Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
21/01111/B Page 1 of 7
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. 21/01111/B Applicant : Mr Scott Newbolt Proposal Erection of an agricultural storage building Site Address Field 314293 Staarvey Road Peel Isle Of Man
Case Officer :
Miss Lucy Kinrade Photo Taken :
18.11.2021 Site Visit :
18.11.2021 Expected Decision Level Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation 25.11.2021
Conditions and Notes for Approval
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
C 1. The agricultural building hereby approved shall be finished in a dark green colour and retained as such thereafter.
Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.
C 2. The building shall be for agricultural use only.
Reason: The application has been assessed on agricultural use only in the interest of protecting the countryside from unwarranted development.
C 3. In the event that the agricultural building hereby approved is no longer used or required for agricultural use or purpose it shall be removed and the ground restored to its former condition, within 6 months of the date the use ceased.
Reason: The building has been exceptionally approved solely to meet agricultural need and any subsequent retention would result in an unwarranted intrusion in the countryside.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The application has been considered on a fine balance that the scale of the proposed building and the explained agricultural need is sufficient and within the bounds of acceptability so as to satisfy General Policy 3 (f) and Environment Policies 1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and that the siting, design and size of building will have a limited visual impact so as to satisfy Environment Policies 2 and 15 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. The application is recommended for approval subject to a number of conditions relating to agricultural use only, the building being finished in dark green and the buildings removal should it no longer be required for agricultural purposes.
==== PAGE 2 ====
21/01111/B Page 2 of 7
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This approval relates to drawing numbers; 2 - Planning Statement 3 - Site Plan 1:2500 4 - Location Plan 1:5000 5 - Proposed Building Dimensions 6 - Agricultural Questionnaire 7 - Email Correspondence with Planning Officer 8 - Statement 9 - Site Photographs 10 - Letter from Planning Admin
All date stamped and received 10/09/2021.
The approval also relates to emails from the applicant all date received 15/11/2021 and 24/11/2021.
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE AS IT COULD BE CONSIDERED A DEPARTURE FROM THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN BUT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.
THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is field 314293 located along the western side of the Staarvey Road, Peel. The field forms part of a wider land holding covering 19 acres in the immediate area.
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the erection of an 8m x 5m agricultural building set back approx. 115m from the road and 25m in from the northern boundary where it steps in slightly. The proposed location of the building is within a natural dipped section of the field as the land slope down and away from the road.
2.2 The building is proposed to be 3m to eaves and 3.5m to centre ridge. A large roller door is proposed on one gable elevation and a single door on one side elevation.
2.3 The building is proposed to be steel framed and clad in dark green metal cladding. The building is proposed to sit on a concrete base.
2.4 The application form and agricultural questionnaire indicates an existing 15 sheep (tups) and is proposing 50 more sheep. Additional information indicates that these animals are owned by another farmer who the applicant has given permission to use the field until the applicant sources their own stock. The applicant does not yet own any stock. The proposed building is to allow him to take care of his own stock and provide safe storage for a tractor with loader, backhoe and other attachments for the maintenance of the land, storage of animal feed, tools and supplies for horticultural activities. Most of the site will be used for grazing with parts also being used for growing crops.
PLANNING HISTORY
==== PAGE 3 ====
21/01111/B Page 3 of 7
3.1 Permission was sought under 09/01649/A for the principle of erecting a new dwelling. This application was refused on the grounds that the proposal would be contrary to established planning policies General Policy 3, Environment Policies 1 and 2, and Housing Policy 4 which not only aim to protect the Manx countryside for its own sake but also seek to direct development to sustainable locations and protect the designated AHLV. The application was also refused on grounds that the proposal failed to demonstrate safe vehicular access and that any engineering works relating to visibility splays would not have an unacceptable impact on the AHLV.
PLANNING POLICY 4.1 The application site is within an area not designated for development on the 1982 Plan and also within an area of high landscape value (AHLV). The site is not recognised as being at any flood risk on recent maps nor in an area at risk of flood. Given the nature of the proposal is it relevant to consider General Policy 3(f) which sets out exceptions to development in the countryside including operations essential for conduct of agriculture, Environment Policy 15 which outlines the general design criteria for agricultural buildings and Environment Policies 1 and 2 which ultimately seek to protect the countryside and AHLV for their own sake and from harmful and unwarranted development.
4.2 The Town and Country Planning Act 1999 states "agriculture" includes horticulture, fruit growing, seed growing, dairy farming, the breeding and keeping of livestock (including any creature kept for the production of food, wool, skins or fur, or for the purpose of its use in the farming of land), the use of land as grazing land, meadow land, market gardens and nursery grounds, and the use of land for woodlands where that use is ancillary to the farming of land for other agricultural purposes, and "agricultural" shall be construed accordingly."
4.3 Environment Policy 1: "The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. For the purposes of this policy, the countryside comprises all land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 at A.3.6 or which is not designated for future development on an Area Plan. Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative."
4.4 Environment Policy 2: "The present system of landscape classification of Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV's) as shown on the 1982 Development Plan and subsequent Local and Area Plans will be used as a basis for development control until such time as it is superseded by a landscape classification which will introduce different categories of landscape and policies and guidance for control therein. Within these areas the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration unless it can be shown that: (a) the development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape; or (b) the location for the development is essential."
4.5 General Policy 3: "Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of: f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry."
4.6 Environment Policy 15: "Where the Department is satisfied that there is agricultural or horticultural need for a new building (including a dwelling), sufficient to outweigh the general policy against development in the countryside, and that the impact of this development including buildings, accesses, servicing etc. is acceptable, such development must be sited as close as is practically possible to existing building groups and be appropriate in terms of scale, materials, colour, siting and
==== PAGE 4 ====
21/01111/B Page 4 of 7
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."
REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 German Commissioners - Objection (20/07/2020) - the acreage on the site is not sufficient to warrant such a building for agricultural use and the Commissioners would like to know if the applicant owns any more land to make a building more viable.
5.2 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services - No highways interest (30/09/2021)
ASSESSMENT
Pre-amble 6.1 The Strategic Plan contains policies that support agricultural development, but as part of such applications it is important that applicants sufficiently demonstrate the true agricultural need so as to meet with General Policy 3(f) and so as to outweigh Environment Policy 1 which ultimately seek to protect the countryside for its own sake. Once sufficient need is demonstrated and the principle for a building is accepted, the assessment then falls to the visual and amenity impacts in order to best protect the visual quality of the landscape in line with Environment Policy 15 and in this case also Environment Policy 2 (AHLV).
Principle 6.2 Often there can be a chicken an egg situation when it comes to agricultural need and agricultural buildings. Without an established operation in place it can often be difficult to demonstrate a need for a building while on the other hand often applicants want to ensure they have all the appropriate facilities and buildings in place first before investing in agricultural or horticultural paraphernalia or investing in livestock.
6.3 Often established agricultural enterprises are the sole income of farmers and their livelihood is heavily dependent on their continued and efficient operation. The bigger and more established the farming operation the easier it's likely to be to demonstrate an agricultural need for a new building to continue the farming operation. This is not to say that smaller farm holdings or start up hobby farms should be discouraged as these can also help contribute to local economy and sustainability, but rather that their agricultural justification is proportionate to the size of the operation and that they can provide sufficient and detailed evidence to support the need for any agricultural building. The risk is that any ad hoc decisions taken on agricultural buildings without sufficient justification of need could lead to an unacceptable proliferation of unwarranted permanent buildings across the countryside which may become obsolete if the intended farming operation does not materialise as anticipated or expected.
6.4 In this specific case, the supporting information for the application and including additional emails from the applicant indicate that the existing 15 sheep on site and the 50 proposed sheep are owned by another farmed whom the applicant has given permission to use the field whilst he makes his own arrangements. The applicant has indicated that the existing tent structure on site is a temporary measure which has allowed him a sheltered area to carry
==== PAGE 5 ====
21/01111/B Page 5 of 7
out fixing works to his tractor but which is to be removed imminently and which would not likely withstand any windy weather.
6.5 The applicant states in the email that the current agricultural needs is for the 'safe and secure place for equipment and supplies' and that 'without a building, the equipment is left outside in the elements rusting, corroding and there is a higher chance of theft', and that already the tractor and attachments are suffering some weather damage and timber and fencing materials getting damp and vulnerable to rot. Not having a shed is costing both time and money which is impacting on the progress in making the land productive. The applicant plans on getting their own stock in spring next year, and that it is possibly in the first instance that their new flock can be housed with the farmers flock already in the field until such a time that the applicants flock is scaled up. The applicant indicates that the other farmer has several sites around the Island including a large lambing and equipment shed in Ballasalla.
6.6 Any structure positioned here would require planning approval. Sometimes in trying to address the chicken and egg situation approval is first sought for a much smaller and less permanent building which meets the basic farming/horticultural needs and once the enterprise becomes more established then consideration can be given to a larger more permanent structure for approval.
6.7 The proposal seeks approval for an 8m x 5m building measuring 3.5m tall, the size of the building is explained to house a tractor, topper, stock trailer, supplementary feed, medication, pens, temporary fencing as well as provide space for any other livestock materials or other horticultural equipment. While the Commissioners are concerned about the size of the building compared with the 19 acres landholding, it is considered in this specific case that there is a tilted balance in favour of the principle of a building here when judged against its initial explained agricultural need and the size of the building would not be so unreasonable minded of the types and size of equipment to be stored and the anticipated stock expected at the site. As such is it considered that the proposal is acceptable in respects of General Policy 3(f) and Environment Policy 1.
Visual Impact 6.8 Whilst these buildings are not uncommon across the countryside, the siting should not result in any significant prominence nor dominant the landscape or skyline. The building in this case has been positioned in a natural dip in the land where views towards it would be limited from public view due to roadside vegetation and the general topography of the area means that it would not interrupt any skyline or far reaching landscape views. The reasonable footprint, low level height and its selected external green colour also helps to further limit its visual impact. While a new isolated structure not clustered within any other development, the proposal has been best sited so as to have an acceptable visual impact in line with Environment Policy 15 and Environment Policy 2.
CONCLUSION 7.1 On review of the application submission and the additional information provided by the applicant and on reaching a judgement against the relevant policies of the Strategic Plan 2016 it is considered, on a fine balance, that in this specific case that the scale of the proposed building, the applicants agricultural intentions and agricultural need demonstrated and the limited visual impact of the building, that the proposal is within the bounds of acceptability so as to satisfy General Policy 3 (f), Environment Policies 1, 2, and 15 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and is recommended for approval subject to a number of conditions relating to agricultural use only, the buildings finish in dark green and its removal should it no longer be required for agricultural purposes.
INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
==== PAGE 6 ====
21/01111/B Page 6 of 7
(a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.
8.2 The decision maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status __
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: 13.12.2021
Signed : L KINRADE Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See below
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.
==== PAGE 7 ====
21/01111/B Page 7 of 7
PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 13.12.2021
Application No. : 21/01111/B Applicant : Mr Scott Newbolt Proposal : Erection of an agricultural storage building Site Address : Field 314293 Staarvey Road Peel Isle Of Man
Planning Officer : Miss Lucy Kinrade
Presenting Officer As above (correct manually if not the case officer)
Addendum to the Officer’s Report
It was noted during the Planning Committee meeting that the standard 4 year planning condition had not been added to the recommendation. The case officer updated the recommendation to add this condition and the application was unanimously approved.
“C4 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.”
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal