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the details as approved, and shall thereafter retained as such. Reason: To safeguard statutorily protected species. (09.07.24)
5.6 Environmental Protection Officer - With regard to PA 24/00001/B please can the applicant provide more information on the foul water provisions for the development. In the application form it states a connection to mains sewer however mains sewerage isn't present in the area.
If a sewage treatment works is installed with a connection to a drainage ditch or watercourse the applicants will need to apply for a discharge license. Further information including the application form can be found at; https://www.gov.im/aboutthe- government/departments/environment-food-and- agriculture/environmentdirectorate/environmental-protection-unit/river-water-quality/discharge- licenses/ (23.01.24)
5.7 Five letters of representation has been received objecting to the proposals. Full details of the content of their submissions can be found on the online planning portal, with the following providing a brief summary of the issues raised:
Detrimental impact of the development upon the wider landscape with the site presently undeveloped;
==== PAGE 18 ====
24/00001/B Page 18 of 25
Dwelling is not in keeping with the locality and is too large.
5.8 One further letter of representation has been received writing in support of the proposals, with a summary of their comments presented as follows:
Anyone who has experience in training sheep dogs knows that they need handling quietly and calmly so this sideline will produce very little noise, if any.
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are as follows:
6.2 PRINCIPAL 6.2.2 The starting point for any development within the countryside (i.e. not zoned for development) is General Policy 3, which allows an exemption for essential housing for agricultural workers who have to live close to their place of work, along with essential agricultural buildings and those required for interpretation of the countryside.
==== PAGE 19 ====
24/00001/B Page 19 of 25
6.2.3 Housing Policy 7 states that new agricultural dwellings will only be permitted in exceptional circumstances where real agricultural need is demonstrated. Likewise Environment Policy 15, which states that where the Department is satisfied that there is agricultural or horticultural need for a new building/s, 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.
6.2.4 As noted in the officer report for the previous application, it was considered that 'there is no dispute, on the basis of the evidence submitted, that the farm operation is substantial and sufficient to require a number of full-time agricultural workers to facilitate the daily running of the farm. This, however, is not the fundamental test, as there are many people (indeed, probably the majority) that are employed far from their place of residence: the main issue is whether or not it is essential that the applicants reside at the proposed location which is positionally detached from majority of the farm sites they operate.'
6.2.5 The position set out by the case officer in the previous officer report can be summarised as follows:
The farm business is spread over a number of areas, and therefore siting the dwelling in the proposed location would not offer an advantage over the current situation.
Some of the site's which the applicant farms appear to have had access to farm houses or agricultural worker's dwellings (Ballacorris Farm, Hillberry Farm, Ballagick and Knock Froy Farm). It would therefore be difficult to argue that a new agricultural workers dwelling be provided to serve these farms, which have had the benefit of agricultural workers dwellings and for which no argument has been advanced to indicate why these dwellings which should be attached to these farms are not available to the applicant.
The majority of the land farmed is leased, providing limited security that the current rental situation will continue in the future should the applicants or owners not wish to renew the leases for each of the parcels of land farmed.
The majority of the farm buildings which support the farm operations are located elsewhere. It would appear that the majority of the calving or lambing would take place elsewhere due to the lack of buildings and limited field capacity. Given the scale of the agricultural operations as articulated in the applicants supporting statement, it is clearly not essential to have a dwelling on the application site as a new dwelling here would require more associated agricultural buildings to enable the farm operations which would not be sustainable when the limited land size is factored in.
There is no provision in the Strategic Plan to allow a farmer to construct a dwelling on the basis of securing a residence for the family. Such a stated intention does not enable the Department to conclude that the long-term prospects for the agricultural dwelling at the site are anything but speculative, and an avenue to allow a residential development in the open countryside not zoned for development.
The DEFA Head of Agriculture and Lands Directorate whose advise the Department gives significant weight when dealing with issues bordering on agricultural justification and need for proposed developments has evaluated the details of the scheme, and argues that there is no agricultural justification for the development. For reference, their previous comments were as follows: o The applicant who is a claimant under the Agriculture Development Scheme has lived at Ballanicholas Farm. The house is surrounded by the fields which were associated with the farm in the past but this land is now farmed by another farmer.
==== PAGE 20 ====
24/00001/B Page 20 of 25
o The applicant's son who is also an ADS claimant has a postal address in Douglas. o From the figures submitted, the land farmed, as they do, would appear to generate a requirement for 2.43 men. o If Sheep are lambed indoors they need to be turned out to grass virtually straight away (within 48hrs max). The proposed new shed is a long way from most of Mr Kelly's fields. Moving to lambing inside would on the face of it create a need for many long journeys returning ewes and lambs to fields after lambing. These sheep will need to be checked regularly post lambing to reduce predation. o The new house would be no better placed than Ballanicholas as far as checking stock is concerned.
6.2.6 From review the current submission, it is notable that changes have been made to the design, layout and siting of the proposed dwelling and indeed the agricultural barn itself. Previous concerns were raised by the case officer in relation to design and siting, however such matters will be addressed in the subsequent section of this report.
6.2.7 With respect to the arguments presented in favour of the development in the context of agricultural need, it is accepted that these largely reflect those presented and assessed as part of the previous application. Therefore, concerns raised by the case officer for the previous application remain a material planning consideration.
6.2.8 Nevertheless, further information has been provided as to the nature of the agricultural tenancies, the length of time which such land has been rented by the applicant, together with greater clarify having been provided over the exact location and quantum of land farm as part of the wider agricultural holding. It is also recognised that a more thorough assessment of the needs of the business has been undertaken by the Agricultural Policy Team, as detailed in Section 6 of this report, who have deemed that the proposals are fully justified in the context of agricultural need.
6.2.9 In particular, the Policy Team note that the agricultural operations associated with the business equate to 3.06 full-time labour units, which is well in excess of the requirement of 1 full-time labour unit. The proposed business therefore justifies the need for at least one agricultural dwelling based solely upon the labour requirement calculation.
6.2.10 Moreover, it is recognised that the applicants currently face logistical challenges, especially during lambing season, due to the distance between their current residence and their broken up farming land. An on-site dwelling with a sufficient livestock housing base would allow for immediate and effective care of livestock, enhancing animal welfare and operational efficiency. The addition of a new agricultural barn would further centralise the storage of farm materials and maintenance of equipment, which is currently scattered across rented locations. Centralising these facilities would reduce travel time at key handling times, whilst the on-site barn would provide improved facilities for livestock management during key handling times.
6.2.11 The Policy Team further consider that many farmers manage numerous dispersed parcels of land all across the island and do not reside directly on-site, instead utilising remote CCTV, changes to farming practices, such as changing lambing patterns and block sizes, and using out-of-hours contracted labour. However, most do still operate from a single base or farm yard which nearly always includes livestock handling facilities and a central livestock shed capable of meeting the farms stocking requirements at key times, e.g. lambing time. The applicants proposed barn and housing will enable this to be done from a central location.
6.2.12 Finally, the Policy Team consider that the financial viability and security of the applicants' farming business are evident from their detailed planning statement and the long- term commitment to agriculture. In particular, Department records indicate the applicants have been active farmers for most of their working lives, demonstrating experience and dedication to farming. They indicate they own a section of their farmed land which is the location this
==== PAGE 21 ====
24/00001/B Page 21 of 25
planning application relates to. The applicants have further indicated to the Department that they have a clear succession plan, with their son poised to take over farming operations when they retire. This ensures the long-term viability of the farm, as future generations are already involved and committed to agriculture. From the information provided therefore, the proposed farmhouse and barn will support the expansion and centralisation of farming operations, making the business more efficient and sustainable.
6.2.13 The assessment and conclusions provided by the Agricultural Policy Team are a strong material planning consideration which weighs heavily in favour of the current proposals, and indeed represents a significant change to their stance relative to the previous application.
6.2.14 Likewise, whilst the concerns raised in relation to the previous application over the fact that the majority of the farmed land is done so on the basis of tenancy agreements, as opposed to being directly owned, this does not in itself undermine the long-term security of the enterprise moving forward. There is no commentary within the Strategic Plan that land farmed should be owned directly by the applicant, and in this particular case it is noteworthy that the rented land in question is split between 9 different landowners and is geographically dispersed. This provides a much greater degree of security compared to if the land in question was owned by a single landowner in a single location, for example, of if indeed the vast majority of the land was owned by a single landowner. That is however not the case in this instance. It should also be borne in mind that even if the majority of the land was owned directly by the applicant, they would be within their rights to sell the land in the same vein as seeking to not renew a rental agreement.
6.2.15 Turning to the issue of available buildings, the applicants' position is clearly outlined within this report, insofar as they do not have suitable building available to them to conduct lambing and provide suitable storage provision for equipment and feed. Indeed there is notably no buildings which are suitable for this purpose which are available to the applicant within close proximity to their current residence, and therefore the consolidation of their living accommodation and dedicated barn for lambing/storage purposes into a central location would clearly provide much greater stability and practicality for the business moving forward.
6.2.16 It is further apparent that no buildings are available or suitable for purchase or use as a dwellinghouse on land which they rent. Whilst of course recognising that the application site is not zoned for development, it is nonetheless noted that the site does fall within an existing if albeit small settlement, and would not represent the development of an isolated dwelling in the countryside in the literal sense.
6.2.17 In summary therefore, it is recognised that the principle of development, particularly in the context of the assessment and decision relative to the previous application is finely balanced. Nevertheless, given the positive support provided by the Agricultural Policy Team in combination with the additional information provided, including the clear pathway for succession of the agricultural business from the applicants to their son, the proposals are on balance deemed to comply with Housing Policy 7 and Environment Policy 15 insofar as a real agricultural need has been demonstrated to justify the erection of the proposed dwelling and agricultural barn in this location.
6.3 DESIGN AND VISUAL IMPACT 6.3.1 Following concerns raised by the case officer for the previous application, the design and siting of the dwelling has been amended to more closely reflect the requirements of Planning Circular 3/91 for a traditional styled dwelling in the countryside. On particular, the proposed two-storey dwelling would incorporate a traditional 3 x 3 fenestration configuration on the front elevation, with a centrally located gable front porch and wide flank chimney breasts.
6.3.2 It is recognised that the dwelling would be sited within close proximity to the highway and therefore clearly visible within this context, whilst further not being sited within close
==== PAGE 22 ====
24/00001/B Page 22 of 25
proximity to an existing agricultural buildings associated with the holding given the absence of any built development presently on site. Given the above, the proposals would not technically accordance with the key requirements of Housing Policy 9 which states that new agricultural dwellings must be sited within or immediately adjoining the main group of farm buildings or a group of farm buildings associated with that farm, whilst being well set back from the public highway. Environmental Policy 15 further adds that 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.
6.3.3 Notwithstanding the above however, the set of circumstances which surround the proposals are fairly unique, particularly given the site is presently undeveloped and the wider agricultural holding is geographically dispersed. It would therefore not be physically possible to site the dwelling within close proximity to existing farm buildings associated with the holding, with the promises effectively comprising the development of a new 'headquarters' to serve the wider holding.
6.3.4 Moreover, the siting of the dwelling within close proximity to the highway in this instance would, in the opinion of officers, be the most appropriate solution as it would effectively constitute the continuation of an existing row of linear development within a small settlement, whilst being sited directly opposite a further row of existing dwellings. As a result, the resultant dwelling would not appear geographically isolated or imposing within the context of the wider landscape as it would sit relatively comfortably within the context of surrounding dwellings in an established, albeit small, settlement.
6.3.5 On this basis therefore, the proposed siting of the new dwelling is considered to be appropriate. It should be further noted that the resultant dwelling would in any case by sited within relative proximity to the new agricultural barn, which in itself is of a generally modest scale and footprint, whilst being of a conventional design which would not appear alien in the context of the wider landscape. The visual impacts associated with the new barn, which are of course undeniable, have to be balanced against the benefits of the scheme and the justified agricultural need, which are considered to have been sufficiently evidenced and carry material weight. The presence of such a barn as already noted would not be incongruous in a rural location, whilst being largely shielded from view of public vistas due to the presence of mature vegetation along the main road through Braaid.
6.3.6 It is also recognised that the quality of finishes for the dwelling will be very important from a visual standpoint, together with a comprehensive landscaping scheme to complement the proposed level of built development. Such matters can be suitably addressed by conditions should planning permission be forthcoming.
6.3.7 To summarise, the development as proposed would clearly result in a material visual impact which is to be expected with the introduction of built development on a presently undeveloped greenfield site. That being said, the proposals are considered to be well designed and represent a vast improvement to the previously refused scheme from a visual aesthetic standpoint. The impact of the development upon the character and appearance of the wider landscape, particularly in relation to the dwelling itself, is considered to be largely limited due to the application site falling within an existing settlement and following an established building line of development. On balance therefore, the proposals are considered to be acceptable from a design and visual impact standpoint in the context of the site's immediate setting, without also resulting in a wholly detriment impact upon the wider landscape, in compliance with General Policy (b) and (c) and Environment Policy 15.
6.4 IMPACT ON NEIGHBOURING AMENITY 6.4.1 The proposed dwelling would be sited a sufficient distance from the adjacent property of Holmlea to the south-west to prevent any realistic overlooking afforded from windows in the southern flank elevation of the proposed dwelling. Likewise, properties located immediately
==== PAGE 23 ====
24/00001/B Page 23 of 25
opposite the site would also be ensured a sufficient degree of separation to ensure their amenities would be safeguarded. The proposed agricultural barn is likewise not considered to resultant in a materially harmful impact upon residential amenity.
6.5 HIGHWAYS AND PARKING 6.5.1 Following the submission of amended plans detailing revised visibility splays, previous concerns held by Highways have now been resolved who are now in support of the proposals. The development would provide sufficient on-site parking for 2 vehicles for the new dwelling, whilst the existing access track would be maintained in its current form. The proposals are therefore considered to be acceptable from a highway safety standpoint.
6.6 OTHER MATTERS 6.6.1 It is noted from the content of some of the private representations received that the current access as widened and gates installed has not been undertaken in full accordance with the approved plans relative to PA 22/01148/B and therefore represents a breach of planning control. The Department's enforcement team is fully aware and such matters are currently subject to a live enforcement investigation. It should however be made clear that the current proposals, if approved, would not regularise the alleged breach of planning control which differ from the works which appear to have been undertaken on site to date.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 In summary, the proposed development is considered to be acceptable in principle having demonstrated a clear agricultural need for the new dwelling and barn, without sufficient detriment to the visual amenities of the immediate locality and wider landscape. The proposals are therefore considered to be in accordance with Strategic Policy 5, Spatial Policy 5, General Policies 2 and 3, and Environment Policies 1 and 15 and Housing Policies 7-9 of the Strategic Plan (2016). The proposals are therefore recommended for approval, subject to the attachment of appropriately worded conditions.
8.0 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
8.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture (DEFA) is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given Interested Person Status. __
==== PAGE 24 ====
24/00001/B Page 24 of 25
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to the it by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.
Decision Made : ...Pending Decision... Committee Meeting Date:...11.11.2024
Signed :...T COWELL... Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See below
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.
==== PAGE 25 ====
24/00001/B Page 25 of 25
PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 11.11.2024
Application No 24/00001/B Applicant Mr Ian Kelly Proposal The erection of a new farmhouse and agricultural barn. Site Address Fields 324673, 321756 And 324674 Braaid Road Braaid Isle Of Man
Planning Officer Toby Cowell Presenting Officer As above Addendum to the Officer Report
At the public meeting the committee declined the recommendation of the Case officer and determined to refuse the application.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal