6 September 2004 · Minister (confirmed Planning Committee refusal on appeal)
Field 234363, Douglas Road, Kirk Michael, Isle Of Man, IM6 1au
The proposal sought approval in principle for a retirement cottage for Mr & Mrs J Graham at the south-east corner of field 234363, Cammall Farm, Douglas Road, Kirk Michael, to allow the applicant to retire due to health issues while remaining available to assist his son running the farm.
Click a button above to find applications similar to this one.
See how this application compares to similar ones — policies, conditions, and outcomes side by side.
The Inspector interpreted Circular 3/88 strictly, requiring real agricultural need to justify a countryside dwelling, even for a farmer's retirement home; occasional assistance during lambing or son's…
Planning Circular 1/88 Residential Housing in the Country
Discourages residential development in countryside except for justified agricultural holdings (para 6-7); site in open countryside outside zoned areas, so normal planning objections prevail without proven need.
Planning Circular 3/88 - New Agricultural Dwellings
Requires evidence of real agricultural need (para 1-2) including past accommodation, occupant role, and site within/adjoining farm buildings (para 3); failed para 2(a)(b) as existing dwellings suffice and occasional help not essential on-site; failed para 3(a) as site 200m away; prior severance of holding not justified.
No adverse traffic impacts
Michael Commissioners strongly object to the retirement cottage due to non-compliance with farm dwelling siting policy and existing buildings on site; DoT Highways confirm no adverse traffic impacts; Agricultural Adviser supports the need for the dwelling to provide farm cover.
Key concern: contrary to Planning Circular 3/88 Policy 2 on farm dwelling siting
Michael Commissioners
Objectionthe farm is not in a fully working order; There are too many buildings already on the site and these existing stone outbuildings are not currently in agricultural use; the dwelling would not be closely integrated with the existing buildings which would be contrary to Planning Circular 3/88 Policy 2; there are many health & safety issues, which should be considered should tourists be allowed to roam free on a working farm
DoT Highways
No ObjectionNo adverse traffic impacts
Caroline Perry Agricultural Adviser
SupportThis would therefore provide improved welfare conditions for the stock and help achieve farm assurance standards.; the dwelling needs to be on or very close to the farm if the applicant is to provide cover for his son.
The original application PA 04/01435/A for approval in principle of a retirement cottage was refused by the Planning Committee twice, citing insufficient justification for another dwelling given prior agricultural permissions and non-compliance with Circular 3/88 siting requirements. Appellants argued the farm's viability, son's takeover, father's health issues post-heart attacks, and need for on-site assistance during lambing, supported by the Agricultural Adviser. The inspector interpreted Circular 3/88 strictly, finding no real agricultural need as the existing farmhouse suffices for the son as principal worker, occasional assistance does not require residency, prior dwellings and holiday conversions provide alternatives, and the remote site fails siting policy. The appeal was recommended for dismissal to uphold countryside protections.
Precedent Value
Strict test for retirement farm dwellings: must prove 'real agricultural need' beyond sympathy, with existing farmhouse for successor sufficient; siting must strictly adjoin buildings. Future applicants must show exceptional ongoing farm operational need, not just cover for absences, and propose integrated locations.
Inspector: David Ward
