The application relates to a narrow triangle of land, on the north side of the property known as Highbury, at the junction of La Rue Jutize and La Rue Du Boulivot in Grouville. The subject land currently forms part of Field 760 and is in agricultural use. The application was refused, as a delegated item, as it is contrary to Policy C6, which establishes “a high level of protection” and “a general presumption against development for whatever purpose” for the Countryside Zone. Policy C6 does also acknowledge that it would be unreasonable to preclude all forms of development, and it then sets out a series of exceptions, which may be permitted where their scale, location and design would not detract from the character and scenic quality of the countryside. The subject change of use, from agricultural to domestic curtilage, is not listed as a possible exception and therefore, irrespective of the assessment of character, it is contrary to policy. In seeking to present a case of the change of use, the applicant has referred to the approval for the extension of the Grouville FC training pitches at Le Boulivot, and the need for adequate screening to form a noise buffer and to block out lighting. No new lighting is proposed as part of the approved football training pitches, and the permission was subject to numerous conditions, relating to hours of use and also requiring adequate on-site planting for screening purposes. It is material to the present considerations that the majority of the relevant boundary to the subject property is already well screened, and the ability exists to provide the missing on-site planted boundary to the elements of the site where there is currently no screening. It is therefore considered that there is no exceptional case to be made. In advising the applicant of the original refusal, the Department informed them of their ability, with the consent of the landowner and of Land Controls and Agricultural Development, to plant trees on agricultural land without a change of use to domestic curtilage being necessary. Therefore, notwithstanding the refusal, their objectives may be deliverable in a manner acceptable to the Planning Department. In submitting their Request for Reconsideration, the applicant refers to other applications where a change of use to domestic curtilage has been approved. However, the circumstances of the quoted applications are not replicated at the subject property. It is a fundamental principle of the planning system that each case is determined on its own merits, on the basis of the policies of the Island Plan, taking into account all material considerations. |