Loading document...
The application site forms an area to the north of the A1 Peel Road and to the west of Ballaleece Farm. The area is currently not developed but has previously been used as a temporary works compound.
The site is located in an area designated as being of High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance in the 1982 Development Plan Order. The site is not zoned for residential development and the application falls to be determined against the policies of the Department in relation to current Planning Circulars.
There are no previous applications relating to the application site considered relevant to this application; however the following application is currently under consideration by the Planning Authority, and relates to the adjacent land within the ownership or control of the applicant:
PA 06/02157/R - Continued use of a commercial kitchen out building as ancillary accommodation, Ballaleece Farm, Peel Road, St Johns. Application currently awaiting determination.
In addition, the following application is considered relevant:
PA 06/00054/A - Approval in principle for the erection of a dwelling & garage, Fields 312605 And 312667 Formally Field 2541 At Ballaleece Farm, Peel Road, St Johns. Refused 4th July 2006.
The application proposes in principle, the construction of a single dwelling for the applicant’s daughter. The application is not described as being for a person whose sole or latest employment was in agriculture, however, the applicant has submitted justification based on agricultural grounds. Access to the site is indicated as being via the existing farm yard.
German Commissioners advise that they have no objections to the application in principle, but reserve their comments until detailed plans are received. A resident of Port Soderick advises that he has no objection to the proposal and the SPMCE advise that they object on the grounds that there exists no justification for a dwelling.
The Isle of Man Water Authority request a standard Note be attached should planning permission be granted as do the Department of Transport Highways Division.
An anonymous representation has been received objecting to the development and stating that there are currently two dwellings on the site, and that the applicant has no connection with agriculture.
This application is a re-submission of PA 06/00054/A, which also sought approval in principle for the erection of a dwelling and garage albeit at a different site within the ownership of the applicant. That
application did not seek permission to build a dwelling for occupation by an agricultural worker, although information was submitted to justify such a dwelling and the second reason for refusal in relation to that application referred to this matter.
Following that decision, discussion took place on site as to a suitable location for a dwelling, notwithstanding that there remained an objection to the proposal in relation to the principle of the development.
This current application seeks approval to construct an agricultural workers dwelling on land to the west of the farm. Access to the proposed dwelling would be through the existing farm yard off the A1 Peel Road, although the applicant's agent advises that a further access would be available via the field to the west of the application site.
Planning Circular 3/88 – New Agricultural Dwellings states inter alia that the siting of a dwelling should be: “a) such that the dwelling would be within, or immediately adjoining the main group of farm buildings; b) well set back from any public highway; and c) approached via the existing farm access, wherever possible.” The application site identified complies with this element of the Circular.
Information submitted with the application indicates that the dwelling would be occupied by the applicant’s daughter who runs a catering business from the farm in addition to assisting with the operation of the farm. The applicant indicates further that he is currently occupied in farming and wishes to do so for as long as he remains able; as such, his daughters involvement in the farm will increase as he and his wife retire from the daily operation.
In granting planning permission for agricultural workers dwellings, Planning Circular 3/88 advises:
“A person who wishes to build a farm dwelling in a rural area must produce evidence to prove need sufficient to offset the general planning objections to such development. Unless real agricultural need can be established (which may include the need for a retirement home for a farmer), the normal planning considerations will prevail.”
In addition, it states that “Where permission is granted for an agricultural dwelling, the following condition will be attached:-
The occupation of the proposed dwelling(s) must be limited to persons whose full time employment or latest employment is or was employment in agriculture in the Island and including also the dependants of such persons as aforesaid.”
In making the application, the applicant has frankly stated that he is not currently retired from agriculture and therefore did not make an application for an agricultural dwelling that he himself would occupy, rather he has applied for his daughter who is not currently employed in agriculture on a full time basis.
The wording of the condition that is applied when such approvals are granted clearly indicates that a person occupying such a dwelling must either be employed full time in agriculture, retired from agriculture or be a dependent of such a person.
On the basis that the applicants daughter could not, at present comply with such a condition, it is considered that insufficient justification exists to grant planning permission for an agricultural workers dwelling at this time.
It is recommended that the application be refused.
Whilst it is recommended that the application be refused, should planning permission subsequently be granted, the following conditions are suggested:
1) This approval is in principle only and will remain valid for a period of two years within which time no development may take place until such time as details of the reserved matters (siting, design, external appearance, internal layout, means of access, landscaping) have been approved by the Planning Authority. Such reserved matters should form the subject of a single application. 2) This approval relates to the plans and information submitted as part of this application and date stamped 26th October 2006.
In an application of this nature, the practice of the Department is to attach a condition restricting the occupancy of the dwelling to a person currently; most recently employed in; or retired from, agriculture. In this instance, the applicant would be unable to comply with such a tie and it is therefore not recommended that such a condition be attached, should the application subsequently be approved.
It is considered that the following parties, who submitted comments, accord with the requirements of Planning Circular 1/06 and are therefore, afforded interested party status:
Accordingly, the following parties are not afforded Interested Party Status:
Recommended Decision: Refused
Date of Recommendation: 15.02.2007
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
R 1.
Insufficient justification exists to warrant the setting aside of the well established policies in relation to the construction of new dwellings in the countryside to accommodate an agricultural worker. It is therefore considered that the proposal is contrary to the provisions of Planning Circular 3/88 – New Agricultural Dwellings, Planning Circular 1/88 – Residential development – Houses in the Countryside and the 1982 Development Plan Order.
I confirm that this decision accords with Government Circular Nos 44/05 (Delegation of Functions to Director of Planning and Building Control) and 47/05 (Delegation of Functions to Senior Planning Officer)
Decision Made : Refused Date: 16/2/07
Signed: [Handwritten signature] M. I. McCauley Director of Planning and Building Control
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown