DEC Officer Report

Application No.: 19/00827/B Applicant: Mr Ben Casement Proposal: Erection of single unit garage Site Address: Andreas Airfield Braust Andreas Isle Of Man Planning Officer: Mr Nick Salt Photo Taken: 21.08.2019 Site Visit: 21.08.2019 Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 09.09.2019 _________________________________________________________________

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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

• C 2. The storage shed hereby approved shall only be used for private or domestic purposes and not for any commercial operation.

Reason: To prevent unacceptable use of the building which may impact on traffic/highway demand, and to ensure that the shed is used for the specific reasons stated in the planning application.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This decision relates to the following plans and drawings, date stamped received on 18th July 2019:

• o 19/0386 01 - Location Plan
• o 19/0386 02 - Site/Floor Plan & Elevations

_______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE COMMITTEE AS IT COULD BE CONSIDERED A DEPARTURE FROM THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is a small section of land which sits within the former Andreas Airfield, at the Andreas Village side. The area is characterised by informal industrial operations and buildings. To the immediate north of the site are three large sheds, and to the south, hardstanding which - according to aerial images available - has been used for the storage of vehicles for a number of years. - 1.2 The site itself also currently consists of hard standing with vehicles stored above with unadopted road access onto the Oatlands Road.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Proposed is the erection of a 8x7m corrugated metal garage building, with a matching shallow pitched roof with a ridge of 4.5m above ground level. To the front of the building (facing east) would be a large roller shutter door and a single pedestrian door. The building would sit on the existing area of hard surfacing, set below the larger building around 5m to the north, and set in from the access road. - 2.2 The applicant has stated that the garage would be for private use.

- 3.0 PLANNING POLICY

3.1 The site lies within an area of 'white land' - land not zoned for development, on the Town and Country Planning (Development Plan) Order 1982. There is therefore a general presumption against development in this area. This presumption is further outlined and clarified in the Isle of Man Strategic Plan policies below. - 3.2 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." - 3.3 General Policy 3 sets out a presumption against development in the countryside but includes instances where there may be exemptions:

• (a) essential housing for agricultural workers who have to live close to their place of work; (Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10);
• (b) conversion of redundant rural buildings which are of architectural, historic, or social value and interest; (Housing Policy 11);
• (c) previously developed land(1) which contains a significant amount of building; where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environment; and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment;
• (d) the replacement of existing rural dwellings; (Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14);

• (e) location-dependent development in connection with the working of minerals or the provision of necessary services;
• (f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry;
• (g) development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative; and
• (h) buildings or works required for interpretation of the countryside, its wildlife or heritage.

• 3.3.1 "Previously-developed land is that which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated fixed surface infrastructure.' The definition includes defence buildings, but excludes:

• o Land that is or has been occupied by agricultural or forestry buildings.
• o Land that has been developed for minerals extraction or waste disposal by landfill purposes where provision for restoration has been made through development control procedures.
• o Land in built-up areas such as parks, recreation grounds and allotments, which, although it may feature paths, pavilions and other buildings, has not been previously developed.
• o Land that was previously-developed but where the remains of the permanent structure
• or fixed surface structure have blended into the landscape in the process of time (to the extent that it can reasonably be considered as part of the natural surroundings)."

- 4.0 PLANNING HISTORY

4.1 Planning approval was granted for an extension to existing broiler houses and the erection of three new broiler houses on this wider site - the site being a larger area including the red line area included with this application (97/00791/B). - 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Andreas Parish Commissioners have no objections to the application (10.08.19). - 6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 The two main considerations in the assessment of this application are the principle of the development and its likely visual impact on the character of the countryside.

6.2 Principle of the development

• 6.2.1 There is a general presumption against new development in the countryside, as per the IOMSP policies outlined in section 3. This strict approach prevents the gradual loss of open countryside on the Island.
• 6.2.2 The site in question is already developed in that there are adjacent large sheds, and the area is currently hard standing used for storage. The land therefore is already in use. In relation to General Policy 3 which can provide exemptions for development in the countryside including on "previously developed land which contains a significant amount of building", this land is regarded as previously developed. The erection of the private garage therefore is not considered likely to increase the impact on the wide countryside.
• 6.2.3 The proposed use of the garage is for private use. This is taken to be for storage and recreational use etc. and would preclude the use of the building for the operation of a business. Such a use would be more suitable within an industrial estate. A condition should be added to approval restricting the use to private/non-commercial.

6.3 Visual Impact

• 6.3.1 A garage building such as the one proposed, if it were to be situated in the middle of a prominent field in the countryside, is unlikely to be acceptable on visual grounds. However,

• the nature of this area is unique in that it is interspersed with large industrial sheds and buildings, some formal and some informal. The neighbouring large sheds to the proposed are taller and more visually prominent than the proposed. In addition, the existing use of the application site for the storage of vehicles could be considered to have a similar visual impact as the proposed garage building.
• 6.3.2 The proposed siting of the building close to larger existing buildings, and the proposed location relatively sheltered from public vantage points and not within an area of particular natural beauty - being on an old runway, all limit the likelihood of an unacceptable adverse visual impact which could be of detriment to the character of the countryside. In relation to visual impact and Environmental Policy 1, the proposal is considered acceptable.

6.4 It is not considered that, due to the open nature of the area and the heavy industrial uses in the vicinity of Andreas Airfield, there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety from the erection of the garage building.

- 7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 In summary, the proposal accords on balance with the aforementioned strategic plan policies and is recommended for approval. - 8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent;
• (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested;
• (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material
• (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure and
• (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

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 in Article 6(4) who should be given Interested Person Status.

8.3 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 Interested Person Status.

I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.

Decision Made : …Permitted……….... Committee Meeting Date:…23.09.2019

Signed :…………N SALT………………………….. 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.