Loading document...
The application site comprises land within an existing farm yard that is located adjacent to Maughold Village in Maughold.
The proposed development comprises of the re-roofing of an existing redundant building contained within the application site to allow associated agricultural use and the erection of a gate to replace a section of wall to the rear of the aforementioned building.
The application site has been the subject of one previous planning application that is considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application.
Planning application 07/00769/B sought planning approval for alterations to redundant farm building to form agricultural storage building. This previous planning application was considered and refused on the 23rd August 2007, with the refusal decision notice issued on the 30th August 2007. A subsequent appeal against the refusal was dismissed by the Minister as an invalid appeal. Copies of the refusal decision notice and the appeal decision have been placed on the file for this current planning application.
Maughold Parish Commissioners believe that the proposal will act to preserve the building and the character of the area. As such they have no objection to the planning application.
The Department of Transport Drainage Division do not oppose the planning application.
The owners and/or occupants of Dhrynane House, which neighbours the application site, object to the planning application. The grounds for their objection can be summarised as concern regarding the potential increase in activity resulting from the proposed development and the potential adverse impact on their residential amenity.
They express concern that the proposed gateway will allow the area directly between their property and the rear of the barn to be used, also to the detriment of their residential amenity.
The application site is not designated for any site specific land use under the 1982 Development Plan Order and, as such, constitutes 'white land' on the plan. It is situated within a wider area of land that is designated as having high landscape or coastal value and scenic significance. It is also located within Maughold Conservation Area.
It is considered that there are two policies within the Isle of Man Strategic Plan that are specifically material to the assessment of the planning application.
General Policy 3 states: "Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of:
Environment Policy 15 states: "Where the Department is satisfied that there is agricultural or horticultural need for a new building (including a dwelling), sufficient to outweigh the general policy against development in the countryside, and that the impact of this development including buildings, accesses, servicing etc. is acceptable, such development must be sited as close as is practically possible to existing building groups and be appropriate in terms of scale, materials, colour, siting and form to ensure that all new developments are sympathetic to the landscape and built environment of which they will form a part.
Only in exceptional circumstances will buildings be permitted in exposed or isolated areas or close to public highways and in all such cases will be subject to appropriate landscaping. The nature and materials of construction must also be appropriate to the purposes for which it is intended.
Where new agricultural buildings are proposed next to or close to existing residential properties, care must be taken to ensure that there is no unacceptable adverse impact through any activity, although it must be borne in mind that many farming activities require buildings which are best sited, in landscape terms, close to existing building groups in the rural landscape."
As stated earlier the planning application seeks approval for the re-roofing of an existing redundant building contained within the application site to allow associated agricultural use and the erection of a gate to replace a section of wall to the rear of the aforementioned building. In terms of assessing the proposed development it is considered logical to look at each of these two elements in turn.
In terms of the re-roofing of the building and bringing it back into agricultural use the conclusions of previous planning application 07/00769/B are considered material. Whilst the appointed Planning Inspector primarily recommended that the appeal was not valid they did make an assessment of the proposed development in case that the appeal was accepted by the Minister. Within that assessment it was recognised that there was a need to strike a balance between the operational requirements of those working the countryside and the residential amenity of those living in the countryside. The appointed Planning Inspector concluded that the proposed
increase in size would make the building a dominant feature in the outlook from Dhrynane House and that its open sided form would unduly affect the residential amenity of Dhrynane House. They also concluded that the increase in size and alterations to the building would preserve or enhance the appearance or character of the Conservation Area.
Firstly, the works to the building proposed by the current planning application are significantly reduced from those proposed by previous planning application 07/00769/B. The only increase in height will be to facilitate the re-roofing of the building and therefore relatively minor. As such the proposed development does not significantly increase in size meaning that the impact on the outlook from Dhrynane House is suitably limited, which addresses the previous concern. Secondly, the form of the building is not significantly altered by the current proposal. Due to this, and in particular the absence of open sides to the building, the effect of the use of the agricultural building on the residential amenity of Dhrynane House is considered acceptable. Finally, the re-roofing of the building should aid to preserve the building and therefore preserve the character of the Conservation Area. In terms of the first element of the proposal it is therefore concluded that the concerns of the previous planning application have been suitably addressed and that taking into account the necessary balance between the operational requirements of those working the countryside and the residential amenity of those living in the countryside that the proposal is acceptable.
In terms of the erection of a gate to replace a section of wall to the rear of the building it should be noted that previous planning application 07/00769/B did not propose this and that therefore the impact of this has not be previously specifically looked at. Having said that the appointed Planning Inspector for the appeal against the refusal of previous planning application 07/00769/B did examine the impact of the larger building then proposed on the area of land that would be accessed by the gate proposed within this current planning application. Through previous visits to the application site and surrounds it is has been observed that the land between the building and the boundary with Dhrynane House is relatively narrow and contains a number of mature trees. The actual use of this land as part of the wider agricultural activity is questionable and it is concluded that the gate is primarily required to provide easier access for the maintenance of this land and the rear of the building. Given the need to strike a balance between the operational requirements of those working the countryside and the residential amenity of those living in the countryside it is considered that this area of land forms a buffer zone between the residential use and the agricultural use. On that basis, in terms of the second element of the proposal, it is concluded that it is reasonable to allow some access to the land, via the proposed gate, but that the use of the land for agricultural purposes would be unreasonable. It is therefore considered appropriate to control the use of this land through condition.
It is recommended that the planning application be approved.
It is considered that the following parties that made representations to the planning application meet the criteria of Government Circular 1/06 and should be afforded interested party status:
Maughold Parish Commissioners; The Department of Transport Drainage Division; and The owners and/or occupants of Dhrynane House.
Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 02.06.2008
N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
C 2. This approval relates to drawing no.s 00512/1, 00512/02, 06007401 and 06007402 date stamped the 12th March 2008.
C 3. 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.
C 4. 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.
I confirm that this decision accords with Government Circular No 31/07 (Delegation of Functions to Senior Planning Officer)
Decision Made : Permitted Date : Signed : Mrs F Mullen Senior Planning Officer
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown