Upload
others
View
8
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Appendix 12
Derry City and Strabane District Council Planning Committee Report
COMMITTEE DATE: 8th March 2017
APPLICATION No: LA11/2015/0504/F
APPLICATION TYPE: Full Application
PROPOSAL: New agricultural shed for existing farm business
LOCATION: Adjacent to 15 Edenreagh Road, Eglinton, BT47 3AS
APPLICANT: Leonard Curry, 19 Edenreagh Road, Eglinton, BT47 3AS
AGENT: M R Jess Ltd, 1 Jordanstown Road, Newtownabbey, BT37 0QD
ADVERTISEMENT: 23.09.2015, 20.01.2016
STATUTORY EXPIRY: 15.09.2015, 14.01.2016
RECOMMENDATION: REFUSE
REASON FOR PRESENTATION TO COMMITTEE: Recommendation to Refuse
All planning application forms, drawings, consultations, letters, representations etc. relating to this planning application are available to view on www.planningni.gov.uk
1. Description of Proposed Development
The proposed development is for the erection of an agricultural shed in the south west corner of
the site with an adjacent hard standing area for the storage of bales and a parking and turning
area. The shed will house three livestock pens and a pallet/feed store. It will be 4m high with a
footprint of 50 sqm and will be finished in green corrugated tin sheeting.
2. EIA Determination
The development does not fall within the scope of the types of the agricultural development
identified in Schedule 2 - 1 of the Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations (NI)
2015 and as such does not need to have an EIA determination carried out.
Appendix 12
3. Site and Surrounding Area
The application site is an approx. 0.5 ha parcel of land located on Edenreagh Road. The western
portion of the site comprises a yard used for the storage of vehicles associated with the applicant’s
commercial business at 13 Edenreagh Road. The remainder of the site comprises a small paddock
with an access lane running through the east and northern portions of the site to the storage yard.
There is a chicken house adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site and there are small trailers
along the northern boundary use for storing wood. The land within the site slopes up from the
road in a westerly direction. The site is served by an existing access off Edenreagh Road. The
northern site boundary with No. 15 and the roadside boundary of the site is defined by trees. The
south and west boundaries of the site are defined by hedge and the storage yard is separated
from the paddock by hedge also.
The site is approx. 1 km North West of the settlement of Tamnaherin. It is located adjacent and
to the south of the detached dwellings at 15 and 17 Edenreagh Road and south of the applicants
dwelling and car breakdown and repair business at 13 Edenreagh Road. The surrounding land to
the south, east and west are agricultural fields.
Figure 1 : Aerial photo of application site
Appendix 12
Figure 2 : Site Location Plan
4. Site Constraints
No relevant site constraints
5. Neighbour Notifications
Neighbour Address Date Neighbour Notified15 Edenreagh Road Edenreagh More Eglinton Londonderry BT47 3AS
28/09/201508/01/201607/10/2016
17 Edenreagh RoadEdenreagh MoreEglintonLondonderryBT47 3AS
28/09/201507/10/2016
Appendix 12
6. Relevant Site History
A/2013/0224/F Permission Granted 05.12.2013
Proposed vehicle storage compound of 780sq m to provide temporary secure storage for
recovered vehicles, relocation of existing palisade fence and gates, proposed landscaping,
improved visibility splays and proposed restrictions on hours of operation at lands adjacent to No
15 Edenreagh Road, Eglinton, as an off-site expansion of the established vehicle repair workshop
& specialist recovery services business at 13 Edenreagh Road, Eglinton
A/2013/0456/F Permission Refused 08.10.2014 Appeal Dismissed 17.04.2015
Retention of shed type structure for agricultural storage
A/2010/0620/F Permission Refused 16.03.2012
Retention of existing change of use from agricultural field to vehicle storage area to
serve/associated with adjoining business premises
A/2010/0614/F Permission Refused 16.03.2012
Proposed retention of existing open sided shelter/store for use as fuel storage area (firewood)
associated with dwelling at No 13 Edenreagh Road
Enforcement History
A/2010/0122CA Open sided structure & hard standing Planning application received
A/2010/0124CA Storage yard Case closed 06.01.2014
LA11/2015/0019/CA Case closed 08.06.2015
Alleged non-compliance with conditions of approval A/2013/0224/F
7. Policy Framework
Derry Area Plan 2011
Strategic Planning Policy Statement for Northern Ireland
Planning Policy Statement 3: Access, Movement and Parking
Planning Policy Statement 21: Sustainable Development in the Countryside
8. Consultee Responses
DARD NI confirm the Farm Business ID has not been in existence for more than 6 years and Single Farm Payment (SPF) has not been received within the last 6 years.
Appendix 12
Environmental Health have no objection to the proposal provided arrangements in relation to storage and disposal of animal waste are adhered to.
Transport NI requested a detailed topographical site access survey to show works necessary to provide the 2.0m x 62.0m visibility splays
9. Representations Consideration
5 objection letters were received in relation to this planning application. 4 of these were from the
neighbouring property 15 Edenreagh Road and 1 letter was from 17 Edenreagh Road. No. 15
raised a number of queries in relation to the processing of the application and arrangements for
in-office meetings and Council committee meetings, which were responded to directly by
telephone on 11.01.2016. The objection letters also raised the following matters of concern:
Applicant has only had a DARD number since September 2013 and is depending on the
Commissioner’s comments of the previous appeal to prove the farm holding has been
established at least 6 years
Applicant states on the P1C Form that he submits a SFP but this has been discontinued
according to DARD
Does the applicant have a herd number and do the Council contact DARD to seek
confirmation/evidence
How much livestock does the applicant have
What is the need for the shed
How will foul sewerage will be disposed of
There are no farm buildings or dwellings on the site
Objects to more landscaping that will affect light into garden of No.15 as the applicant has
already erected a fence which is higher than the boundary hedge with her property.
Site location plan shows a public right of way which does not exist over No. 17’s property
Alterations to the existing access (as stated on Q15 of the P1 Form) not shown on the plans
Proposal will have a traffic and environmental impact on the neighbourhood
The objector highlighted that the original site address No. 19 was incorrect, this was subsequently
amended to ‘adjacent to 15 Edenreagh Road’ and neighbours/objectors were re-notified of this
amendment on 18.01.2016 and the application was re-advertised on 20.01.2016.
Appendix 12
All other issues raised in relation to the access, traffic, rights of way, farm business, farming
details, sewerage, landscaping etc. are considered in my assessment below.
10. Planning Assessment and Other Material Considerations
Section 6 (4) of The Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011 requires the Council to make planning
decisions in accordance with the local development plan, unless material considerations indicate
otherwise. The site is located within open countryside as defined in Map 1 of the Derry Area Plan
2011. This proposal has therefore been assessed against the policy framework listed in paragraph
7 and all other material considerations including consultation responses, representations and
relevant planning history.
Strategic Planning Policy Statement for Northern Ireland
There is no conflict or change in policy direction between the provisions of the SPPS and those of
PPS 21. PPS 21 therefore remains the applicable policy context under which to consider the
proposed development.
The SPPS supersedes PPS 1 General Principles, however the guiding principle of what PPS 1 aimed
to achieve in terms of public interest is supported through the SPPS; in particular, paragraphs 2.3
and 5.72. The impact of the proposal on the surrounding land uses and buildings has been
considered under criteria (e) of CTY 12 below.
PPS 21: Sustainable Development in the Countryside
Policy CTY 1 of PPS 21 permits agricultural development in the countryside in accordance with
Policy CTY 12. Policy CTY 12 indicates that planning permission will be granted for development
on an active and established agricultural holding where it is demonstrated that it complies with
criteria (a) - (e).
Active & Established Farm Holding
The starting point for making an assessment under Policy CTY 12 is establishing whether there is
an active and established agricultural holding. Paragraph 5.56 of PPS 21 advises that for the
purposes of this policy, the determining criteria for an active and established business will be that
set out under Policy CTY 10. Criterion (a) of CTY 10 refers to a farm business being currently active
and having been established for at least 6 years. The amplification text states that the applicant
Appendix 12
will therefore be required to provide the farms DARD business ID number along with other
evidence to prove active farming. Paragraph 5.39 states what agricultural activity refers to for the
purposes of this policy, which includes maintaining land in good agricultural and environmental
condition.
The application site incorporates the total of the land identified on the submitted farm map
comprising one parcel of land. DARD advised that the Farm Business ID was allocated on
02.09.2013. It has not been in existence for more than 6 years and Single Farm Payment has not
been received within the last 6 years. The applicant advises that, since its purchase in 2002,
farming activity on his holding includes ploughing and planting land with potatoes every year,
keeping a flock of hens producing free range eggs, keeping a flock of sheep for lamb production,
cutting silage, cutting and harvesting turf, tree/hedge and general land maintenance, land
improvement including drainage etc. Evidence submitted by the applicant to prove active farming
includes:
Invoices from D&M Farm Services (February 2010 - December 2012)
Invoices from John McDevitt Tractor & Machinery Spares (June 2013)
Invoices from C&T Tractors (July 2013)
Letter from Chambers confirming they will stock their hay/straw (May 2014)
Andres Witherow Fencing (December 2014)
Invoices from Chambers (May / July 2016)
Insurance renewal invoice tractor insurance (December 2015 & July 2016)
Letter from C McFarland stating he trimmed & maintained hedges for several years
Letter from Station Restaurant advising applicant supplied them with vegetables & eggs until
they retired in 2008
Letter from Cowan Bros (March 2012) stating the applicant has been involved in farming &
they supplied them for several years
Letter from Len Curry (November 2013) stating that he carried out soil testing for 9 years
Solicitors letter (June 2014) stating he purchased 2 acres of land adjacent to farm
Letter Morris Curry, 40 Ervey Rd (May 2015) stating the applicant correctly renting 15 acres
from him
The applicant has also made reference to a previous planning appeal on this site (2014/A0136 -
A/2013/0456/F) in which the Commissioner accepted that the farm holding was currently active,
given support from the Ulster Farmers Union, and that the holding was established for at least 6
years, based on invoices submitted indicating that the applicant had maintained the land in good
Appendix 12
agricultural and environmental condition. Whilst the majority of the invoices submitted with this
application, and those which were the subject of the appeal, do not make any specific reference
to this particular farm business, it would be difficult to sustain a refusal on this basis given that
the Planning Appeals Commission have accepted that the farm business as active and established.
In this respect it must therefore be accepted that the proposal meets the initial test set out in
CTY 12.
Criteria (a) necessary for the efficient use of the holding
The submitted farm maps dated 17.08.2015 indicate that the holding comprises one small field
(0.24 ha) which is the application site, within which the farm building is proposed. The applicant
has indicated on the site location plan that part of the adjacent field (0.6 ha) is within his
ownership. He submitted an email from his solicitor dated 29.01.2015 confirming that he
purchased these lands on 28.10.2014 and a letter from DARD dated 28.09.2015 acknowledging
receipt of the applicants request to include additional lands to the farm business. The applicant
has also submitted a letter which states he currently rents 15 acres of land from Morris Curry of
40 Ervey Road. The applicant was asked to provide accurate and up-to-date farm maps which
include these additional lands within his farm holding, but this information was not provided.
Figure 3: DARD Farm Maps
Appendix 12
The applicant has not specifically stipulated the intended use of the building, on the plans it is
noted for livestock use and dry storage of feed. The applicant advised in June 2016 that livestock
on the holding comprises 30 sheep and 40 chickens. The applicants Flock Number was allocated
4 November 2014 and the applicant has submitted flock movement records to demonstrate a
stock of animals on the farm and the necessity for the farm building. However, I note that the
submitted flock movement records show that 46 sheep were bought in various transactions
between February and October 2015 and following this 34 sheep were sold between then and
April 2016. According to the submitted documentation, there does not appear to have been any
sheep purchased in connection with this flock since October 2015. Despite the applicants letter
dated 20 June 2016 stating that livestock on the holding comprised 30 sheep, DARD confirmed
on 23 June 2016 that there were no animals under the flock number, at that time. Given that
there does not appear to be any sheep currently associated with the applicants flock number, it
can be concluded that the proposal is not necessary for the efficient running of the agricultural
holding given the small scale nature of the farming enterprise and is contrary to criteria (a) of CTY
12.
The plans for the proposed shed indicate three livestock pens and a pallet/feed store internally.
However, the design of the building does not lend itself to its function of housing livestock. There
is no ventilation, no slurry tank and no means for internal run off or collecting of animal waste.
The building could not function to house livestock.
Overall, it has not been demonstrated that the proposed building is necessary for the efficient
use of the farm holding given that the business does not appear to have any substantial livestock
associated with it, other than the chickens which are housed within the existing chicken pen on
this site. The design of the building does not lend itself to housing livestock. In addition, the
extent of the total farm holding comprises only 0.24 ha according to the submitted farm maps
dated 2015 as no up-to-date farm maps have been provided to include the additional lands which
the applicant is laying claim to. Furthermore, if a farm building is constructed on this parcel of
land and the yard laid out as per the submitted site plan, this would develop the only land
remaining that could be farmed. As such, the proposal fails to comply with criteria (a) of CTY 12.
Criteria (b) character and scale appropriate to the location
The proposed shed will measure 10m x 5m with a ridge height of 4.2m. It will have a footprint of
50 sqm, which is relatively small for a building of its nature. The design and materials are fairly
typical of modern agricultural buildings. It will be constructed in green corrugated tin sheeting
Appendix 12
with a painted block plinth. The building will have a large roller shutter door to the front onto the
yard and two smaller shutter doors to the rear onto the adjacent field. The scale and character of
the building is therefore appropriate to this area of countryside in compliance with criteria (b) of
CTY 12.
Figure 4: Proposed Floor Plan & Elevations
Criteria (c) visually integrates into landscape and additional landscaping provided as necessary
It is proposed that the building will be sited on the south west corner of the site which sits at a
higher level above the road. The south west boundary with the adjacent field is defined by a
hedge and trees. The site will be visible for a short distance when approaching from the south
along Edenreagh Road, however I consider that the proposed shed will not appear overly
prominent on this site given the low ridge of the building and the intervening vegetation which
will assist in screening the building. The site will also be visible from Tamnaherin Road around the
junction with Brockagh Road across the valley to the east, however these are long range views
along this busy road and from this vantage point the site would benefit from surrounding
vegetation and would not appear visually prominent in the landscape. In this respect, I consider
that the proposal will integrate into the surrounding landscape in accordance with criteria (c) of
CTY 12 and also in accordance with CTY 13 and CTY 14 of PPS 21.
Appendix 12
Figure 5: View of site approaching from south along Edenreagh Road
Figure 6: Long distance view of site from Tamnaherin Road across the valley
No additional landscaping is considered necessary, however the applicant has provided details of
new planting on the submitted site layout. This scheme indicates that existing mature vegetation
to all site boundaries shall be maintained and augmented with new hawthorn hedge in any gaps
and shows that new trees will be planted on the northern portion of the site with No. 15. No. 15
has objected to the provision of additional landscaping which will affect light into garden of their
property. With regards to this matter, regardless of what has been indicated on the submitted
Appendix 12
plans, the Council have no control over the planting of trees or any other vegetation within the
site as this would not require planning permission.
Criteria (d) impact on natural or built heritage
There are no natural or built heritage features in the area that will be affected by the proposed
shed. The proposal therefore complies with criteria (d) of CTY 12.
Criteria (e) impact on residential amenity of dwellings outside the holding
Criteria (e) of the policy asks the applicant to demonstrate the development will not result in
detrimental impact on the amenity of residential properties outside the holding including
problems arising from noise, odour and pollution.
The objector at No. 15 queried the means of disposal of animal waste from the proposed shed.
The applicant has advised that no slurry tank will be provided within the shed. Environmental
Health asked the applicant to clarify how he intended to manage the storage and removal of
animal waste from the site and also sought clarification with regards to the use of the proposed
hard standing. Subsequently, the applicant advised that no manure will be stored outside on the
hard standing area but will be spread onto land used for growing potatoes, which can be assumed
to be the potato drills to the north of the shed as identified on the submitted site layout.
The applicant originally proposed to provide a hard standing for storing bales and for parking and
turning adjacent to the boundary with the rear garden of No. 15. However, following receipt of
objections from this property and the issues raised by Environmental Health, this hard standing
area was relocated adjacent to the proposed shed, moving it 60 metres away from the private
amenity space of No. 15. I am satisfied that the additional information and revised layout
provided by the applicant addresses any issues in relation to odour or noise emanating from the
development. Following submission of this information, Environmental Health have no objections
provided that the arrangements for the storage and disposal of animal waste are adhered to. The
proposal will not result in a detrimental impact on the residential amenity of nearby unconnected
dwellings in accordance with criteria (e) of CTY 12.
Appendix 12
Figure 7: Site Layout
Policy CTY 12 then goes on to say that in cases where new buildings are proposed the applicant
will need to provide information to confirm;
- there are no suitable existing buildings on the holding;
- the design and materials to be used are sympathetic to the locality and adjacent buildings; and
- the proposal is sited beside existing farm buildings
There are no existing farm buildings on this holding. The buildings to the north of the application
site at 13 Edenreagh Road are commercial buildings associated with the applicant’s business
enterprise which are not located on the farm holding. They are currently used in connection with
the business. The design and finishes of the proposed building are typical of modern agricultural
buildings and are sympathetic to the locality as detailed in criteria (b) above. There are no existing
buildings on the holding, therefore the proposal is not sited beside existing farm buildings and
does not meet this part of the policy.
Appendix 12
The policy goes on to state that exceptionally consideration may be given to a site away from the
existing farm provided there are no other sites available at another group of buildings on the
holding, and where;
-it is essential for the efficient functioning of the business; or
-there are demonstrable health and safety reasons.
I am not satisfied that the proposed shed is necessary for the efficient function of the farm holding,
as detailed in criteria (a) above and the applicant has not cited any health and safety reasons for
siting at this location. It is therefore considered that the exceptional test within CTY 12 is not met.
Planning Policy Statement 3: Access, Movement & Parking
At the previous appeal for the retention for a farm building on this site, the PAC determined that
visibility splays of 2.0m x 62.0m should be applied to this site access. Transport NI requested a
detailed topographical site access survey to show the works necessary to provide the 2.0m x
62.0m visibility splays. Transport NI point out that this will require the application site to be
extended into lands not indicated as being within the ownership of the applicant. The extent of
the existing splays are 2.0m x 21.0m to the south west and 2.0m x 36.0 to the north east. The
provision of the splays to the south west will require the lowering of 15m of verge and graded
embankment to the existing field level. The provision of the splays to the north east will require
25m of embankment to be cut back and graded to the existing field level, 25m of hedging to be
removed and a telegraph pole to be relocated/removed. The applicant has not submitted the
necessary information to demonstrate that the visibility splays can be achieved in order to provide
a safe access to the site. The proposal is therefore contrary to AMP 2 of PPS 3.
With regards to the public right of way shown on the site location plan which has been contested
by both objectors, the right of way has no bearing on this application as the applicant proposes to
access via the existing access onto Edenreagh Road. The ownership of these lands is a civil matter
between the applicant and the owner of No. 17.
11. Conclusion and Recommendation
Appendix 12
Having considered all material considerations, including the development plan, relevant planning
policies, planning history of the site, consultations an all issues raised in the objections, refusal is
recommended for the reasons below.
12. Refusal Reason
1. The proposal is contrary to the SPPS and Policy CTY 1 of Planning Policy Statement 21 in that
there are no overriding reasons why this development is essential in this rural location.
2. The proposal is contrary to the SPPS and Policy CTY 12 of PPS 21 in that it has not been
demonstrated that the proposed building is necessary for the efficient use of the agricultural
holding.
3. The proposal is contrary to Policy AMP 2 of PPS 3 in that the applicant has failed to
demonstrate that adequate visibility splays of 2.0m x 62.0m for the proposed development.