11 June 2008 · Delegated - Senior Planning Officer Mrs F Mullen
Store, Baldromma Mooar, Lane From Hibernia Maughold Road To Baldromma Moar, Maughold, Isle Of Man, IM7 1at
The site is within an existing farmyard adjacent to Maughold Village and within the Maughold Conservation Area. The proposal sought to re-roof a redundant stone outbuilding with minimal height increase to enable agricultural storage and to replace a rear wall section with a gate for access.
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 officer considered the proposal in two parts against the previous refusal of 07/00769/B, which found a larger extension would dominate the outlook from Dhrynane House due to size increase and open…
General Policy 3
Restricts countryside development except for essential agricultural buildings/operations (f). Officer found re-roofing redundant building for agricultural use qualifies as essential for farm operations on previously developed land within building group, with minimal impact.
Environment Policy 15
Requires agricultural buildings near residences to avoid unacceptable amenity harm, sited close to groups, sympathetic in scale/form. Minor scale changes acceptable balancing farm needs vs Dhrynane House amenity; condition 4 ensures no harm from rear land activity.
Time limit
The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
Approved plans
This approval relates to drawing no.s 00512/1, 00512/02, 06007401 and 06007402 date stamped the 12th March 2008.
Agricultural use only
The building must only be used for agricultural purposes. For the avoidance of doubt, agriculture is defined under Section 45 (1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999.
No storage/livestock in rear buffer
In the interests of the protection of the residential amenity of Dhrynane House the land between the boundary of Dhrynane House and the rear of the agricultural building must not be used for the storage of agricultural equipment, any associated material or livestock.
no objection; proposal will preserve the building and character of the area
Do not oppose
do not oppose
Local residents objected strongly to the proposed gateway due to potential noise, light pollution, and disturbance from farm activities impacting their adjacent home, while Maughold Parish Commissioners did not comment on this application and Highways Division had no opposition.
Key concern: potential noise, light pollution and farm activity disturbance to adjacent residential amenity from enlarged gateway
Stan and Shirley Ryzak
ObjectionOur home, Dhrynane House, is immediately adjacent to Balladromma Mooar and the above application refers to enlarging the gateway access to an area which, if used to extend farming activities, would result in the enjoyment and living environment of our home being directly affected.; The proposed gateway would allow for a variety of agricultural purposes including livestock operations and/or farming machinery to be manoeuvred, stored or accessed at any time of day or night and we feel very strongly that this would greatly intrude upon our home life.; We have no doubt that our property would be directly affected by noise, activity and light pollution should this particular part of the proposed planning application be granted.; We do not accept that this proposed gateway is necessary for access to re-roof the barn as we have no doubt that this can be achieved by using the access already available.
Maughold Parish Commissioners
No CommentHighways Division
No ObjectionDo not oppose
The original application 07/00769/B for proposed alterations to a redundant farm building to form a new covered agricultural storage building was refused. Penketh-Millar (agent) lodged the appeal as appellant, but the inspector questioned its validity due to lack of 'interested person' status, paralleling a prior Dreemskerry Quarry case where a similar appeal was ruled invalid. Appellant argued the proposal was appropriately sited within an existing farm group, met storage needs under policies, and would not harm amenities. The planning authority defended refusal on grounds of harm to residential amenity of Dhrynane House (contrary to Environment Policy 15) and inappropriate location near village. Inspector found the proposal would harm residential amenity through visual intrusion, noise, and disturbance, and fail to preserve/enhance the Maughold Conservation Area (Environment Policy 35); recommended dismissal if valid. Minister ruled no valid appeal exists, upholding refusal; alternatively would have dismissed.
Precedent Value
Strict enforcement of 'interested person' status for appeals; agents cannot appeal in own right without clear documentation. Future applicants must ensure correct appellant naming on form to avoid invalidation; emphasise alternative sites if near residences in conservation areas.
Inspector: Graham F Self MA MSc(Eng) FRTPI
