21 November 2007 · Minister for Local Government and the Environment (via Chief Executive letter confirming Inspector's recommendation)
Ballagawne Farm, Ballagawne Road, Baldrine, Isle Of Man, IM4 6ep
The proposal was for a new steel-framed barn measuring 19m x 10m, 3.8m to eaves and 4.8m to ridge, with concrete blockwork lower walls and corrugated sheeting above, located in an open field 15m west of the farmstead and 20m south of the highway, to store hay from 25-acre holding and machinery.
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 Planning Committee refused on 21/11/2007. On appeal, Inspector Hurley found the 'utilitarian appearance, size and prominent location of the proposed building would detract from the open, rural cha…
General Policy 3
Prohibits development outside zoned areas except inter alia 'building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry'. Officer/Inspector assessed if barn met (f) exception; Planning Authority/DAFF argued small scale (0.26 labour units) lacks sufficient need; court ruled commercial viability irrelevant, pure 'essential for agriculture' test applies, applicant's unchallenged evidence of inadequate storage potentially met it.
Environment Policy 1
Protects countryside unless overriding national need with no alternative. Inspector applied strictly, finding no such need; court held questionable applicability to agriculture (farms inherently countryside, would prohibit most farm buildings), should be read with other policies per 1.7.2, given limited weight.
Environment Policy 2
Protects AHLV unless no harm or location essential. Site in high landscape value/scenic area; building's prominent location tested, failed as would harm character.
Environment Policy 15
Requires agricultural need outweighing countryside policy, sited near building groups, appropriate scale etc., exceptional for exposed/prominent sites. Inspector found need insufficient for small holding, site 15m from farmstead but prominent/isolated; court confirmed need test excludes commercial viability.
erection of such barn would have some agricultural merit
DAFF Agricultural Adviser finds the proposed agricultural building has some agricultural merit despite the small scale of the current enterprise; Department of Transport Highways Division does not oppose; Lonan Parish Commissioners object strongly citing insufficient agricultural justification and excessive building size.
Key concern: level of agricultural activity insufficient to justify new building size
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF)
Conditional No ObjectionOn the basis of these comments, the erection of a new agricultural building would have some agricultural merit.; The current enterprise is of a size which this Department would not view as an agricultural business.
Department of Transport, Highways Division
No ObjectionThe Highways Division of the Department of Transport has no views on this application. The application having been considered, the response is: Do not oppose
Lonan Parish Commissioners
Objectionrecommend refusal of the above Planning Application; recommends that the decision made on 19th March 2008 should be upheld and the appeal be dismissed
Planning permission was refused for erection of a steel-framed agricultural barn at Ballagawne Farm, Lonan, on 21/11/2007 by the Planning Committee. The appellant appealed and an inquiry was held on 12/02/2008 by Inspector Michael Hurley, who recommended dismissal citing landscape harm, lack of commercial viability, subdivided farm status, and alternatives for crop handling. The Minister accepted this on 19/03/2008 and confirmed refusal. The appellant's Petition of Doleance was dismissed by Deemster Doyle on 05/12/2008. On appeal to the Staff of Government Division on 23/11/2009, the court found the Inspector misdirected himself by treating commercial viability and subdivided farm status as material considerations not supported by policy (contrary to General Policy 3(f) 'essential for the conduct of agriculture'), quashed the Minister's decision, and remitted for reconsideration by a different inspector.
Precedent Value
Establishes that commercial viability is not a material consideration for agricultural buildings under GP3(f); decisions must stick to policy wording without injecting profitability tests. Future applicants should focus on functional essentiality for agriculture, avoiding viability arguments; inspectors must explicitly disclaim immaterial factors.
Inspector: Michael Hurley
