Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
24/00731/B Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Application No. : 24/00731/B Applicant : Mr Andrew Kelly Proposal : Erection of an extension to existing agricultural building Site Address : Field 435281 Crossag Road Ballasalla Isle Of Man IM9 3EF
Planning Officer: Graham Northern Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 07.08.2024 __
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. The extension to the existing agricultural building may only be used for agricultural purposes.
Reason: The countryside is protected from development and an exception is being made on the basis of agricultural need only.
C 3. The extension to the agricultural building hereby approved shall be removed and the ground restored to its former condition in the event that it is no longer used or required for agricultural purposes for a period of 24 months.
Reason: The extension has been exceptionally approved solely to meet agricultural need and its subsequent retention would result in an unwarranted intrusion in the countryside.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. Overall, the proposal is considered acceptable in terms of both agricultural need and visual impact and accords with the requirements of Environment Policies 1 and 15, and General Policy 3 of the Strategic Plan.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
==== PAGE 2 ====
24/00731/B Page 2 of 5
This approval relates to the following drawings received 25.06.2024: o Location Plan Proposed o Site Plan with Proposed o Proposed Plans and Elevations o General Arrangement Proposed __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The site represents Field 435281 and the existing agricultural building which lies on the north western side of the A26 between Black Hill Farm on the south eastern side of the road, and Glen Wood on the north western side. The site slopes steeply down towards the Awin Ruy to the north west at a gradient of around 1 in 10. The existing building is set into the slope of the land which makes it less visible from the road.
1.2 The existing agricultural building on the site measures 12.2m wide, 18.4m long and 5.2m to the ridge, and is currently used to support the operations of the farm. Existing hard- core access and manoeuvring surround the building.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for erection of extension to existing agricultural building. The proposed extension which would measure 9.1x 27.5m would be erected on the front elevation of the existing agricultural building on site. This extension would be set at the same land level as the existing building. The extension would be 6.3m to the ridge and 3.6m to the eaves, with the ridge of the new extension 1.1 metres higher than the existing building. The total floor area for the proposed works would be about 252 sq. m(when measured externally).
2.2 The new extension would be finished in Yorkshire boarding with concrete panels to the lower section.
2.3 The applicant advises that the extension of the agricultural building would provide covered housing for existing livestock.
2.5 The additional information provided by the applicant reads thus; o The farm business extends to approximately 200 Acres leased on a rolling tenancy. o The proposed building would be erected on land owned by the applicants. o Current stocking includes, 34 beef breeder cows, , 16 calves 15 other cattle, 100 sheep with lambs. o The information provided shows an intention to increase Beef cows from 28 to 40 and other cattle from 17 to 30. o The proposed building will provide a covered housing area of 252 m2. o The proposed building will be clad with Yorkshire boarding to the outside above concrete panels placed internally to provide some ventilation to the rear of the building. o Roof water will be piped into existing drainage. o The proposed shed will provide modern facilities, suitable livestock ventilation and sufficient access for modern agricultural machinery and storage.
==== PAGE 3 ====
24/00731/B Page 3 of 5
o Without the proposed shed, some cattle will likely be outwintered, which given the local rainfall would see significant soil structure damage, soil erosion and considerable costs associated with cultivations.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 Site Specific 3.1.1 The site lies within an area of land not designated for development on the Area Plan for the South, and is identified as Incised Slopes. The site is not within a Conservation Area or a Registered tree Area and there are no registered trees on site. The site is considered to have low likelihood of flood risks.
3.2 Area: TAPS (2013) 3.2.1 The Character Appraisal within the Area Plan for the South states thus concerning the area - D14 (Ballamodha, Earystane, and St Mark's):
3.2.2 Overall Strategy: "Conserve and enhance: o The character, quality and distinctiveness of the area, with its wooded valley bottoms, its strong geometric field pattern delineated by Manx hedges, its numerous traditional buildings and its network of small roads and lanes. o The strategy should also include the restoration of landscapes disturbed by former mining activities.
3.2.3 Key Views o Distant views prevented at times by dense woodland in river valleys and by the cumulative screening effect of hedgerow trees, which tend to create wooded horizons. o Open and panoramic views out to sea from the higher areas on the upper western parts of the area where there are few trees to interrupt views.
3.3 National: STRATEGIC PLAN (2016) a. General Policy 2 - 'Development Control' considerations. b. General Policy 3 - presumption against development outside allocated sites, other than specific exceptions which include, (f) "building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry". c. Environment Policy 1 - protection of countryside and its ecology. d. Environment Policy 4 - protection of ecology and designated sites/protected species. e. Environment Policy 14- Soil quality considerations for development that would result in permanent loss of agricultural land. f. Environment Policy 15 - Development of agricultural buildings in the countryside. g. Strategic Policy 1 - Efficient use of land and resources h. Strategic Policy 4 - development proposals must protect or enhance the nature conservation and landscape quality of urban as well as rural areas. i. Strategic policy 2 - Priority for new development to identified towns and villages j. Strategic Policy 5 - Design and visual impact k. Spatial Policy 5 - Development in countryside only in accordance with General Policy 3. l. Transport Policy 4 - Highway capacity and safety considerations.
4.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 The Department's Biodiversity Strategy is capable of being a material consideration. It seeks to manage biodiversity changes to minimise loss of species and habitats, whilst seeking to maintain, restore and enhance native biodiversity, where necessary.
5.0 PLANNING HISTORY 5.1 The existing agricultural building on the site was approved under application 10/00641/B
==== PAGE 4 ====
24/00731/B Page 4 of 5
6.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.
6.1 DOI Highways Division finds it to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and/or parking as the existing access design is acceptable for the increase in operations that the proposed extension will bring, and will allow further agricultural activities to remain on the land rather than travelling to other sites to store animals, materials and machinery etc. as needed. (04.07.2024).
6.2 No comments have been received from neighbouring properties.
7.0 ASSESSMENT 7.1 The key considerations in the assessment of this application are: a. The principle of and justification for the building; b. Visual impact on the wider countryside; and c. Whether the development would result in the loss of high quality agricultural land.
7.2 The principle of and justification for the proposal (GP3 & EP 15) 7.2.1 In planning policy terms, the Strategic Plan Environment Policies 1 and 15 are key to the assessment of the acceptability of the agricultural building in principle. General Policy 3 also provides a backdrop to EP15 by restricting development in the countryside other than in exceptional circumstances - the relevant one being operations "essential for the conduct of agriculture." EP15 goes into further detail about the 'agricultural need' for a new building sufficient to outweigh GP3's general presumption against countryside development.
7.2.2 With the current application, there is an existing and long established farm business operating from the site and the proposal for an extension to the existing buildings to offer additional cow accommodation will align with GP3(f) and EP15 and will help support the continued growth of the business in line with the aforementioned policies. Therefore, the principle is considered to be acceptable.
7.3 Visual impact on the wider countryside (EP1, EP15, GP2 & STP 5) 7.3.1 Where sufficient agricultural need is demonstrated, EP15 goes into further detail on the requirements in terms of siting and size/material used etc. The proposal would be sited as an extension to the existing building on the site, and within the existing site enclosure. Moreover, the new extension would be integrated into the sloping site as per the existing building setting it below road level and would be of a design and materials that the new extension would mirror the existing building; thus the design and finish of the new extension would not create undue visual impacts on the surrounding landscape.
7.3.2 . Accordingly, the proposal in terms of design, finish and siting would comply with the requirements of EP 15, which requires that that all new developments are sympathetic to the landscape and built environment of which they will form a part.
7.4 Loss of High Quality Agricultural Land (EP 14) 7.4.1 Environment Policy 14 allows for development on agricultural land provided that they do not result in the loss of high quality agricultural land. High quality agricultural land is defined as being Class 1/2, Class 2/3 and Class 3/2 as annotated on the Agricultural Land Use Capability Map. The proposal site is shown as being within Class 3/4 and as such falls outside the defined land protected by EP14.
7.4.2 In addition the area for the proposed extension is a steep embankment running towards the highway and as such wouldn't provide any optimal agricultural benefit - other than what is being proposed a building to house animals and store feedstock. As such, it is considered that the requirements of Environment Policy 14 are met in this regard.
==== PAGE 5 ====
24/00731/B Page 5 of 5
8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 In summary, the proposal is considered acceptable in terms of both agricultural need and visual impact and broadly accords with the aforementioned policies of the Strategic Plan. The application is therefore recommended for approval.
9.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 9.1 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.
9.2 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.
9.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture 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. __
I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.
Decision Made : Permitted
Date: 08.08.2024
Determining officer Signed : C BALMER
Chris Balmer
Principal Planner
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