Officer Report

Applicant: Mr Ian Kelly Proposal The erection of a new farmhouse and agricultural barn Site Address Fields, 321756, 324673 And 324674 Foxdale Road Braaid Isle Of Man IM4 2AN Case Officer : Russell Williams Site Visit: Expected Decision Level Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation 22.01.2025

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. 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.

• C 4. 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 5. 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 restrictive policies apply and new dwellings are not normally approved except in exceptional circumstances, which include where a functional agricultural need has been established and accepted by the Department.
• C 6. 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 7. 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 8. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, 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.
• C 9. Prior to the first occupation of the dwelling hereby permitted, the access and visibility splays shall be fully constructed and completed in accordance with Drawing No. PBSPV 02 and PBSP 03 and the access shall be hard surfaced with a gradient not exceeding 7% over its first

• 6m. Thereafter the access shall be permanently retained as approved. The re-surfacing must result in a bound surface such that no material is tracked onto the public highway. Reason: In the interests of highway safety

• C 10. All areas within the visibility splays shown on the approved block site plan Drawing No. PBSP 03 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 11. 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 12. 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.

• C 13. 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.

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 functional need for a new agricultural workers dwelling and barn at the site. The development, as now amended, can be delivered without significant detriment to the visual amenities of the immediate locality and wider landscape. The proposals will not harm the amenity of residential properties in the area or highway safety and are considered to be acceptable in this regard. The proposals are therefore considered to be in accordance with Strategic Policy 5, Spatial Policy 5, Transport Policies 4 and 7, General Policies 2 and 3, and Environment Policies 1 and 15 and Housing Policies 7-9 of the Strategic Plan (2016).

Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to the following drawings and documents, date stamped received on 18 November 2024: Site Location Plan SLP 01 Existing Block Site Plan EBSP 01 Proposed Block Site Plan 1:1000 PBSP 02 Proposed Block Site Plan 1:500 with visibility PBSPV 02 Proposed Block Site Plan enlarged 1:500 PBSP 03 Proposed Ground Floor Plan PGFP 01 Proposed First Floor Plan PFFP 01 Proposed Attic Floor Plan PAFP 01 Proposed South East Elevation PSEE 01 Proposed North West Elevation PNWE 01 Proposed South West and North East Elevations PSW and NEE 01 Proposed Section View PSV 01 Proposed Roof Plan PRP 01 Proposed Barn NE and SW Elevations PBNESWE 01 Proposed Barn NW and SE Elevations PBNWSEE 01 Proposed Barn Floor Plan PBFP 01 Proposed Barn Roof Plan PBRP 01

• Map of Parcels of Land Farmed 1
• Map of Parcels of Land Farmed 2
• Map of Parcels of Land Farmed 3 Site Plan of Fields Farmed at Hilberry, Onchan Planning Statement Agricultural Statement

_______________________________________________________________ Right to Appeal

It is recommended that the following organisations should be given the Right to Appeal on the basis that they have submitted a relevant objection:

Marown Parish Commissioners

It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal: DOI Highway Services No objection subject to conditions which have been applied DOI Highway Drainage No objection It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given the Right to Appeal as they have submitted an objection that meets the specified criteria: Holmlea, Braaid Road, Braaid Deerae, Braaid Road, Braaid White House, Braaid Road, Braaid Bluebell House, Braaid Road, Braaid

________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site comprises Fields 321756 and 321758 which is situated on the northwest 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 detached dwelling is proposed to be sited within the Field 321758 adjacent to the main road, following the same building line as the adjacent detached dwelling of Holmlea to the south-west.
• - The dwelling would comprise a total of 6-bedrooms, with accommodation laid out across three floors with second floor accommodation proposed in the roofspace, which would be facilitate by 3 no. front facing rooflights. The dwelling would have traditional living and kitchen/dining accommodation, a snug, office, utility, store and garage.
• - The dwelling would comprise a gabled front porch with wide chimney breasts at either flank to emulate traditional rural Manx vernacular.
• - The dwelling would include an attached dual-pitched single storey element incorporate a single garage and store room.

• - Additional parking provision would be delivered to the immediate front of the dwelling, with the existing site access to relocated slightly south and widened to 6m with new concrete hardstanding laid over the first 6.0m. The access drive runs along the northern boundary
• - The proposals include the planting of a new boundary hedge along much of the south and west perimeter of Field 321758.

2.2 The second element of the proposals relates to the erection of a detached agricultural barn. This building formed the reason for a previous refusal when the barn was to be located in the southern corner of the adjoining Field (321756) which would be accessed via the existing track/driveway. As described in Section 5.0 of this report, members were concerned with the siting and landscape impact of the building. The barn will now be sited to the northern boundary of Field (321758) and immediately adjacent (west) of the proposed farmhouse. - 2.3 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. - 2.4 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. - 2.5 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) - 2.6 The following provides a summary of the applicant's position as articulated in the officer report for the previous application and within the submitted Agricultural Appraisal:

• - Combined, the farming operations have a labour requirement of 3.29 standard labour units.
• - Currently, for both parties, all ewes are lambed outdoors through a 6-week period commencing in April.
• - The son farms on leased land at Ballachrink, Hillberry and some at Ashley hill.
• - The main applicants operations are based at Ballacorris farm, St Marks along with other parcels of land at Ballagick, Knock Froy, Cordeman, Close Clarke and Hampton Croft along with other smaller land parcels.
• - Both parties are farming on long established rental agreements (5 years plus).
• - The applicants currently reside at Ballanicolas Farmhouse, St Marks, which is leased. There is no land or buildings available at Ballanicolas.
• - The provision of a dwelling will provide Both Mr Ian Kelly and Darren Kelly security of residence and also provide a permanent base from which to operate their agricultural businesses from.
• - Both parties are not in a position to purchase a dwelling, however combined they have the potential to build a property suitable for them all.
• - Agriculturally tied houses in the area that come to the market are very rare and Mr Ian Kelly has researched available tied houses with no success.
• - Both Businesses are Red Tractor Farm Assured, selling their produce to Isle of Man Meats.
• - 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.

• - The building at Ballacorris is too far away to consider housing and early lambing ewes due to the travel time involved and the increased level of observation and attention required during lambing.
• - The applicant also trains and sells sheepdogs. Travelling to various parcels of land, sometimes, twice daily, sometimes three times a day to see and train his animals is at least 7.2 mile round trip (to the nearest parcel) which is far from Ideal. Having the suitable facilities on site to would reduce the need to travel as frequently and improve the training.
• - The reduced traveling would not only save on fuel bills but also reduce the businesses carbon footprint.

2.7 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.

• - 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.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY - 3.1 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. - 3.2 The following sections of the Area Plan for the East (2020) are considered relevant in the determination of this application:

• 3.2.1 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."

3.3 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: - 3.4 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." - 3.5 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:

• 3.5.1 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."
• 3.5.2 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."

3.6 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, 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."

3.7 "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."

3.8 Housing Policy 7: "New agricultural dwellings will only be permitted in exceptional circumstances where real agricultural need is demonstrated."

• 3.8.1 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."

3.9 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."

• 3.9.1 "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."

• 3.9.2 "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."

3.10 Housing Policy 9: "Where permission is granted for an agricultural dwelling, the welling 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
• (c) it is approached via the existing farm access."

• 3.10.1 "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."

3.11 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." - 3.12 Environment Policy 4 protects biodiversity (including protected species and designated sites). - 3.13 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.

3.14 Transport Policy 4: The new and existing highways which serve any new development must be designed so as to be capable of accommodating the vehicle and pedestrian journeys generated by that development in a safe and appropriate manner, and in accordance with the environmental objectives of this plan. - 3.15 Transport Policy 7: The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards.

- 4.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

4.1 Planning Circular 3/91 'Guide to the Design of Residential Development in the Countryside.

• 4.1.1 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."
• 4.1.2 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. "
• 4.1.3 Policy 4: "External finishes are expected to be selected from a limited range of traditional materials."
• 4.1.4 Policy 5: "Doors and windows together with their size and relationship with each other and the wall face should follow traditional rural forms."

4.2 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 PLANNING HISTORY

5.1 The following applications are of material planning relevance to the proposed development:

24/00001/B - The erection of a new farmhouse and agricultural barn. Site Address Fields 324673, 321756 And 324674 - Refused 15 November 2024 for the following reason: The proposed agricultural barn forming part of the wider development would be sited at too great a distance from the proposed dwelling and existing dwellings within the village, contrary to the provisions of Environment Policy 15 of the Strategic Plan (2016) which requires new agricultural buildings to be sited as closely to existing building groups as practical. The proposed barn would further be sited in an exposed and elevated location with the potential to result in an obtrusive feature in the context of the wider landscape. The proposals are therefore deemed to be unacceptable from a visual impact standpoint, further contrary to General Policy 2 (b) and (c) of the Strategic Plan (2016).

22/01148/B - To widen an existing vehicle entrance and associated works. Fields 321756, 321755 & 321758 Braaid Road Braaid Isle Of Man - Permitted 9 August 2023

21/01444/B - Erection of 4-bedroomed bungalow, (agricultural worker's dwelling), and erection of agricultural barn and the construction of a private access road. Field 321756 & 321758 Braaid Road Braaid IM4 2AW - Refused 9 August 2022 for the following 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.
• 6.0 REPRESENTATIONS

6.1 The following Statutory Consultees have been consulted and their responses can be summarised as follows: Marown Parish Commissioners - The Commissioners considered the above Planning Application

• at their meeting held on Wednesday 18 December 2024. The Commissioners resolved to OBJECT to the application on the following grounds:

• o There is a presumption against development in the countryside. DOI Highway Services - The application is similar to previous submission PA 24/00001/B, seeking the creation of a farmhouse and an agricultural barn. The final revisions of the previous PA were acceptable to Highways. This application broadly mirrors the access arrangements of the previous, with some minor alterations. The site already benefits from an existing access, however access is to be taken from a new position along the field. The principle of access to the site has been established, but with the proposed development bringing intensification of use, the relocation of the access has been included to demonstrate betterment of access arrangement and visibility. The site lies within a 40mph speed limit. Manual for Manx Roads visibility requirement for a 40mph speed limit is 90m. The application has provided 90m splays from the access from a 2.4m setback distance. To the north the 90m splay can be achieved with an offset from the edge of highway of approx. 1.5m. The offset used could increase the risk of overtaking vehicles being obscured, however,
• obstruction would be instantaneous and vehicles would return to the visibility envelope in a short distance. To the south, the 90m splay can be achieved to the centreline of the carriageway. At this position there is increased risk that oncoming vehicles would be hidden from view. However, in this direction vehicles are coming off the roundabout where speeds would be lower. To further support the access proposals, visibility splays of 70m have also been provided. These can be provided to the nearside edge of carriageway with minimal offset. Despite some relaxations being applied to the plans, Highways consider the improvement in access arrangement and visibility achievable from the proposal to be greater than the intensification of use experienced by the site. Therefore, the visibility provided is acceptable to Highways.

The new access is proposed to be 6m in width, with a gentle entry taper. This meets the MfMR width standards for an access. The access is stated to be formed of a bound and consolidated surface material for a minimum of 6m from the edge of highway. The access must be no greater in gradient than 7% (1:14). The alteration to the highway will require a Section 109(a) Highway agreement post planning consent. The Applicant / Developer shall provide run off / surface water drainage where necessary to prevent water from flowing out onto or damaging the public road, such as where an access slopes down towards the road. Similarly, on construction of the vehicular access, the existing road drainage must either be retained or an effective alternative scheme provided at the Applicant's / Developer's expense on a satisfactory arrangement being drawn up and agreed with the Highway Services' Drainage team.

Internally, there is sufficient space for the parking of at least two vehicles to support the dwelling. With the inclusion of a garage, bicycle parking can be supported internally. The applicant may want to consider the provision of an electric vehicle charging point in order to support the islands sustainable transport goals. The access will be used for both domestic and agricultural vehicles. There is sufficient space internally for the movement and turning of domestic vehicles. One alteration between the previous and current application is the movement of the field gate to the northern edge. The new location is 15.2m from the boundary with the highway. A vehicle with trailer may find the movement in from the access to the gate difficult. There may be a requirement for additional manoeuvres within the site in order to access the gate or enter the highway in a correct alignment. While the area marked for hardstanding is not extensive, there is substantial open area behind the access that can provide space for these movements.

The proposal raises no significant road safety or highway network efficiency issues. Accordingly, Highway Services Development Control raises no objection to the proposal subject to all access arrangements including visibility splays to accord to Drawing No. PBSPV 02 and PBSP 03, and for the access to be a max. gradient of 7% for the first 6m back from the highway. The Applicant is advised that a S109(A) Highway Agreement is needed after the grant of planning consent. DOI 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: Applicant should be aware of and demonstrate compliance with the clause above.

Ecosystem Policy Team - No objection subject to condition. Detailed comments

• o Our comments regarding the development of this land are unchanged since we commented on PA 24/00001/B. Accordingly, we again request conditions to ensure impacts on breeding birds and common lizards are avoided, and to mitigate against the loss of an area of sod bank. Potential Conditions
• o A Precautionary Working Method Statement for breeding birds and common lizards, written by a suitably qualified ecologist to be submitted to Planning and approved in writing by the Department and for the development to them be carried out in accordance with these details
• o Landscaping (new hedge planting) to be undertaken as per the Proposed Block Site Plan during the first planting season following commencement of development and for the replacement of any planting which dies or is removed within the first 5 years.

6.2 4 representations have been received from members of the public objecting to the proposals and can be summarised as follows:

• o The application should therefore be refused by the Department on the basis that the application is not materially different to the previous applications (24/00001/B and 21/01444/B)

• in the last few years; it is the same development, on the same site plan, being in the same position on the same parcel of land.
• o Harmful impact upon residential amenity (light, outlook, noise and privacy) and the quiet enjoyment of the area, particularly from lambing or calving
• o Harm to highway safety
• o The site is not zoned for development under the 1982 Order and is contrary to Housing Policy 9 in particular as if fails to satisfy the test at HP9(a)-(c)
• o Loss of Manx Hedge bank, trees etc will be harmful to the character and appearance of the area
• o An agricultural need to live on the site has not been demonstrated and the proposal does not meet the exception circumstance requirements of Housing Policies 7 or 9
• o The site is not big enough to be run as a farm (5 Acres), the grazing will be reduced further to approximately 3 acres if the house/garage and, barn is built.
• o if this application is approved it would be contrary to the stated aim of the Strategic Plan to protect the countryside for its own sake (Environment Policy 1).
• o Increase in farm movements and for dog training would be harmful to highway safety and the A26/A24 and the Braaid roundabout are known accident spots.
• o There has been a breach of planning permission 22/00148/B to widen an existing vehicle entrance and associated works, as works have not been carried out as approved

6.3 2 representations have been submitted with the application received from members of the public supporting to the proposals and can be summarised as follows:

• There is a lack of active farmers in the community and with the land owned/rented the applicant needs a base to work from. They fulfil the criteria of a fulltime farmer and The Braaid is supposed to be an agricultural hamlet. o I hope common sense will prevail and the Planning Committee will see the needs of the wider community and support the fragile farming industry even if it affects my view. o Farmers should be able to live close to their livestock, for practical reasons, as well as economic and animal welfare. o Farmers need ancillary buildings. The proposed application provides space for sheepdogs, as well as indoor space for orphaned lambs in need of intensive care. The current remote barn space is impractical in terms of services, and provides only limited 'people' support. o The proposed support building would enable machinery to be worked-upon in a properly lit, fully serviced area, removing the need to work upon broken machinery in the fields, with the associated risks. o With decades of decline in farming, support should be given to the producers and passing this application would increase productivity, remove practical problems, and increase security. o The 'micro farm' being proposed represents a logical solution to the economic barriers of entry to the construction of larger new farm developments. o The site is within an existing village curtilage, and the proposed construction complies with the Manx vernacular. It provides employment, bringing economic and environmental benefits, and meets the objectives of the Isle of Man agricultural and sustainability policies.

6.4 Letter of support from Mr Stu Peters, MHK for Middle:

• o I believe you are applying again for planning permission to build a barn and agricultural dwelling on your land.
• o I would like to record that I am absolutely in support of this development as I believe it will have no impact on neighbours, is an entirely sensible and modest scheme and will make best use of your limited resources during a period of great uncertainty for our farming industry.

- 7.0 ASSESSMENT

7.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are as follows:

• - Principle of development and justification of need (SP5, GP3, EP1, HP7)
• - Design and visual impact (GP2, EP15)

• - Impact upon neighbouring amenity (GP2, g)
• - Highways and parking (TP4,7)
• - Other matters

7.2 Principle of Development

• 7.2.1 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. The previous planning application, refused in 2024 (24/00001/B) accepted that the principle of developing a new farm dwelling and barn on the site was acceptable, but for the reason set out at Section

• 5.0, the landscape impact of the barn and its siting was not found to be acceptable. For completeness, the principle of development is assessed once again below.

• 7.2.2 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.
• 7.2.3 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.'
• 7.2.4 The position set out by the case officers in the previous reports to 24/00001/B and 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.
• 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.
• o 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.

• 7.2.5 From review the current submission, it is notable that changes have been made to the siting of the proposed agricultural barn, which are a direct response to the reason for refusal of 24/00001/B. Other matters, including the assessment of agricultural need, stand labour requirements of the holding and functional need remain unchanged.
• 7.2.6 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 planning application. Therefore, concerns raised by the case officer for the previous application remain a material planning consideration.
• 7.2.7 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 clarity having been provided over the exact location and quantum of land farm as part of the wider agricultural holding. This information was assessed by the Agricultural Policy Team and reported in the planning officer report to committee for application 24/00001/B. The Agricultural Policy Team deemed that the proposals to be fully justified in the context of agricultural need and there has been no material change in circumstance since.
• 7.2.8 In particular, the Policy Team noted 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.
• 7.2.9 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.

• 7.2.10 The Policy Team further considered 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.
• 7.2.11 Finally, the Policy Team considered 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 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.
• 7.2.12 Whilst the points raised by objectors to the proposals over the lack of agricultural need are acknowledged, the previous assessment and conclusions provided by the Agricultural Policy Team to the refused application 24/00001/B 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.
• 7.2.13 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, or 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.
• 7.2.14 Turning to the issue of available buildings, the applicants' position is clearly outlined within this report, insofar as they do not have suitable buildings 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.
• 7.2.15 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 hamlet, and would not represent the development of an isolated dwelling in the countryside in the literal sense.
• 7.2.16 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 that the agricultural need and functional requirement has been accepted previously and remains equally valid to this application, that 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 functional and realistic agricultural need has been demonstrated to justify the erection of the proposed dwelling and agricultural barn in this location.

- 7.3 DESIGN AND VISUAL IMPACT

• 7.3.1 The design of the dwelling closely reflects the requirements of Planning Circular 3/91 for a traditional styled dwelling in the countryside. In 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.
• 7.3.2 It is acknowledged that the proposals would not technically accord with the key requirements of Housing Policy 9 which states that new agricultural dwellings must be sited within or immediately adjoining a 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. It is recognised that the dwelling would be sited within close proximity to the highway and therefore clearly visible within this context, but together with the agricultural barn, the buildings will sit between existing built form. The dwelling will provide an active frontage onto the highway which given its design approach, is considered to be appropriate and in keeping with the character of the area.
• 7.3.3 Notwithstanding the above, 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.
• 7.3.4 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 the hamlet, 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. On this basis therefore, the proposed siting of the new dwelling is considered to be appropriate.
• 7.3.5 The siting of the proposed barn has now been revised and reflects the location of the original submission for 24/00001/B, which was subsequently amended to move the barn further away from the dwellinghouse. This was, ultimately, the reason that the previous scheme was refused. 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 now that it is to be located adjacent to the dwellinghouse and a third party owned barn to the north. The siting will ensure that the barn is within sight and sound of the farm dwelling which is a critical consideration during the lambing season.
• 7.3.6 The proposed barn is no longer located in an isolated landscape setting away from existing/proposed buildings. Topographically it will also be on lower land and will be less prominent as a result. The visual impacts associated with the new barn, which are of course undeniable, are reduced significantly in respect of this amended siting. The proposed barn will relate well to built form and would not constitute an isolated, incongruous feature within the

rural landscape. Existing and proposed landscaping will help soften the impact of the development as a whole and such will reduce the visual impact from public vantage points. The applicants point with regard to there being no removal of hedgerow or trees are noted and agreed with, though the removal of a section of Manx bank along the road frontage will cause some minor harm.

• 7.3.7 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.
• 7.3.8 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 meet the relevant policy and guidance tests for design, resulting in an acceptable impact from a visual aesthetic standpoint.
• 7.3.9 The impact of the development upon the character and appearance of the wider landscape, particularly in relation to the relocated barn, is considered to be limited to the immediate setting due to the application site falling within an existing settlement and following an established building line of development. The proposals will not give rise to wider landscape impacts and on balance therefore, the proposals are considered to be acceptable from a design, visual and landscape impact perspective. The proposals therefore comply with General Policy (b) and (c) and Environment Policy 15 of the Strategic Plan.

- 7.4 IMPACT ON NEIGHBOURING AMENITY

• 7.4.1 Objections have been received form neighbouring residents over concerns that the development will adversely impact upon residential amenity of neighbouring properties.
• 7.4.2 The impact upon amenity was found to be acceptable previously and the only material change is the location of the proposed barn.
• 7.4.3 Whilst the barn will now be closer to residential properties, its siting is still well separated from nearby dwellings and gardens. The seasonal use of the barn for lambing will not give rise to any significant unacceptable impacts from noise or odour as a result of the siting and separation distances.
• 7.4.4 It is considered that 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 opposite the site would also be ensured a sufficient degree of separation to ensure their amenities would be safeguarded.
• 7.4.5 The proposals are assessed as complying with General Policy 2 (g) and Transport Policies 4 and 7 of the Strategic Plan.

- 7.5 HIGHWAYS AND PARKING

• 7.5.1 The application will relocate an access off the A26 slightly south along the western boundary.
• 7.5.2 Submitted plans indicate the extent of visibility splays that will be provided, together with finished surfacing, boundary treatments and parking/turning provision within the site.
• 7.5.3 Notwithstanding public concerns raised in regard to highway safety, the principle of a new access was found to be acceptable under the previous grant of permission and the position of this amended access improves visibility along the site frontage. DOI Highway Services do not

object to the proposed development and consider the transport impacts to be acceptable, subject to conditions.

• 7.5.4 The development provides 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 and complied with Transport Policies 4 and 7 together with General Policy 2 (h) and (i) of the Strategic Plan.

- 7.6 OTHER MATTERS

• 7.6.1 It is noted from the content of some representations received that the current access has been widened with gates installed and that such has not been undertaken in full accordance with the approved plans relative to PA 22/01148/B. It is claimed that this 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.
• 7.6.2 The point raised by DOI Highways Drainage are noted, though the proposals relate to the use and upgrading of an existing hard surfaced access and so drainage regimes are unlikely to change significantly. This matter can be controlled through the required S109 (A) Highway Agreement.

- 8.0 CONCLUSION

8.1 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.

8.2 The amended application and new location of the agricultural barn address the reason for refusing application 24/00001/B and the development now ensures that there will be no significant adverse impact upon visual amenity or the character of the landscape that would warrant refusal. - 8.3 The proposals are therefore considered to be in accordance with Strategic Policy 5, Spatial Policy 5, Transport Policies 4 and 7, 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.

9.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE 9.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted).

9.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to:

• o Applicant (in all cases);
• o a Local Authority; Government Department; Manx Utilities; and Manx National Heritage that submit a relevant objection; and
• o any other person who has made an objection that meets specified criteria.

9.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10.

9.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required):

• o any appellant or potential appellant (which includes the applicant);

• o the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, the Department of Infrastructure and the local authority for the area;
• o any other person who has submitted written representations (this can include other Government Departments and Local Authorities); and
• o in the case of a petition, a single representative.

9.5 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 the Right to Appeal.

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 : …Permitted……….... Committee Meeting Date:…10.02.2025 Signed : Russell Williams 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.

Planning Committee Decision 10.02.2025

Application No. : 24/91306/B Applicant : Mr Ian Kelly Proposal : The erection of a new farmhouse and agricultural barn Site Address : Fields, 321756, 324673 And 324674

Foxdale Road Braaid Isle Of Man IM4 2AN Planning Officer : Russell Williams Presenting Officer As above Addendum to the Officer’s Report

Planning committee unanimously accepted the recommendation of the Case Officer with an amendment to the wording of condition 6 to require a lighting plan, which is worded as follows:

C6 - No external lighting may be installed unless a lighting plan is first submitted to and approved in writing by the Department.

Reason: To prevent light pollution and impact on wildlife.