Appendix 14

Derry City and Strabane District Council Planning Committee Report

COMMITTEE DATE: 9th January 2019

APPLICATION No: LA11/2018/0482/O

APPLICATION TYPE: Outline

PROPOSAL: Erection of farm dwelling and domestic garage

LOCATION: 285m North East of 15 Barleyhill Road, Castlederg

APPLICANT: Mr Gerard McHugh

ADVERTISEMENT/STATUTORY EXPIRY: 06/06/2018- 28/06/2018

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse

REASON FOR PRESENTATION TO COMMITTEE: Refusal

All planning application forms, drawings, letters etc. relating to this planning application are available to view on www.planningni.gov.uk

1. Description of Proposed Development

Erection of farm dwelling and domestic garage

2. Site and Surrounding Area

The proposed site is an irregular parcel of land located approx. 285m to the North of No 15

Barleyhill Road and approx. 220m to the north of the nearest farm buildings set within the

farm grouping. The site is elevated when viewed from the public road. The site consist of

poor agricultural land with no defined boundaries. Small immature coniferous plantation is

located immediately to north of the site. Proposed access is via a proposed laneway which

cuts through agricultural land 80m to the west of the proposed site. Localised views from the

site frontage and from the SW on Barleyhill Road.

Appendix 14

Figure 1: Site Location Plan

Appendix 14

Figure 2: Overview of farm holding and proposed site

3. Site Constraints

No constraints.

4. Neighbour Notification Report

No neighbours required to be notified

5. Relevant Site History

J/2012/0096/F- Site 350m North of 15 Barleyhill Road, Castlederg, Proposed 225kW wind

turbine (30m hub height) - Permission Granted albeit approval has expired 23/09/18

Site

Farm Holding

Previous approval J/2009/0122/F

Appendix 14

J/2011/0262/F - Site 350m North of 15 Barleyhill Road, Castlederg, Proposed 100kW wind

turbine (30m hub height) - Permission expired 25-11-2016

J/2009/0122/F- Erection of farm dwelling with the redevelopment of a redundant dwelling to

provide a new domestic garage and stores- Approved 29-09-2009

6. Policy Framework

Strategic Planning Policy Statement

Strabane Area Plan 2001

PPS3 Access, Movement and Parking

PPS21 Sustainable Development in the Countryside

7. Consultee Responses, Internal/External

DFI Roads- No objection

Environmental Health Department: EHD have indicated that should the applicant commence

construction of the wind turbine prior to planning consent expiring (25th September 2018),

the Environmental Health Service is of the opinion that the predicted noise from the turbine

will exceed the financial involved limit of 45dB at the site of the proposal.

If there is evidence that construction of the proposed turbine has commenced the

Environmental Health Service would recommend that planning permission is refused for the

proposed dwelling house due to the impact the turbine would have on future occupants of

the proposed dwelling. To date there is no evidence of commencement of the turbine. During

a meeting with the applicant it was stated that the turbine development had not commenced

and the permission had expired on 23-09-18.

NI Water- No Objection

Appendix 14

DAERA- No Objection in that the applicant’s holding has been active over 6 years

Shared Environmental Services- The potential impact of this proposal on Special Protection

Areas, Special Areas of Conservation and Ramsar sites has been assessed in accordance with

the requirements of Regulation 43 (1) of the Conservation (Natural Habitats, etc.) Regulations

(Northern Ireland) 1995 (as amended). The proposal would not be likely to have a significant

effect on the features of any European site.

8. 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 Strategic Planning Policy Statement (SPPS) introduces transitional arrangements which

will operate until the Council’s Plan Strategy has been adopted. During this period, planning

authorities will apply the existing policy (in this case PPS21 policies CTY1 Development in the

Countryside & CTY10 Dwellings on Farms – the retained policies) together with the SPPS. Any

conflict between the SPPS and the retained policy must be resolved in favour of the SPPS.

The SPPS retains the policy provisions of Planning Policy Statement 21: Sustainable

development in the countryside (PPS21). Policy CTY 1 of PPS21 lists the range of types of

development which in principle are considered acceptable in the countryside and that

will contribute to the aims of sustainable development.

Policy CTY10 Dwellings on a Farm

There are three policy tests under CTY10, all of which must be met if a dwelling on a farm is

to meet policy requirements. These are as follows:

Appendix 14

Criterion a) that the farm business is active and established for at least 6 years.

The evidence provided by the applicant and a response from DAERA has highlighted

that the applicant has been an active farmer over 6 years. Therefore the applicant

has addressed criteria (a).

Criterion b) requires that no development opportunities out-with settlement limits have

been sold off from the farm holding within 10 years of the date of the application.

• A history search of the submitted farm maps indicated that there appears to be a

previous history on the applicants holding under J/2009/0122/F- Erection of farm dwelling

with the redevelopment of a redundant dwelling to provide a new domestic garage and

stores which was approved on 29-09-2009 which is after the qualifying date of 25 November

2008. It would appear from the site visit and following discussion with the applicant that this

approval has not been implemented and has expired.

Criterion c) requires that the proposed dwelling is visually linked or sited to cluster with an

established group of buildings on the farm and where practicable. Access to the dwelling

should be obtained from an existing lane.

The proposed site is located approximately 220m away from the nearest agricultural

buildings associated with the farm holding. These are located to the south within the farm

grouping associated with No 15 Barleyhill Road. Officers contend that the separation distance

(see figure 4) is significant and that there is no visual linkage whatsoever between the

proposed site and the farm grouping to the south.

During a meeting with Officers, the applicant indicated that the removed siting was due to a

need for a dwelling not closely located to the working farm. The applicants business centres

on potato production and distribution. The applicant indicated that the storage and

distribution of the product from the farm grouping occurred during the daytime and due to

Appendix 14

work patterns of his partner the activity was not conducive to quality sleep patterns. Mr

McHugh indicated that the previous approval J/2009/0122/f was not implemented due to

this issue. Mr Mchugh also indicated that the previous turbine application has also not been

implemented.

Officers have considered the reasoning for the siting of the proposed farm dwelling however

the substantial separation distance which is approx. 220m from the farm grouping results in a

dwelling which will have no visual linkage whatsoever. The applicant owns all lands that

surrounds the holding and a more appropriate location could be accommodated, which

visually links with buildings on the farm holding (addressing criterion c) whilst addressing

issues raised by the applicant and criteria (c) of Policy CTY10 which states that new farm

dwellings are to be visually linked or sited to cluster with an established group of buildings on

a holding. As such, the proposal fails to address criteria (c) of Policy CTY10.

Figure 4: View of site in relation to Farm grouping.

SITE Farm Grouping

Appendix 14

Figure 5: View of site along Barleyhill Road

CTY13 Integration and Design

The site has no defined boundaries that would provide any significant enclosure or means of

integration. The proposed site is open and exposed when viewed along Barleyhill Road. Due

to the lack of any adequate backdrop and means of enclosure, a dwelling at this location

would be conspicuous and would not integrate successfully into the landscape. Any

development on site would rely primarily on the use of new landscaping for integration.

This is also compounded by the fact that as the site is not visually linked or sited to cluster

with an established group of buildings on a farm and thus the proposal would be contrary to

Policy CTY13.

Site

Appendix 14

CTY14 Rural Character

Due to the lack of existing vegetation and the open nature of the site, a dwelling would be

unduly prominent and conspicuous and would not integrate into the landscape. A dwelling if

approved at this location would have an adverse impact upon the rural character and thus be

contrary to Policy CTY14 Rural Character. This would be further exacerbated by the degree of

roadside hedging that requires to be excavated to achieve adequate visibility splays. This will

result in an unacceptable from of development by reason of prominence.

9. Conclusion

Having considered all material considerations, including relevant planning policies comprising

the Strategic Planning Policy Statement, Strabane Area Plan and PPS21 (Sustainable

Development in the Countryside) and consultation responses, it is considered that although it

passes the principle of the need for a single dwelling in the countryside, it fails to meet criterion

(c) of PPS21 Policy CTY10 Dwellings on Farms as the site is not visually linked or sited to cluster

with an established group of buildings on a holding. It also fails to meet Policy CTY13

Integration and Design and Policy CTY14 Rural Character as a dwelling on site would be

prominent in the landscape and does not cluster with a farm grouping.

Therefore the Planning Officer recommendation is to refuse a dwelling on a farm at this

particular location for the following reasons;

10. Reasons for refusal

1. The proposal is contrary to Policies CTY1, CTY10, CTY13 and CTY14 of Planning Policy

Statement 21, Sustainable Development in the Countryside and does not merit being

Appendix 14

considered as an exceptional case in that it that the proposed new dwelling is not visually

linked or sited to cluster with an established group of buildings on the farm.

2. The proposal is contrary to Policy CTY13 of Planning Policy Statement 21, Sustainable

Development in the Countryside, in that the proposed dwelling is not visually linked or

sited to cluster with an established group of buildings on the farm and would be a

prominent feature in the landscape as the site lacks long established natural boundaries

and relies primarily on new landscaping for integration.

3. The proposal is contrary to Policy CTY14 of Planning Policy Statement 21, Sustainable

Development in the Countryside in that the building would, if permitted, result in a

detrimental change to the rural character of the countryside by reason of undue

prominence.