DEC Officer Report

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No.: 21/01026/B Applicant: Mylvoirrey Limited Proposal: Erection of a detached agricultural building Site Address: Mylvoirrey Glen Road Ballaugh Isle Of Man IM7 5JD Senior Planning Officer: Mr Jason Singleton Photo Taken: 03.02.2022 Site Visit: 03.02.2022 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 15.02.2022 _________________________________________________________________

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. The buildings 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 building must be used for the purposes for which it is approved.

• C 3. The external walls and roof on the new building must be a dark green colour and the roof a dark green colour all being retained thereafter. Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.
• C 4. In the event that the building hereby approved is not used or required for agricultural purposes for a period exceeding 12 months, the agricultural buildings hereby approved shall be removed and the ground restored to its former condition within 18 months of its last use.

Reason: The building has been exceptionally approved solely to meet agricultural need and its subsequent retention would result in an unwarranted intrusion in the countryside.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.

This planning application is recommended for approval as it has proved to be acceptable in terms of the agricultural need satisfying General Policy 3, and the proposed buildings scale, materials, colour, siting and form would be in accordance with Environment Policy 1 and 15 of the Strategic Plan.

Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to drawings and supporting information received on 31st August 2021, referenced;

Land ownership Plan Proposed Plan and Elevations Site Plan Agricultural Questionnaire _______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status

Additional Persons

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 4(2)

The owner or occupier of Faaie Wyllin, Glen Road. as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status. _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is referred to as Mylvoirrey, Glen Road Ballaugh. The site is located to the west of the Highway and on site occupies a number of buildings, namely a bungalow fronting the highway, a two storey detached dwelling and in between a central collection of agricultural buildings with concrete hardstanding to the front. - 1.2 The nearest neighbouring property shares a boundary with the site and is located to the south of the application site and is named; Faaie Wyllin. The boundary here is a small timber fence with approx. 6m high evergreen hedging (Leylandii) on the boundary and some hedging. - 1.3 The siting of the proposal is currently crushed rubble and used as part of the farming enterprise as a tractor / implement storage and general farm storage on site as a hard standing.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Proposed is the erection of an agricultural building measuring a footprint of 9.1m x 18.4m with a height to the eaves of 4.2m and an overall ridge height of 5.5m. This building would be constructed from a steel 'portal' frame and cladded with box profile metal sheets for the walls and roof in a green colour. The roof would feature 8 roof lights (4 per slope) for natural illuminance and the only opening are to the front (North West) elevation facing the existing agricultural barns. - 2.2 The applicants note the need for the barn as; "We are planning on expanding sheep flock and plan to lamb them in January rather than the spring, the shed will be required for lambing and the housing of sheep during winter months. Our cows and cattle already occupy our existing buildings as we calve from January onwards. We also finish or own cattle for the meat plant and they require housing from weaning in October to mid spring." - 2.3 The siting on the barn is noted as being close to applicant's house so they are on hand during lambing and easily accessible. This is to the West of the existing dwelling house (Mylvoirrey Farm House) and to the north of the neighbouring property Faaie Wyllin and to the south of the existing agricultural buildings.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY The application site is within an area recognised as being within 'white land' and within the wider catchment of woodland and within a broader area of High landscape value use the 1982

Development Plan (North). The site is not within a conservation area, nor are there any identified registered trees on site. However, the site is identified on the flood risk map as within an area of surface water flooding.

3.2 Within the adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, the following policy are considered to be the pertinent relevant policy in the determination of this application: - 3.3 General Policy 3f - Exceptions for Development in the countryside for agriculture - 3.4 Environment Policy 1 - Protection of the countryside and its ecology - 3.5 Environmental Policy 2 - Protection of AHLV landscape - 3.6 Environmental Policy 7 - Protection of Watercourses - 3.7 Environmental Policy 15 - visual impact of any buildings - 3.8 Environment Policy 21 - Design of agricultural buildings - 3.9 Environment Policy 22(iii) - Environmental Harm through vibration, odour, noise and light

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY The application site benefits from the previous approvals:

4.1 15/00213/B - Alterations, erection of extension and creation of new driveway to dwelling. 15/00168/B - Erection of single storey extension to dwelling.

08/00208/A - Approval in principle to erect an agricultural worker's dwelling. 08/02093/REM - Reserved matters application for the erection of an agriculture worker's dwelling. 04/02118/B - Erection of agricultural barn.

• 01/01191/B - Erection of agricultural building. 97/00231/B - Extension to agricultural shed. 91/00812/B - Erection of agricultural building. 94/00068/B - Alterations and extensions to dwelling and extension to agricultural building. 90/00927/B - Lean-to extension to barn. 88/00620/B - Erection of Agricultural shed.

4.2 The site has also received the following refusals;

• 02/01761/C - Change of use of farm stores to general agricultural building and installation of underground modular tank. Refused at appeal. 01/02107/C - Change of use of farm stores to general agricultural building

- 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Bride Commissioners has not commented at the time of writing.

5.2 Highways Services do not object (No Highways Interest) 14.09.21 - 5.3 The neighbouring property Faaie Wyllin commented (22.09.21) to object, given the location, proximity to the boundary and the possibility of noise and smells. A previous application was refused for housing cattle. Farm has been created in the last 20 years in this residential area, where only 1 building existed. Would feel like "…you living in a working farm yard, tractors and machinery running from early morning, cows being weaned off calves etc".

- 6.0 ASSESSMENT

• (i) Principle for essential need. (Gp3f)
• (ii) The visual impact of the proposed building in terms of siting, design, size or finish (EP15 & 21)
• (iii) Any adverse visual effect upon the countryside. (EP1 & 2)
• (iv) Impact upon the residential amenity (Ep22, EP15)
• (v) Environmental Impact (Ep22, EP1, Ep7)

• (i) Essential Need

6.1 There aforementioned policies would indicate there is a general presumption against new development in the countryside, as indicated in Environment Policy 1 and General Policy 3 of the Strategic Plan. The starting point for any development within the countryside (i.e. not zoned for development) is therefore General Policy 3, paragraph F which allows exemption for agricultural buildings and Environment Policy 15, which requires, firstly the Planning Authority to be satisfied

that there is agricultural or horticultural need for a new building, sufficient to outweigh the general policy against development in the countryside. EP 21 essentially indicates that no stable building will be allowed if it would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the countryside in terms of siting, design, size or finish. This is also underpinned through Environmental Policy 1 & 2 to ensure any development does not adversely affect the countryside.

6.2 The applicant has provided details (agricultural questionnaire) to confirm he is the farmer/ owner, of land buildings who lives within the farm holding. The site is an active farm with its land holding of 25.5 acres owned and a further 20 acres rented on an agricultural tenancy and another 50 acres part owned but occupied by the applicants farming enterprise. The farm currently operates with 41 beef cows and 73 other beef cattle with 40 sheep. It is planned to increase the number of sheep to 80. There are also approx. 10 acres of barley associated with the farm. The main farm buildings and dwellings are all clustered together on site with the farm lands being on the opposite side of the road as noted on the land ownership plan submitted as part of this proposal. - 6.3 Reflecting on the complex planning history of the site, there have been a number of permission for agricultural buildings with earliest application from the late 1980's through to 2004. It would appear there are four connected buildings sitting central to the site and two more to the south corner of the site. When cross referenced against the seven approvals for agricultural buildings, and reflecting on the detailed planning history and analysis contained within the 2004 permission, the planning inspector on considering the proposals and those previous decisions on site recommended approval. - 6.4 Having visited the site, it is confirmed this is an active farm and the buildings on site area currently being used for agricultural purposes for the husbandry of animals and for their support (storage of feed, hay and farm equipment). As such the principle of an additional farm building for the welfare of animals (lambing) on this site building would accord with GP3f where its use would be used for the conduct of 'agriculture'.

• (ii) Visual Impact of the proposal

6.5 Having considered the justification and its broad acceptance in principle, we turn to the siting of the building. Environment Policy 15 notes the proximity of the proposal should be sited as close the farmstead as possible and be appropriate in terms of scale, materials, colour, siting and form to ensure they are in keeping with their surroundings. In this case the proposal would be of the same style or method of steel frame construction and level of finish using the green box profile sheets to clad the vertical elements and roof pitches would be seen to match that of the existing farm buildings. The location would be sited close to the existing group of farm buildings; approx. (approx10m) to the south of the main farm buildings and (approx.8m) from the applicants farm house and would be considered appropriate for its intended use for the husbandry of animals, in this case for the welfare of breeding sheep and lambing, as noted in para 2.2. The proposed building would be suitable for its intended use in accordance with Ep15 and 21. Visual Impact on the countryside - 6.6 The siting of the proposed building as noted above would confirm the location is not one of open countryside but would be read within the context of an existing working farm to which planning policies support for the placement next to existing building groups. From the highway the building would be partially screened by the existing two storey residential dwelling that sits between the proposed siting and the highway and would be read amongst other agricultural buildings of similar type, size and colour fronting the highway. The addition of this proposed building and its use would confirm to the guidance given in EP15 and 21 where it would not be considered to have any detrimental impact upon the wider countryside (EP1) or would not be considered to harm the character and quality of the wider landscape designation of AHLV (EP2). Impact on the residential amenity - 6.7 The later paragraph of Ep15 refers to the potential conflicts of siting of agricultural buildings near residential properties, which is further supported through EP22 that deals with statutory nuisances. Firstly, in considering the farm dwelling closest to the proposed building

• (Applicants Farm House) this would be approx. 8m away but given the current farm layout their residential curtilage is segregated by a concrete post and timber panel fence to the of the dwelling house. It is noted here that the farm house has a timber fence to the north and west with gardens to the front (east). As such the proposal would not be eroding any amenity space of the dwelling and is close enough to allow the owners, who farm the land to be on hand where they would have responsibility for the welfare of the animals during the lambing periods and wider agricultural responsibilities.
• 6.8 In relation to the nearest neighbouring residential property Faaie Wyllin, consideration has to be given to any adverse impact from the proposed building and use giving rise to the potential for statutory nuisances. Their comments area noted in para 5.3 and following a site visit to the farm and visiting this neighbouring property, it was noted; the boundary here is one of mature evergreen trees, 2-3m wide and 6-7m tall between the proposed building and the nearest part of the neighbouring dwelling house at distances varying between 8m-10m with the kitchen window looking towards the boundary and a dining room, closest to the boundary.
• 6.9 It was further noted, footprint of the proposed building is currently used as part of the farming for the storage of machinery, tractors or plastic wrapped bales of hay. As this forms part of the wider farm "yard" there are no restrictions on how this section of the site can be used as part of the wider farm and the usual agricultural activity where those usual noises and smells commonly associated with the use are in existence. The proposal is not seeking to change a use of this area over and above the existing or would be introducing an element of farming activity that is not already present on site.
• 6.10 The siting of the building with its mass, height and orientation, is not considered to result in a loss of light towards Faaie Wyllin, given the distances involved and the existing level and height of the boundary treatment. Furthermore, the location of the proposal being to the north of Faaie Wyllin would ensure there is no shadowing from path of the sun as a result of the proposed building. If anything the proposed building would cast a shadow into the application site given the orientation of the sun. As the proposal does not feature any windows in the rear elevations it is not considered to offer any loss of privacy from overlooking.
• 6.11 Having heard the issues from the neighbour at the time of the site visit, in this instance it would be appropriate to include a condition for the use to be limited to only agricultural activities for the husbandry of animals and also requiring the building's removal and the land returned to its current state should the building cease to be used for the approved use, would in this case be appropriate. Environmental Impact
• 6.12 With regard to the wider environment and any contamination of the Glen Dhoo located approx. 50m to the west of the site, any agricultural runoff water or waste from the site to the river is already. It is also noted there are other agricultural buildings closer to the river than the proposal. On the application form the drainage from the building is noted as to soakaways. It is further noted that any discharge or contamination of a nearby watercourse from the operations at the farm would be and offence under Section 27 of the Inland Fisheries Act 1976.
• 6.13 Having liaised (by email) with the Environmental Protection Unit and Inland Fisheries, they have individually commented where the Environmental Protection Officer confirmed (11/02/22) they are not aware of any water pollution issues in the area with regard to the current farming practice. Also they undertake river water monitoring at Ballaugh Bridge 4 times a year with all of the parameters they monitor for being assessed as 'Excellent' classification. This includes ammonia, dissolved oxygen, biochemical oxygen demand, nitrate and phosphate. This is also published in the 2020 river quality monitoring report online. The Inland Fisheries Officer confirmed they have not any evidence of pollution to the river. On balance, this aspect of the proposal would not be seen to contribute or exacerbate the current river water condition leading to demonstrable harm and would accord with Ep22, EP1, Ep7.

- 7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 The planning application has been designed to ensure its siting and appearance has no adverse impact on the character of this site and the wider countryside, or that of the neighbouring property, which has been recommended for approval. - 8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• (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 Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status

Decision Made : Permitted Date : 23.02.2022 Determining officer

Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management

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.