24/91334/BRefused

4 June 2025 · Delegated - Principal Planner (Chris Balmer)

Construction of Agricultural Storage Building

Field 534635, Slegaby Lane, Hillberry, Onchan, Isle Of Man, IM4 5bn

This decision was appealedAP25/0021

Appeal dismissed

View →

Received25 Nov 2024

Validated4 Dec 2024

Decided4 Jun 2025

6 months

Received25 Nov 2024

Validated4 Dec 2024

Decided4 Jun 2025

6 months

Why was this refused?

Lack of proven agricultural need and justification for scale
Isolated siting harming landscape character
Conflict with General Policy 3(f) and (g)
Visual intrusion from size and height
Failure of Environment Policy 1 and 15
No established farming operation

The proposal was for a new agricultural storage building measuring 43m by 21m with a 9m ridge height, clad in dark green box profile composite sheeting, including a roller shutter door, pedestrian doors, rooflights, and solar panels on one roof slope.

Refusal Reasons

✗The Department is not satisfied that there is sufficient justification for the proposed building to warrant setting aside the presumption against development outside areas zoned for development. Furthermore, the proposed size and siting will be seen in an isolated position within the countryside, it is not considered appropriate and would harm the character and quality of the landscape. As such, the proposal is concluded to represent unwarranted development that is detrimental to the amenity of the countryside contrary to the provision of General Policy 3(g) and Environment Policy 1.
✗There is no overriding need for the proposed agricultural building, as has been assessed in the preceding sections of this report. No exceptions can be justified within the submission, as required by General Policy 3f, and there is a conflict in the information provided for the proposed building.

Documents (19)

Officer Report Decision Notice Location Plan Application Form

Find Similar Applications

Click a button above to find applications similar to this one.

⚖️

Compare this application

See how this application compares to similar ones — policies, conditions, and outcomes side by side.

Search for an application to compare with

Decision & Reasoning

Refused4 June 2025

The officer determined there was no sufficient justification or evidence of agricultural need for a building of this size (43m x 21m x 9m), as the applicant provided vague details on storage for hay, …

Policies Assessed (3)

GP3

General Policy 3

General Policy 3(f) permits development outside zoned areas only for buildings essential for agriculture; the officer found no overriding need demonstrated, with vague justification, no established operation, and conflicting info on livestock/machinery. GP3(g) presumes against unwarranted countryside development; the proposal's size/siting harmed landscape amenity.

ENV1

Environment Policy 1

Protects countryside from unwarranted development; large isolated barn lacked justification, appearing visually intrusive and detrimental to character/quality despite topography/hedgerows.

ENV15

Environment Policy 15

Sets design criteria for agricultural buildings, permitting in isolated areas only in exceptional circumstances with appropriate landscaping/materials; no exceptional need justified 9m high isolated siting 190-220m from dwellings, scale/form out of keeping with rural character.

Public Comments (3)

SupportDOI Highway Services(statutory consultee)

no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and/or parking as the access onto the A18 from Slegaby Lane is acceptable for the proposals and the building is likely to reduce agricultural traffic entering and exiting the site to/from the local highway network.

SupportOnchan Commissioners(parish)

Approved for planning purposes only.

SupportDOI Highway Drainage(statutory consultee)

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: Applicant should be aware of the clause above.

Consultation Responses

DEFA Agriculture objects to the proposal due to lack of demonstrated agricultural need and insufficient supporting information.

Key concern: lack of demonstrated agricultural need for a building of this scale

DEFA Agriculture

Objection

I am unable to support the proposal at this time and would not recommend it due to lack of information; With a detailed plan I would be able to re-assess that proposal

Appeal Decision