Planning Committee Agenda

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT FOOD AND AGRICULTURE

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1999 TOWN AND COUNTRY (DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURE) (No2) ORDER 2013 TOWN AND COUNTRY (DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURE) ORDER 2019

Agenda for a meeting of the Planning Committee, 4th February 2021, 10.00am, in the Ground Floor Meeting Room of Murray House, Mount Havelock, Douglas

1. Introduction by the Chairman

2. Apologies for absence

3. Minutes To give consideration to the minutes of a meeting of the Planning Committee held on the 4th January 2021.

4. Any matters arising

5. To consider and determine Planning Applications Schedule attached as Appendix One.

6. Site Visits To agree dates for site visits if necessary.

7. Section 13 Agreements To note those applications where Section 13 Agreements have been concluded in the period 3rd to 28th January 2021.

8. Any other business

9. Next meeting of the Planning Committee Set for 15th February 2021.

Appendix One PLANNING COMMITTEE Meeting, 4th February 2021 Schedule of planning applications

Item 5.1 Construction of nine new garages and Land At Corner Of Lhon Vane Close And Lhon four bike stores Dhoo Close Onchan Isle Of Man IM3 3BD

PA20/01307/B Recommendation : Permitted

Item 5.2 Conversion of workers cottage to a Former Groundsman's Cottage Douglas dwelling house including erection of an Cemetery Glencrutchery Road Douglas Isle extension and vehicle access Of Man IM2 6DB

PA20/01211/B Recommendation : Refused

Item 5.3 Conversion of garage to a physiotherapy The Gatehouse The Colony Port Lewaigue treatment room Ramsey Isle Of Man IM7 1AL

PA20/01057/B Recommendation : Permitted

Item 5.4 Alterations and erection of first floor Cooyrt Bane Ballafayle Ramsey Isle Of Man extension IM7 1ED

PA20/01209/B Recommendation : Permitted

Item 5.5 Conversion of single dwelling into two Glen View Cottage Main Road Foxdale Isle Of dwellings Man IM4 3EF

PA20/01245/B Recommendation : Permitted

Item 5.6 Erection of a greenhouse Field 124163 Adjacent To Cronk Breck Bernahara Road Andreas Isle Of Man

PA19/01132/B Recommendation : Permitted

Item 5.7 Erection of a replacement detached Fern Villa & Part Fields 410213 & 410216 dwelling with associated access, increase Ballakillowey Road Colby Isle Of Man IM9 of residential curtilage within adjacent 4BW field to provide a parking area and erection of a barn PA20/01116/B Recommendation : Permitted

Item 5.8 Erection of extension to provide garage Cooil Shellagh Douglas Road Kirk Michael Isle and living accommodation 2

Of Man IM6 1AU

PA20/01229/B Recommendation : Permitted

Item 5.9 Installation of multiple ground solar Field 514066 Mill House Old Castletown Road panels Santon Isle Of Man

PA20/01270/B Recommendation : Permitted

Item 5.10 Erection of summer house for use as hair 17 Broogh Wyllin Kirk Michael Isle Of Man salon IM6 1HU

PA20/01288/B Recommendation : Permitted

Item 5.11 Alteration and extension to dwelling Ballacomish Cottage Ronague Road Ballabeg Castletown Isle Of Man IM9 4HF

PA20/01289/B Recommendation : Permitted

Item 5.12 Erection of detached garage & store, Ballacomish Cottage & Part Field 421122 alterations to improve vehicular access Ronague Road Ballabeg Castletown Isle Of and partial expansion of residential Man IM9 4HF curtilage into field no 421122

PA20/01290/B Recommendation : Permitted

Item 5.13 Variation of condition 2 to PA 20/00909/C Lough Ned Oak Hill Port Soderick Isle Of Man Additional use of residence as brewery IM4 1AN business and distributor to public houses, to increase the number of staff PA20/01322/B Recommendation : Permitted

Item 5.14 Additional use of garage as a fitness 1 Laureston Avenue Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 studio/gym 3AE

PA20/01330/C Recommendation : Permitted

Item 5.15 Erection of a replacement detached Ellan Ash Clenagh Road Sandygate Ramsey dwelling, detached garage and wood Isle Of Man IM7 3AE store with associated landscaping, relocation of vehicular access and PA20/01441/B extension of residential curtilage to rear Recommendation : Permitted of dwelling

Item 5.16 Alteration and erection of two storey Hillside Cottage Ballavale Road Santon Isle Of extension and erection of detached

Man IM4 1EH garage with ancillary living accommodation above. PA20/01473/B Recommendation : Permitted

Item 5.17 Erection of a two storey extension to Minglestone Glen Roy Laxey Isle Of Man IM4 provide ancillary living accommodation 7QD

PA20/01478/B Recommendation : Permitted

Item 5.18 Installation of air source heat pump 3 Spring Gardens Douglas Isle Of Man IM1 3JN

PA20/01254/B Recommendation : Permitted

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.1 Proposal : Construction of nine new garages and four bike stores Site Address : Land At Corner Of Lhon Vane Close And Lhon Dhoo Close Onchan Isle Of Man IM3 3BD Applicant : Mr Michael Weldon Application No. : 20/01307/B- click to view Senior Planning Mr Jason Singleton Officer :

RECOMMENDATION: To APPROVE the application ______

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the conditions

C1 . The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

Reason for approval: The proposed application is recommended for approval as it is not considered to harm the use and enjoyment of neighbouring properties and would comply with General Policy 2(b) & (c) (g) (h) & (i), Environmental Policy 22 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, those sections of and is recommended for approval. ______

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):

35 Lhon Vane Close, 58 Lhon Vane Close, 61 Lhon Vane Close, 45 Bemahague Avenue, 46 Bemahague Avenue as their boundary is within 20m of the red line boundary of the application site and they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (July 2020).

39 Bemahague Avenue, as they are not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy ______

Planning Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS BEING REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE UNDER SECTION 2; 1(D) AS IT COULD BE CONSIDERED CONTRARY TO THE LAND USE DESIGNATION AND IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.

1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site is the curtilage of an area of single storey garages located on the corner of Lhonvane Close and Lhondhoo Close. Access to the garages is currently only accessible through Bemahague Avenue to the south of the site. The current garages are in three blocks, one to the eastern boundary, one towards the southern boundary, and the third block, centrally located on a back to back layout of garage attached to the southern block to form a "T" shape. The garages are all flat roof, with single car width up/over doors in white and finished in a spar dash. General car parking is available towards the northern boundary and to the western boundary. The existing garages sit at a lower level than the pavement, (approx. 1m) to the north and west boundary and falls away to the southern boundary by a further 1m. This is reflected in the stepped roofs of the existing garages.

1.2 The character of the surrounding residential area are a variety of styles from detached dwellings to the north of the site and semi-detached to the east, south and bungalows to the west, all with a degree of off road parking on the driveway to the front. The properties that boarder the site to the east and south are generally the two stories high.

1.3 There are 22 garages on site and 12 car parking spaces all owner by the applicant and rented out accordingly on a long term basis. Two small grassed area of land belongs to the commissioners with the option to purchase by the applicant.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the construction of nine new garages and four bike stores to the north and north west elevation of the site adjacent to the boundary. The garages would be flat roof and single car width (2.5m wide to 2.8m wide) and 6.0m long. The four bike stores would measure on average 2.2m wide and 3.2m long to either end of the 'car' garages. The garages would be constructed with spar dash render to match the existing garages; fibreglass roof; white powder coated aluminium doors; fascia's and barge boards in white Upvc.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is within an area of predominately residential on the Proposal Map 6 (Onchan) of the Area Plan for the East. Came into operation on 1st December 2020.

3.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this application; 3.3 General Policy 2 (GP2) (in part) Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development: (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; 6

(c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways;

3.4 Environmental Policy 22 (in part) Development will not be permitted where it would unacceptably harm the environment and/or the amenity of nearby properties in terms of: iii) vibration, odour, noise or light pollution

3.6 Other Material Considerations The Department has recently published the Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) which provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property. This includes specific guidance on rear and side extensions in Section 7.0 titled; Impact on Neighbouring properties.

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 02/00846/A - Approval in principle for erection of 6 dwellings to replace existing garages. Refused on appeal. 91/01768/A - Approval in principle to demolish garage block & erect detached/semi- detached dwellings, Refused on Review.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS (in part, full reps available on line) 5.1 Onchan District Commissioners commented (22/12/20) seeking a deferral until 11th January. In light of the current COVID lockdown measurers issued on 6th January until 21st January. On (15/01/21) the commissioners wrote to advise there are no board meetings and unable to consider the planning application.

5.2 Highways Services do not object (18.12.20) After reviewing this Application, Highway Services find it to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network efficiency and /or parking with a positive contribution to sustainable travel on provision of bicycle storage facilities.

5.3 35 Lhon Vane Close, Lives immediately adjacent to the east of the site and their boundary backs onto the application site. They are concerned regarding the level of noise from bikes and cars revving in the morning, an increase in garages will be an increase in noise and fumes. Untidy nature of the site could worsen and rubbish thrown over their wall. The site is being used as a cut through to the St.Ninians Lower School and would lead to an increase in pedestrians. Ongoing issues with parking to Lhondhoo Close and Lhonvane Close.

5.4 58 Lhon Vane Close, lives oppose with application site, (directly opposite the existing garages) to the north across the highway. They strongly object to adding more garages onsite in front of their house and blocking their view. The current garages do not add to the value of the estate and are tatty and not pleasant. They would prefer new houses instead. The garages create noise levels from tenants using them for mechanical work, and noisy engines.

5.5 61 Lhon Vane Close, lives opposite the application site (directly opposite the proposed new garages) to the north across the highway. They object to the adding of more garages, consider the existing a blight on the area, noise from cars and bikes revving up, particularly at weekends, area not well maintained and can look untidy and an eyesore. Has a large hedge 7 to obscure the garages. Draws attention to the area being used as a school pick up and drop off or Lower St. Ninians, this would leave to a further increase in noise and pollution.

5.6 39 Bemahague Avenue, is located on the access road to the site approx. 130m to the south of the application site. Objects as the proposal would increase the volume of traffic through Bemahague and is unacceptable, questions the legitimate uses of these garages as none of them appear to house a car. The area and use of the garages is more akin to industrial units. Parking in the area is already at capacity and this would be seen to exacerbate this, placing pressure on the highways and for emergency vehicles. Would prefer to see residential dwellings used rather than more garages.

5.7 45 Bemahague Avenue, is located on the access road to the site approx. 25m to the south of the site. Objects as the proposal would place a further strain on highway, increasing vehicle traffic, particularly pickups and builders vans using the garages for secure storage, difficulty for emergency services to access the area as conflicts with parking on site and on the access road to the site. The potential for further noise and disturbance by working on vehicles and all day and at weekends. Concern is raised regarding the storage and handling of hazardous waste as none of the garages are used for parking of vehicles. Incompatible use with the character of the area, untidiness of the garages, children being able to use the roofs of the garages given the difference in level and causing a nuisance and potential health and safety incident.

5.8 46 Bemahague Avenue, is located on the access road to the site approx.15m to the east of the site (next to 48). Objects as the existing garages are currently used for commercial storage, eg, a gardener a woodworking company, a glazing company, several builders, plumbers and other. This has since increased year on year with many vans visiting the area which is not compatible with the residential area. Would place further strain on parking in the area, and the potential run off water would could impact on the adjacent properties.

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are; (i) visual impact of the proposed development; (GP2(b) & (c)) (ii) the impact upon the amenities (overlooking, loss of light; over bearing impact, privacy and visual amenity) of the neighbouring properties. (GP2(g)) (iii) Environmental impact (EP22) (iv) Highway Safety (GP2h,i)

6.2 (i) Visual impact The principle of adding more garages to the site in lieu of parking spaces would be an acceptable form of development as it would not be introducing a new element of use that is not already available or utilised on site. The design of the proposed garages would be of similar scale, form and style as the existing garages with a layout that is not to dissimilar to the existing but reflects this part of the site and its topography. The general appearance here is considered proportionate to the site and would be seen to replicate an existing built form. When finished to match the current appearance it will ensure the built forms are complementary to the character and appearance of the existing garages and would not be seen to adversely impact the character of the area given the existing surrounding garages.

6.3 When viewing the proposed garages, it would be partially visible from the highway to the north and surrounding properties but given the topography of the site and differences in levels, the flat roofs would be approximately the height of the current handrail (approx. 1m) on the footpath edge of the site on the north and west boundaries. In this case any views of the additional garages would be read in the existing context of the site and surrounding streetscene. These aspects of the visual legibility are deemed to be an acceptable form of development that complies with those sections of General Policy 2(b) & (c). 8

6.4 (ii) Neighbouring amenities The comments from concerned residents are briefly noted in section 5.0, the common theme arising from those, but not limited too, are; Noise, Pollution, unkept appearance, school shortcut, parking pressure, vehicle access, use for commercial applications, Health and safety with kids on the roof, potential for flooding.

6.5 Turning to the neighbouring residents' concerns, the proposed garages would remove an element of parking but would inadvertently remove the ability for any outside storage or parking of unsightly vehicles and would further enclose the openness of the site to screen the internal access corridor and fronts of the garages. It was further noted from the site visit, the difference in levels of the site and the surrounding highway where the views looking into the site from the north would be a rendered concrete wall and flat roof approx. 1m higher than the pavement. The visibility and outlook above the tops of the garage would still be achievable and would not be seen as an incongruous feature or harmful in its visual amenity. Whilst this is in turn could allow an element of mis-use and unauthorised access to the roofs, as indicated, this is would be a form of trespass as the land and buildings are private and a matter for the law.

6.6 The agent and applicant have sought to address the concerns in their submission dated 18 January 2020, which portrays a difference of opinion. In summary, the garages have been owned and managed for 18 years by the applicant, in this time, they have not received any complaints regarding noise or nuisances. None of the garages have electricity, water or sewer drainage connected, so cannot be used as a commercial entity, or allow for noise activities on site through workmanship with noise tools. The owners have to carry public liability insurance and part of this they know and inspect the contents of each garage and they, the applicant, confirms these garages are not used in any way different to a garage attached to a residential property. Also stated, the garages generally store motorbikes, bicycles, general storage for house holders, and some for those who are self-employed for storage. The owners take pride in the appearance and continually maintain the garages and area.

6.7 From a strictly planning perspective and what are deemed material considerations. The proposed garages would not be considered to offer any aspect of overlooking leading to a loss of privacy to either of the neighbouring properties. Not would there be any loss of light or overshadowing from the built form of the garages, given the single story nature. Also it would not be considered to have an overbearing effect given the intervening distances between the application site and the neighbouring properties and the proposed location of the garages.

6.8 With regard to the above, the level and scale of development proposed are considered to be relatively subordinate to the existing garages and not judged to cause harm to the enjoyment of the neighbouring amenity. On balance, these aspects would be considered to be compliant with those sections of General Policy 2(g). 6.9 (iii) Environmental impact Turning to whether the proposal would harm the environment and/or the amenity of nearby neighbouring properties through a statutory nuisance, it is noted that noise levels are likely to be the most common "nuisance" here as opposed to vibration, odour, noise or light pollution. The additional garages would not be introducing an element of use that is not already present on site. There is a legitimate use of the land for garages and as such those activities would not be incompatible with what is being proposed. There is no evidence that indicates there are any commercial mechanical workshops operating from here, which has been verified by the owners and the lack of services to the garages. It is not considered the additional garages would be intensifying the existing use over and above the existing levels given the nature of uses of the garages.

6.10 On balance, it is considered the additional garages would not cause harm to the enjoyment of the adjacent neighbouring amenity through any statutory nuisance of; noise, odour and light pollution given the intermediate distances and the current arrangement on site of existing garages and would not have any adverse impact that would be contrary to Environmental Policy 22.

6.12 (iv) Highway Safety The concerns raised regarding access and egress from the site, parking and vehicle movement as raised following the consultation period and noted in section 5.0. However, highway Services have considered the merits of the proposal, access to and from the site from the highway, as well as parking and highway safety. As the transport professionals their comments are heavily relied upon and do not object to the proposal. As such the proposal would be aligned with the principles of GP2 (h&i).

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 For the above reasons, it is concluded that the proposed garages would be an appropriate form of development that does not harm the use and enjoyment of neighbouring properties and would comply with aforementioned planning policies of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, and is recommended for approval.

8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

8.2 The decision maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.2 Proposal : Conversion of workers cottage to a dwelling house including erection of an extension and vehicle access Site Address : Former Groundsman's Cottage Douglas Cemetery Glencrutchery Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 6DB Applicant : Mr T Thwaites Application No. : 20/01211/B- click to view Principal Planner : Miss S E Corlett

RECOMMENDATION: To REFUSE the application ______

Reasons and Notes for Refusal R : Reasons for refusal O : Notes (if any) attached to the reasons

R 1. It is considered that the development would have an adverse impact on the use of the cemetery through the introduction of domestic activity and traffic within an area used by those attending funerals and tending burial sites, with inadequate provision for the storage of bins and where there would be an adverse impact on the privacy and perceived privacy of those in adjacent residential properties and the development is therefore contrary to General Policy 2c, g, h, j, k and m of the Strategic Plan. ______

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

26 and 27, Mountain View as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (2019). ______

Planning Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT

THE SITE 1.1 The site is a portion of Douglas cemetery which is situated on the north western side of Glencrutchery Road oppose the football pitch and immediately alongside part of the residential estate of Mountain View - specifically numbers 25, 26 and 27 which back onto the site.

1.2 The site accommodates an existing building - a former cottage which accommodated the groundsman associated with the maintenance of the cemetery. The cottage has not been

11 occupied as a dwelling for some time but is understood to be used for storage in association with the maintenance of the cemetery.

1.3 The site also includes a pedestrian access onto Glencrutchery Road through the cemetery and existing alongside the north western landing of the footbridge which has recently been removed. This access is open only between the hours of 0800hrs and 1600hrs as are the main cemetery gates. This path leads to another pedestrian gate onto Sulby Road in Willaston and this gate is opened at the same times.

1.4 The building is a traditional Manx cottage whose front elevation faces Glencrutchery Road and is visible therefrom. There is currently no boundary of the cottage with the cemetery and the boundary between it and Mountain View is formed by a stone wall which extends as high as ground floor ceiling levels of the properties on each side, and mature trees planted at intervals along the boundary on the cemetery side. The application site is higher than the ground level of the dwellings in Mountain View.

1.5 The building has three windows at first floor level and two, one either side of the front door at ground floor level, on window slightly larger than the other. There are no windows or doors in the main part of the house on either gable although there is a door on the elevation facing Mountain View in the single storey lean-to annex at the rear. Behind this sits a flat, corrugated roofed pergola.

1.6 The dwellings in Mountain View alongside the site are two storey with windows which look towards the application site. There is clear view from the rear of number 25 and 26 up towards the site where the top half of the gable is visible from the ground floors and from the first floor bedrooms and bathroom (number 26) one can see clearly the front of the existing single storey outbuildings to the rear of the cottage.

1.7 The burial plots around the application site are not as new as those on the north eastern side of the main entrance drive although some are clearly family plots where there have been more recent burials.

1.8 The application has been amended to include vehicular access from the property to the main cemetery gates (drawing JTM2031-P-00A).

THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the renovation of the existing cottage and its use for residential unconnected with the cemetery and its extension. The extension will be at the rear and take the form of two conjoined annexes which extend 3m from the rear of the property and further to the rear of this the existing pergola is to be re-finished with a sedum roof and rendered walls and bifold opening doors into the rear garden area on the Mount View side of the property. The existing door facing Mountain View will be replaced by a high level window with no new first floor windows installed and the bifold doors will be at single storey level and some 8.4m from the boundary wall with Mountain View.

2.2 A driveway which will accommodate two vehicles nose to tail is proposed to the rear of the building.

2.3 The applicant has clarified that vehicular access to the site will be via the main gates and the red line has been adjusted accordingly although it has not been clarified how the occupants of the property will get in and out of the site outside the period when the gates are locked. PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the East as an Area of Civic, Cultural or Other Purposes (cemetery).

3.2 The proposed use is not consistent with the land use although as the dwelling is already in situ and was clearly previously used as a dwelling. The property would appear to have lost its habitable status through non-use and it is understood that it has been used for storage in the intervening period.

3.3 Whilst the site is not designated for development, it is appropriate to consider the provisions of General Policy 2 which set out general standards of development which should be applicable to all developments irrespective of whether they are in accordance with the land use designation. The appropriate parts of that policy are as follows:

Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:

(b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; (j) can be provided with all necessary services; (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan; (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding; (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption.

PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 No planning applications have been submitted for this property but various have been for the cemetery itself which are not relevant to the current application.

REPRESENTATIONS 5.1.1 Douglas Borough Council ask that the correct ownership is noted on the form and the application changed accordingly (09.11.20 and 11.11.20).

5.1.2 Further correspondence between the applicant and Douglas Borough Council on 25.11.20, 04.12.20 and 23.12.20 reveal that the Council will provide the occupier with a key to the cemetery gates where the occupiers can pull up in front of the gates which are set back from the main road and will open and close the gates as do the council staff at present. They advise that all domestic life has to be confined to the curtilage of the dwelling and the parking spaces shown on the drawings cannot be used for anything other than parking and the occupiers must abide by the rules of the cemetery which will be enforced through a covenant imposed by the Council. They will advise the occupiers about bin storage. They resolved on 23.12.20 to support the application.

5.2.1 Highway Services seek additional information, suggesting that the application site must include the main cemetery access as they will not accept increased use of the gate next to the footbridge as the gate is of insufficient width for the increased pedestrian and vehicular usage resulting from the development. This access should be for pedestrians only. Also the 13 proposed gates must open inwards not outwards and there should be provision for the secure storage of bicycles, waste and consideration should be given for an electric vehicle charging point (09.11.20).

5.2.2 Highway Services comment further on 27.11.20 confirming that the main cemetery gates will be an appropriate access and egress despite the driveway visibility splays having been drawn incorrectly. They recommend sliding gates at the entrance to the property to maximise parking and suggest an internal reorganisation to allow better access to the spaces. They remain concerned about bin storage and amenity issues relating to dual use and practical operations. They raise no objection subject to conditions about waste, amenity and site gating.

5.3 A representation has been received from the owner of 26, Mountain View who object to the application on the basis that it would impinge upon their privacy, their perception of privacy and that it would not be in keeping with its surroundings. They suggest that it long ceased to be a residential property and what is proposed "vastly" increases the footprint of the property into an area which is currently used by gardeners and is not a building. They explain that their property is immediately behind the building and the plans show floor to ceiling windows facing their bathroom and bedroom and they are also significantly raising the ground floor level such that occupants will be able to see over the mutual boundary wall as the distance between the windows are less than 20m. They question how the property will be accessed for the development and thereafter with potentially continual headlamps in the dark will impede on their rights and perception of privacy (09.12.20)

5.4 A representation has been received from the owner of 27, Mountain View objecting to the application on the basis that there will be overlooking of their bedroom window and into their back garden and living room and they suggest that a covenant could be imposed to prevent the cutting down of any boundary shrubs and a redesign of the property so that there are no windows looking towards their property. They wonder how visitors will gain access to the properties outside cemetery opening hours and whether this will increase parking on Mountain View. An automated gate entry system may address this. They are concerned that the building works will cause noise and nuisance to the other users of the cemetery and respect to other users and property owners could be given and no working is undertaken at weekends (27.11.20).

ASSESSMENT 6.1 The proposed use is contrary to the land use designation. As such it is necessary to consider whether the principle of the development is acceptable as well as whether the development would have an acceptable impact on the living conditions of those in adjacent dwellings and the cemetery, on highway safety and on community safety (General Policy 2).

Principle of development 6.2 Whether the development is acceptable in principle depends upon whether a residential use could be compatible with the use of the adjoining land as a cemetery. Whilst the property used to be a dwelling associated with the cemetery, it has since lost its habitable use and thus the principle of living accommodation in this location needs to be considered afresh.

6.3 Cemeteries are places of quiet reflection and where those who may be in an emotional condition may be, either attending a funeral or tending a grave or garden of remembrance. it was noted that the graves closest to the site include relatively recent burials which would suggest that this part of the cemetery is visited. It is often the case, as indeed it is here, that there are residential properties abutting a churchyard or cemetery and for those attending a funeral or tending to a place of rest can find the continuation of others' daily lives so close to them to be inappropriate or insensitive but this is generally something to be accepted due to the location of many churchyards and cemeteries. In these cases however, there is usually a fixed boundary between the existing residential properties and the cemetery or churchyard 14 and where the two sets of activities do not intermingle. In this case, the means of access and particularly important, the vehicular access is directly through the church yard where domestic and funereal traffic (pedestrian and vehicular) will coincide when the cemetery is open. As is the case with many cemeteries, people tend to congregate at the entrance and at the rear exit of the Borough Crematorium building before and after services so there are often people congregating in the areas where the domestic traffic associated with the proposed dwelling will wish to pass. Whilst the vehicular traffic may be passing slowly and it is unlikely that there would be a highway safety issue for this reason, it is not considered particularly sensitive to have non-cemetery traffic passing through the site whilst those attending funerals or tending graves are going about their business. The proposed dwelling is a three bedroomed dwelling and could easily be occupied by a family with the traffic - pedestrian and vehicular - which would go along with that.

6.4 It is proposed that those occupying the proposed dwelling would have a key to access the gates of the cemetery. It is not clear whether those visiting the site would also have the same facility: if not, there may be a temptation to leave the gates open when visitors may be expected. There is also no certainty that the gates would always be locked behind those coming into or out of the site and thus there is concern that the security of the cemetery would be compromised by the existence of a residential property within the grounds.

6.5 It has not been clarified how bins would be stored when due for collection. It is unlikely that the refuse collection vehicle will enter the cemetery (which may well be closed if the vehicle attends outside cemetery opening times) so any bins to be collected would have to be moved to the pavement on Glencrutchery Road where they would be an impediment to those using the footway. Many bins remain outwith owners' property if they are collected whilst the occupiers are at work. The bin(s) could therefore remain on the footway for some time.

6.6 For the above reasons, it is not considered that the principle of a dwelling within the grounds of the cemetery is acceptable.

Living conditions of those in adjacent dwellings 6.7 The adjacent properties within Mountain View are positioned very close to the boundary with the cemetery such that their windows are visible from within the cemetery from where there are views into these properties. This of course is only possible by the public when the cemetery is open. There would be views into these properties outwith these times if the application is approved.

6.8 The proposed dwelling by virtue of the proposed additional building mass and the inclusion of the bifold doors, coupled with the fact that the existing property is set higher than the adjacent dwellings will also have an impact on the outlook and the privacy of the adjacent properties, particularly 26 and 27, Mountain View. Using the Residential Design Guidance calculation of overbearing impact (the "25 degree rule") the proposal would not impinge upon the outlook of those in the adjacent property and it is important to bear in mind that the building is already in situ so its impact is already experienced. The proposal does add mass to the property though and the most important addition in this respect is the single storey rear extension which, whilst only single storey, is higher than the adjacent properties and is within 20m (it is 18m to the rear of number 26).

6.9 It is unlikely that anyone within the single storey annex would be able to see into the ground floor of the adjacent properties. However if this area is lit, it will be apparent to those in the adjacent properties that this is occupied, unlike the current situation which has no habitable rear annex. This could affect the perception of the privacy of those in the adjacent dwellings. From the upper floors of the adjacent dwellings, particularly the bedroom and bathroom of number 26, there will be a clear view down into the rear garden area of the proposed dwelling and vice versa. The use of the existing building as a dwelling will inevitably affect the privacy and perceived privacy of the adjacent dwellings. 15

6.10 There is also an impact for the occupants of the proposed dwelling in terms of them being overlooked by the occupants of the adjacent dwellings although this would be a matter for anyone contemplating occupying the property. Regardless of this, the relationship between the adjacent properties in Mountain View and the proposed dwelling is uncomfortable.

Highway safety 6.11 As stated above, the coming together of domestic and cemetery related pedestrian and vehicular traffic is likely to be awkward although given the nature of the internal roads within the cemetery, it is not likely that any traffic will be travelling particularly quickly so there is not considered to be a risk of highway safety being adversely affected by the proposal.

Community safety 6.12 The proposal is likely to result in the gates of the cemetery being open at times when it is officially closed without any real confirmation of how the immediate closure of the gates thereafter will be secured. This could be considered to be a risk to those who may unwittingly enter the open gates and then become locked in. The proposal is also likely to result in bins being stored on the public footway outside the pedestrian gate into the cemetery without any way of ensuring that they are brought in immediately after being emptied. Many people leave their bins out for collection the night before and some stay there until the owners come home from work the following day. The position of a bin or bins here is likely to be detrimental to public safety due to it being an impediment to the use of the footway.

Design 6.13 It is not considered that the design of the proposed works is objectionable and there is indeed merit in renovating the existing property which currently appears to be neglected in an area visible to and visited by the public. There is however the option of renovating the property with an end use of storage in connection with the maintenance of the cemetery.

CONCLUSION 7.1 It is considered that the development would have an adverse impact on the use of the cemetery with inadequate provision for the storage of bins and where there would be an adverse impact on the privacy and perceived privacy of those in adjacent residential properties and the development is therefore contrary to General Policy 2c, g, h, j, k and m of the Strategic Plan.

INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

(a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

8.2 The decision maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and 16 o whether there are other persons to those listed in Article 4(2) who should be given Interested Person Status.

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.3 Proposal : Conversion of garage to a physiotherapy treatment room Site Address : The Gatehouse The Colony Port Lewaigue Ramsey Isle Of Man IM7 1AL Applicant : Mrs Jane Cowley Application No. : 20/01057/B- click to view Planning Officer : Mrs Vanessa Porter

RECOMMENDATION: To APPROVE the application ______

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or operated until the parking areas have been provided in accordance with drawing No. 20 1431 02. Such areas shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking and turning of vehicles associated with the development and shall remain free of obstruction for such use at all times.

Reason: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for off-street parking and turning of vehicles in the interests of highway safety.

C 3. The area of the building to be used for therapy shall be limited to that shown on the floor plans forming part of the application and the use hereby permitted shall not extend into any other part of the premises.

Reason: To minimise the disturbance to adjacent residential occupiers and to protect the residential character of the locality.

C 4. The use hereby approved shall only be for the benefit of Mrs Jane Cowley while they are resident at 'The Gatehouse,' The Colony, Port Lewaigue, Ramsey and no staff may be employed and/or work at the premises.

Reason: Although the specific details of this application have been found acceptable, any change to its operation will require fresh assessment.

Reason for approval: The propose change of use would not harm the use and enjoyment of neighbouring properties and the available parking on the existing driveway is sufficient enough to accommodate the traffic associated with the proposed natural therapy use. Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

"Close Foillan" Port E Vullen as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (January 2020). ______

Planning Officer’s Report

THE APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS IT COULD BE CONSIDERED CONTRARY TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.

THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of The Gatehouse, The Colony, Port Lewaigue, Ramsey which is a semi detached property situated to a corner plot on the Maughold Road where it meets The Colony.

1.2 Parking for the property is situated to the south of the site and is directly onto Maughold Road.

THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The current planning application seeks approval to change the use of the existing garage into a treatment room and to alter the garage door into a window and door.

PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The previous planning applications are not considered to be specifically material in the assessment of the current application.

PLANNING POLICY 4.1 The site lies within an area zoned as Predominantly Residential on the 1982 Development Plan, North Map.

4.2 Given the nature of the application it is appropriate to consider General Policy 2, Business Policy 1 and Business Policy 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

4.3 General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 states; "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development: (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space, and (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways."

4.4 Business Policy 1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 states; "The growth of employment opportunities throughout the Island will be encouraged provided that development proposals accord with the policies of this Plan." 4.5 Transport Policy 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 states; "The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards.

4.6 Appendix A.7.6 of the Isle of Man Strategic plan 2016 should also be noted which stipulates that, for a typical residential development, two (2) spaces should be provided per unit, at least one of which is retained within the curtilage and behind the front of the dwelling.

REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services have written in to state that they do not oppose the application and note that whilst there prior representation (9.10.20) was prepared prior to the comments from Close Foillan and Garff Commissioners they still remain of the same opinion that the existing access does not require alteration.

5.2 Garff Commissioners have considered the proposal and state the following, "The general nature of the proposed business its potential for impact on the neighbourhood were discussed. The amount of parking available was considered to be adequate for the level of clients attending for appointments but Members agreed to defer to the expertise of Highways in this matter. (12.10.20).

5.3 Cornerstone Architects have written in on behalf of the owners/occupiers of "Close Foillan" stating firstly with regards to the access to "Close Foillan" relying heavily on a clear road immediately outside his property and they have concerns with the traffic management associated with visitors to the clinic adding to an already difficult situation. (2.10.20). A further comment was received on 24.12.20 which commented that their client wanted a condition to be attached to the application.

ASSESSMENT 6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of the planning application is the principle of the additional use and the potential impacts of the proposal on the wider amenity.

THE PRINCIPLE OF OPERATING A BUSINESS FROM THE SITE 6.2 When looking at the principle of the additional use it should be acknowledged that permission has been approved and refused for the operation of businesses from a residential property, throughout the Island.

6.3 'The Gatehouse' is within a site zoned as 'predominately residential' and as such the change of use of the garage to a treatment room would not comply with the land use designation in 3.1, however the application site will majority stay as a dwellinghouse. There is also no alterations proposed to the property as such there will be no visual impact on the General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 based on the small scale use.

6.4 It should be noted that 'The Gatehouse' is not close to a town centre or commercial area with the impact of the proposed change of use unlikely to draw materially harmful levels of trade away from the town or village centre. Moreover, to approve the application could enable the growth of a business that would eventually achieve a sufficient turnover as to encourage its moving into a larger, more attractive and more appropriate commercial premises in that town centre in due course.

THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS UPON NEIGHBOURING AMENITIES 6.5 Concerns can be raised by such proposals, namely relating to the impact upon on-street parking provisions and noise & general disturbances though people coming and going from the site. The applicants are the full time occupants of the property, living within the other rooms within the property and will be the only employee working from this address. The supporting information with the application indicates that the business is to operate three times a week with a total of 6/7 patients a day.

6.6 In terms of neighbouring properties, due to the nature of the business, with only a single client at a time and no noisy activities being carried out, it is considered unlikely that there will be significant impact on the neighbouring properties.

6.7 One of the neighbouring properties has raised concern with regards to the additional traffic and the parking available on site. Whilst the coming and going of vehicles to the property is likely to increase above the existing arrangement due to the coming and goings of clients, however these comings and goings would likely be difficult to differentiate between a general household (for example a family of 4 each with their own car) and therefore it is unlikely that the business would be significantly more disruptive than normal domestic activities that would otherwise be acceptable in a dwelling.

6.8 The Strategic Plan required that a residential dwelling requires a minimum of two off road parking spaces. The applicants have stated on their forms that there was a possible 4 parking spaces within the front of their property, further to a site visit to the property further details were requested from the agents to ascertain where the parking spaces where available on the site.

6.9 Additional drawings were received to show additional parking to the south west of the front garden with the removal of the greenhouse and planters. With this alteration it would bring the possible parking spaces over what is required within Appendix 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. The fact that the property does have the parking arrangement is sufficient enough to meet the required standards and in having spaces available for those visiting the premises for therapy one after the other. The proposal is considered to be provided with sufficient parking and thus not expected to result in any adverse highway safety impacts on the area.

6.9 It is considered necessary to include a condition firstly to ensure that the parking to the front is done according to the drawing received and secondly another condition to ensure that the driveway is made available and unobstructed for the parking of vehicles at all times.

CONCLUSION 7.1 For the above reasons the proposal is considered to comply with General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and therefore acceptable.

INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.4 Proposal : Alterations and erection of first floor extension Site Address : Cooyrt Bane Ballafayle Ramsey Isle Of Man IM7 1ED Applicant : Mr & Mrs M Harmon Application No. : 20/01209/B- click to view Senior Planning Mr Jason Singleton Officer :

RECOMMENDATION: To APPROVE the application ______

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

Reason for approval: The planning application would be an acceptable form of development that has been designed to ensure that it would not harm the use and enjoyment of neighbouring properties, that of the countryside and would comply with General Policy 2, Environment Policy 2 and the principles of the Residential Design Guide 2019. ______

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

The owners of Reayrt Ny Marrey, as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (July 2018). ______

Planning Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS BEING REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE UNDER SECTION 2; 1(D) AS IT COULD BE CONSIDERED CONTRARY TO HOUSING POLICY 16 AS THE PROPOSAL WOULD INCREASE THE VISUAL IMPACT WHEN VIEWED BY THE PUBLIC AND IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.

1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of Cooyrt Bane, Ballafayle, Hibernia Maughold Road, Ramsey. The property sits to the east of the highway and west of the 23

Electric railway. The property is characterised by an extended bungalow with an attached flat roof garage and flat roof extension to the west sitting at a lower level than the highway and screened by the planting and its topography from the highway.

1.2 The character of the streetscene here is essentially seven detached properties within their own curtilages that are accessed of the Hibernia Maughold Road. These properties front onto the highway and present a variety of property characteristics from extended bungalows, to dormer extensions in the roofscape and two storey properties, all of which sitting at a lower level than the highway. The nearest residential property is Reayrt Ny Marrey to the side (north) elevation.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed are a series of internal alterations to the ground floor layout and an upwards extension to provide additional living accommodation with alterations to the roof. The proposed roof space would span across the central part of the bungalow, extending the north and south walls up to first floor level to meet the ridge creating two gable ends. The flat roof over the garage would be altered to a pitch, and the western extension would see the roof pitch alter to match the garage. The proposed application would see a net gain in space of 95 m2 and providing two further bedrooms and an internal balcony with void over the living room.

2.2 The scope of works would see a new roof being installed and a new palette of colours and finishing materials introduced. The existing ground floor walls would be rendered and painted in a light grey colour, the new vertical sections from the raising of the roof would be dark grey or black vertical cladding boarding, the roof dark grey smooth concrete tiles, windows and door in grey or black Upvc / aluminium frames, fascia board and rainwater goods in black Upvc units.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is located within an area of 'High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance' as designated in the Isle of Man Development Plan 1982.

3.2 Within the adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, the following policies are considered to be relevant in the determination of this application:

3.3 General Policy 2 (GP2) (in part) Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development: (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality;

3.4 Environment Policy 2; The present system of landscape classification of Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV's) as shown on the 1982 Development Plan and subsequent Local and Area Plans will be used as a basis for development control until such time as it is superseded by a landscape classification which will introduce different categories of landscape and policies and guidance for control therein. Within these areas the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration unless it can be shown that:

(a) the development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape; or 24

(b) the location of development is essential."

3.5 Housing Policy 16: The extension of non-traditional dwellings or those of poor or inappropriate form will not generally be permitted where this would increase the impact of the building as viewed by the public.

3.6 The Department has recently published the Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) which provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property.

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 There are a number of previous planning applications on this site, however, none are considered relevant in the determination of the current proposal.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Garff Parish Commissioners had not commented at the time of writing. 5.2 Highways Services do not object (13/11/20)

5.3 The owners of Reayrt Ny Marrey have commented on 10/11/20; 17/11/20; 23/11/20, to object given the previous planning history regarding the inclusion of a pitched roof over the garage, the upper bedroom window in the north gable is viewed as an intrusion of their privacy, (overlooking) this elevated window would allow for direct views into their living room and their bedroom, making it very depressing. Request that the window is frosted glazing if it is to be retained. Their living accommodation is upside down living, placing the living room at first floor level. Doesn’t understand why they need a window in the north gable when they have roof lights. Given her age and mobility would not be able to make any meetings to represent herself and reiterates the window if retained needs to be frosted glazing.

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are;

(i) the visual impact upon the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and that of the countryside (HP16, GP2b,c EP2) (ii) the impact upon the amenities (overlooking, loss of light; over bearing impact, privacy and visual amenity) of the neighbouring properties. (GP2(g,)

6.2 (i) Visual Impact The principle of altering and extending an existing residential property would be an acceptable form of development for increasing the floor area. The proposed roof alterations would be introducing a larger built massing by building at two stories and would see the ridge height increase approx. 2.0m in height to the ridge but the proportions and form of these in terms of size and height and the general appearance it is considered proportionate to the overall footprint of the property and size of the curtilage. Whilst this massing could increase any views from the highway, the proposal would be considered an improvement on the existing in terms of design and appearance. It is also worth noting if the applicant proposed to demolish and rebuild the proposal, it could be agreed that what is being proposed would be an improvement over the existing bungalow and could comply with HP14. Whilst the dark palette of finishes may not be to everyone's liking, it would add a uniform appearance throughout the existing dwellinghouse helping to ensure the new built forms are in complementary to the character and appearance of the dwellinghouse and deemed to comply with Housing Policy 16.

6.3 When viewing the proposed alterations to the roof and elevations of the dwellinghouse, it would not be clearly visible from the highway at the west, given the 25 topography and any glimpsing views would be read in the residential context of the property and the surrounding streetscene within this hamlet of residential properties. It is further noted the adjacent property to the north 'Reayrt Ny Marrey' sits at a much higher level than this dwellinghouse, so the raising of the roof would not be seen as an incongruous visual feature on the landscape but observed within this context. These aspects of development are deemed to be an acceptable form of development that complies with those sections of General Policy 2(b,c) and the RDG 2019 without harming the visual amenity of the countryside and this area of high landscape value in accordance with EP2.

6.4 (ii) Neighbouring amenities Turning to the comments received from the neighbour at Reayrt Ny Marrey, their concerns relate to the window on the north gable end, at first floor level, which would face towards their property and garden.

6.5 Having visited the site and observed the juxtaposition of the two properties, Reayrt Ny Marrey sits nearer to the highway than that of the application site and at a higher elevation, which ensures the rear elevation of Reayrt Ny Marrey is behind the front building line of the application site. Also observed within the south gable elevation of Reayrt Ny Marrey are two windows which look over the front gardens of the application site. Within the rear elevation of Reayrt Ny Marrey are a set of patio doors and balcony nearest to the application site.

6.6 The distance between the proposed gable window and these patio windows on rear elevation would be approx.15m. When considering any outlook from this bedroom window would mainly be across those properties to the north and east out to sea and Maughold Head as opposed to the west, and inland. Given the existing configuration of the two properties and the existing level of mutual overlooking, a lesser distance than the usual 20m would be acceptable in this instance. The residential design guide give a clear explanation of this in paragraph 7.5; "This distance can be relaxed where the design or orientation is such that privacy and amenity of a neighbouring property is not compromised. In dense urban areas where there is already a level of mutual overlooking a lesser standard may be acceptable". Given the oblique angles involved between the window faces, the difference in height between the two first floor levels, and the distances involved, it would not be considered to offer any direct overlooking into Reayrt Ny Marrey which could lead to a loss of privacy.

6.7 When considering whether there would be any loss of light or overshadowing from the built form of the extension, given the two story nature it would not be considered to have an overbearing effect given the intervening distances between the application site and that of the neighbouring property to the north. Nor would these immediate neighbours to the north, be disadvantaged from any loss of light over and above the existing levels given the properties orientation and the distances involved.

6.8 On balance, the level and scale of development proposed here are considered to be relatively modest and not judged to cause harm to the enjoyment of the main dwellinghouse or considered to harm the neighbouring amenity, specifically those to the north who border the site, these aspects would be considered to be compliant with those sections of General Policy 2(g).

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 The planning application would be an acceptable form of development that has been designed to ensure that it would not harm the use and enjoyment of neighbouring properties, that of the countryside and would comply with General Policy 2, Environment Policy 2 Housing Policy 16 and the principles of the Residential Design Guide 2019.

8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: 26

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.5 Proposal : Conversion of single dwelling into two dwellings Site Address : Glen View Cottage Main Road Foxdale Isle Of Man IM4 3EF Applicant : Mr Nick Cooper Application No. : 20/01245/B- click to view Planning Officer : Mr Paul Visigah

RECOMMENDATION: To APPROVE the application ______

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. Prior to the occupation of any part of the dwellings hereby approved, the car parking and manoeuvring areas shown on Drawing 400-01 date-stamped as having been received 23rd October 2020, shall be provided and remain free from obstruction thereafter.

Reason: To ensure that the Strategic Plan car parking standards are met in the interest of highway safety.

C 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no structures or other free standing buildings shall be erected within the curtilage of the dwelling(s) hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, without the prior written approval of the Department.

Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.

Reason for approval: Overall, it is considered that the proposal would comply with is Strategic Policies, 1, 2 and 10, General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan and the Foxdale Local Plan 1999.

______

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

Kyrenia, Mines Road, Foxdale as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy. ______

Planning Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT

1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of Glen View Cottage, Main Road, Foxdale, an existing three storey traditional terraced dwelling which sits at the end of a long lane which runs parallel with the A3 in the middle of Foxdale, with side elevation abutting Main Road, Foxdale. The property is situated at the eastern side of the A3 which runs through Foxdale and is bounded by West View on the southern boundary, Linden Bud on the east, and Glen View Bungalow (9 Main Road) and Glenside on the northern boundary. The external walls are finished in spar dash render, while its windows are all UPVC casement windows.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application seeks approval for conversion of single dwelling into two dwellings with associated parking. The only external changes would involve the creation of aperture and installation of a window on the front elevation of the lower ground floor, as well as the cladding of the front and side elevations and the lower ground floor.

2.2 The first dwelling would border the highway and would have a store on the lower ground floor, a living room and kitchen on the ground floor, in addition to two bedrooms and a bathroom on the first floor. There would be an internal stairway to serve this dwelling.

2.3 The second dwelling will have a shower room and two unassigned spaces on the lower ground floor, an entrance porch, an enclosed porch and an open plan living room and kitchen area on the ground floor, as well as a bedroom and bathroom on the first floor. There would be a shared entrance on the ground floor with access via the front elevation on the ground floor. There would be an internal stairway and spiral stairs to serve this dwelling.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Foxdale Local Plan of 1999 as Predominantly Residential, and the site is not within a Conservation Area. As such, the following policies of the Strategic Plan are considered to be relevant.

3.2 General Policy 2: Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:

(j) can be provided with all necessary services;

3.3 Strategic Policy 1: Development should make the best use of resources by: (a) optimising the use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and under- used land and buildings, and re-using scarce indigenous building materials; (b) ensuring efficient use of sites, taking into account the needs for access, landscaping, open space(1) and amenity standards; and (c) being located so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services.

3.4 Strategic Policy 2: New development will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions of these towns and villages. Development will be permitted in the countryside only in the exceptional circumstances identified in paragraph 6.3.

3.5 Strategic Policy 10: New development should be located and designed such as to promote a more integrated transport network with the aim to: (a) minimise journeys, especially by private car; (b) make best use of public transport; (c) not adversely affect highway safety

3.6 Whilst the proposed dwellings are not flats, it is also considered that Housing Policy 17 contains some useful wording:

"The conversion of buildings into flats will generally be permitted in residential areas provided that: (a) adequate space can be provided for clothes-drying, refuse storage, general amenity, and, if practical, car-parking; (b) the flats created will have a pleasant clear outlook, particularly from the principal rooms and (c) if possible, this involves the creation of parking on site or as part of an overall traffic management strategy for the area."

3.7 Transport Policy 7: The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards. The current standards are set out in Appendix 7.

3.8 The following sections of the Foxdale Local Plan 1999 are considered to be relevant:

3.8.1 Paragraph 3.41 "3.41 However, it is the opinion of the Department as well as that of the local Commissioners and a significant number of local people that Foxdale is only capable of a limited amount of additional dwellings located in carefully selected sites if the village is to try to retain its closely-knit social fabric and its rural and relatively natural appearance. It is essential also that the creation of further dwellings does not place an undue burden on the school in terms of the number of school children it is required to educate. It is equally important (and sensible in economic terms to reduce travelling) that children who reside in the village can be educated in Foxdale, along with their friends and neighbours, rather than having to be sent elsewhere because the local school does not have sufficient capacity."

3.8.2 F/P/R/2 - Policy "Every new dwelling shall be provided with at least two car parking spaces. These will normally be expected to be provided behind the building line: however, in order to promote flexible and imaginative layouts this may not always be the case. Parking spaces should, however, be provided as close to the dwelling which they are intended to serve, as is possible." 30

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The application site has been the subject of a previous planning application which is considered to be materially relevant to the current application.

4.2 Planning approval was granted for alterations and construction of second floor dormer windows and rooflights, 'Glen View', Main Road, Foxdale, Patrick under PA 84/00446/B in May 1984.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.

5.1 Representation from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division confirms that they 'Do not oppose' in the letter dated 20 November 2020.

5.2 Patrick Commissioners have made the following comments regarding the application in a letter dated 16 December 2020:

The Commissioners note that the two properties created will be on the small size particularly the one-bed unit.

Of more concern however is the shared entrance. The Commissioners are not clear which property would be responsible for the shared entrance. If it is to be communal space, there becomes the issue of responsibility for safety and emergency access. To this end, it is suggested that the conversion is analogous to flats and there should be a condition therefore that all regulations required of flats should be applied to the properties thus created.

5.3 The Owners/occupiers of Kyrenia, Mines Road, Foxdale which is situated within close proximity to the application site object to the application on the following grounds (18/11/20 & 25/11/20): i. Glen view does not have right of way across land Kyrenia as per deeds, therefore no parking can be associated with this planning application. Permission was only granted for Lyden Budd. ii. Designated parking is in design but there is no permission for vehicular access to get to the spaces. iii. Development is not in keeping with the neighbourhood. The properties in the locale are single family dwelling homes. Flats and HMOs are not in keeping with the demographic population. iv. The division of the house into two is not in line with the Foxdale local Plan. There has already been a growth of houses and further planning permission granted on an additional site in Foxdale, that there is no need to grant permission for additional flats. v. Incorrect Plans: I have just been looking at the plans again and the location plan and boundary line is entirely incorrect also. It has included the entire garden of an adjacent property. This should really be rectified before any planning officer even considers the application as it is falsifying documents.

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of the application are the principle, the impact upon the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and streetscene, the amenity for future occupiers, impact upon neighbouring properties, and the impact upon highway safety.

6.2 The Principle

6.2.1 The principle of creating two residential from the existing dwelling in what is an otherwise residential area - and zoned as such - is acceptable in principle.

6.3 Impact upon the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and streetscene 6.3.1 In regard to the impact on the existing dwelling, it is also considered that the dwelling forms part of an existing terrace with the eastern element appearing as a later extension to the traditional cottage and bearing a slightly more modern outlook. It is also considered that the only works to the exterior of the building would be the addition of a window on the front elevation of the lower ground floor and cladding of sections of the lower ground floor of the newer section of the building; physical works which are judged an overall improvement to the appearance of the property.

6.3.2 When considering the impact of the proposed development on the character of the streetscene, it is noted that there is very little homogeneity in the form, massing and design of the terrace to which the property adjoins and as such the mild alterations on the exterior of part of the new dwellings would be in keeping with the diversity of dwelling types within the terrace, as well as this section of the A3 where the buildings are particularly dissimilar. Therefore, the works to create two new dwellings from an existing one within a terrace with varied building appearances would be in keeping with the character of the locality and accord with GP2 (b, c & g).

6.4 Impact on Neighbouring Properties 6.4.1 With regard to impacts on neighbouring dwellings, it is not considered that the subdivision of this dwelling into two dwellings would unduly impact on the residential amenity of neighbouring occupiers in a manner that would be sufficient to warrant a refusal of the scheme. This is hinged on the fact that there would be no changes in the massing and scale of the existing dwelling. Besides, the addition of a new window on the lower ground floor would serve a storage space and would not introduce any form of overlooking of the neighbouring properties.

6.4.2 Similarly, it is not considered that the increase in number of dwellings would considerably alter the comings and goings of the occupants of the dwellings in a manner that would impacts on neighbouring residential amenity, given that the levels of occupancy for a two bedroom and one bedroom dwelling would not be considerably at variance with the current use as a large single dwelling with a higher occupancy rate; as the existing dwelling could easily be used as a five or six bedroom dwelling. Whilst the change to the pattern of occupancy for the application site may result in a change to living conditions for the neighbouring properties it does not necessarily equate to harm to living conditions. As such, it is not considered that the proposed scheme would result in detrimental impacts on neighbouring residential amenity sufficient to warrant a refusal of the application.

6.5 The amenity for Future Occupiers 6.5.1 Both properties would have sizeable living and kitchen areas and their internal layout would be more than adequate to provide the acceptable levels of internal space for future occupiers with the bedrooms, bathrooms and hallways considered to be appropriate. Thus, the internal space provided for both dwelling is considered acceptable.

6.5.2 The layout of the site would also ensure that the outside amenity space provided would be sufficient. Details contained in the submitted plan (400-01) shows that each dwelling of the created dwellings would have access to sizable fenced gardens, two parking spaces and an outdoor area that would be sufficient to provide for external drying of clothes and bin storage areas. Therefore, it is considered that the proposal provides an acceptable amount of parking and amenities standards for future occupiers of the new dwellings.

6.5.3 Also important to consider is the outlook from both dwellings which would not be different from the current outlook obtainable from the primary windows on the existing 32 dwelling. It is noted that the bedrooms, kitchens and lounges would be afforded clear and pleasant outlook onto the proposed gardens and the streetscene.

6.5.4 Based on the forgoing, it is considered that the proposed scheme would comply with Strategic Policy 1 and Housing Policy 17.

6.6 Impact on Highway / Parking 6.6.1 The sub-division of the existing dwelling would create two separate dwelling houses, 1 x 1 bed and 1 x 2 bed, with both properties benefiting from a single driveways/access and sufficient off street parking available; 2 spaces per unit. Therefore, the proposal provides for adequate parking and manoeuvring space.

6.6.2 Strategic Policy 10 recognises that there is a direct link between the location of new development and its effect on the transport network by ensuring that development is in a sustainable location to minimise private car journeys, make best use of public transport and encourage pedestrian movement. In this case, the location of the dwelling by a public transport corridor would ensure that occupants of the new dwellings, whilst provided with their separate parking spaces could benefit from the use of public transport if they so choose.

6.6.3 It is also important to note that DOI Highways have not objected to the proposal. On this basis it is considered that the access arrangements and layout of site to provide for parking and turning of vehicles is considered acceptable. Based on the foregoing, the proposal is considered to comply with GP 2 (h & i), Strategic Policy 10, Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan and Policy F/P/R/2 of the Foxdale Local Plan 1999.

6.7 Other Matters 6.7.1 It is understood that the occupier of a neighbouring property Kyrenia, Mines Road, have indicated that the existing rear lane which provides vehicular access to the site is within their ownership, whilst also stating that access would not be provided for the parking areas provided on the site. There are also concerns with regard to the demarcation of the site boundary which impacts a neighbouring property, although the particular property affected has not been mentioned and no complaints or comments have been received from the owners or occupiers of any of the abutting dwellings in this regard. Similarly, reference has been made to the contents of deeds; matters which bear no weight in planning terms. Whilst these may have implications for implementation of the proposed scheme, the application has only been assessed on the planning merits of the application.

6.7.2 Likewise, the issues that border on Covenants or details contained within Deeds are civil legal issues that lie outside the scope of the planning application as land ownership is a civil matter and would hold no weight in the assessment of a planning application. Any determination under the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 can neither create nor detract from land ownerships, any right of way, or other civil legal rights and obligations as may exist between the parties. Considering these bear no weight in a planning decision, the application has been assessed excluding these issues.

6.7.3 With regard to the comments made by the commissioners concerning the shared access to the new buildings which is considered to be a communal area, it is also considered that the layout of the site allows for a shared driveway which is not considered to considerably alter the functionality of the dwellings. Whilst the concern is noted, and the suggestions regarding the conditioning of the use of the dwellings as flats is noted, it is not considered that the shared use of an access into the dwellings would be sufficient to justify the classification of the dwellings as flats given that the internal layout allows for the operation of the dwellings as properties within a terrace. Besides, a number of dwellings within terraces on the Island have shared facilities such as shared gardens and parking areas for which occupants take responsibility without the imposition of conditions to regulate use. It

33 is therefore considered that there are no clear justifications within planning remit to impose such conditions on the proposed scheme.

6.7.3 Concern has also been raised by the occupants of Kyrenia, Mines Road that the proposed scheme fails to align with the Foxdale local Plan 1999, and that the development is not in keeping with the neighbourhood character and demographics. These issues are addressed below:

Non-compliance with Local Plan 6.7.3.1 The first issue which addresses compliance with the local plan is not considered to clearly reflect the intents of the local plan as no element of the written statement accompanying the local plan is averse to the splitting of dwellings within an area designated for residential use. Besides, the Strategic plan allows for such development provided it aligns with the related policies within the Strategic plan; issues which have been addressed in sections 6.3, 6.4, 6.5 and 6.6 of this report. Moreover, it has been clearly articulated in paragraph 3.41 of the Foxdale Locale Plan (1999) that Foxdale is capable of accommodating a limited amount of additional dwellings located in carefully selected sites provided the developments try to retain the closely-knit social fabric and the rural and relatively natural appearance of the settlement; conditions which the proposed scheme aligns with.

Non-conformity to the Locality 6.7.3.2 With regard to the development being at variance with the character of the locality, it is noted that the property is part of a terrace with properties that are considerably varied. Similarly, the street scene is considerably varied as there is no overriding size, design, massing and finishing of the dwellings and terraces within close proximity to the application site. As such, there is no overriding pattern for which the proposed would fail to comply with. As well, the locality is considerably varied in terms of demographics with a growing demand for smaller dwellings to cater for younger residents who want to live alone as Paragraph 3.35 of the Local Plan Written Statement clearly states: "First-time buyers housing has already been provided in Foxdale: a number of dwellings have already been built at Sprucewood View and have sold well. There may be demand for more given the relatively high number of 15 - 25 year olds currently in the Foxdale population." Therefore it is not considered that the proposed development would fail to conform to the character of the locality or the demographics of the area.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 Overall, it is considered the proposal would comply with the relevant policies of the Isle Of Man Strategic Plan, and as such it is recommended that the application be approved.

8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the D20/01245/Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

8.2 The decision maker must determine:

34 o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.6 Proposal : Erection of a greenhouse Site Address : Field 124163 Adjacent To Cronk Breck Bernahara Road Andreas Isle Of Man Applicant : Mr Christopher & Mrs Sonia Kelly Application No. : 19/01132/B- click to view Principal Planner : Mr Chris Balmer

RECOMMENDATION: To APPROVE the application ______

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. For the avoidance of doubt no approval is hereby given for the extension of the residential curtilage (as approved under PA 16/00963/B).

Reason: In the interest of the visual amenities of the countryside and as no approval has been sought for the extension of the curtilage.

C 3. If the greenhouse is no longer required or used for growing of horticultural/agricultural products, then it must be removed from site and returned to grassed field all within 6 months of the cessation of the use.

Reason: the site is not designated for development and the development is approved on the basis of specific need in this case.

C 4. Within one month of the date of this decision notice a detailed scaled scheme (including section drawings) illustrating the size/height and finish (landscaping/planting) of the new sod banks which will continue the existing sod bank along the western boundary of Field 124163 to the northern boundary of Field 124163 as shown on Drawing "Sheet 2 of 2" shall be submitted and approved in writing to the Department. This approved scheme shall be fully implemented and completed within 3 months of the approval of the condition and retained thereafter. Any landscaping (excluding sod bank construction) included in the scheme shall be shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons. Any trees or plants which die or become seriously damaged or diseased must be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: In the interests of the visual amenities of the countryside surrounding the site.

C 5. The building must be used only for agricultural/horticultural purposes.

Reason: The countryside is protected from development and an exception is being made on the basis of agricultural/ horticultural need. As such the building must be used for the purposes for which it is approved.

Reason for approval: It is considered the need for the proposed greenhouse is acceptable, whilst also not adversely affecting the countryside or any other public or private amenities. The proposal therefore complies with Environment Policy 1 & 15, General Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. ______

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the following persons should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):

The owner/occupier of Ballachurry Farm Cottage, Bernahara Road, Andreas is not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy; as they do not refer to the relevant issues in accordance with paragraph 2C of the Policy and as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy. ______

Planning Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO THE PROPOSAL BEING; SUBJECT TO AN OBJECTION FROM AN EMPLOYEE OF THE PLANNING AND BUILDING CONTROL DIRECTORATE AND AS THE DEVELOPMENT COULD BE CONSIDERED CONTARY TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN BUT RECOMMENDED FOR AN APPROVAL

1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The site is situated in open countryside to the north east of St. Jude's and south of Andreas village. There are two other properties in the vicinity; Ballachurry Farm and Birds Croft. The application site is an agricultural field (124163) adjacent to the residential curtilage of the dwelling, Cronk Breck, which was approved as a replacement for a former dwelling.

1.2 The property has a range of outbuildings to the east which provide accommodation for the applicants' car collection, a former helicopter hangar which is now used for the storage of equipment and a new helicopter hangar. The curtilage of this property includes the outbuildings, the immediate landscaped area in front of the property and the driveway, but excludes the land to the south of the driveway and the pond.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The proposal is for the erection of a greenhouse to the west of the most recently constructed helicopter hangar. The proposal would sit outside the residential of the site and within the immediately adjacent field 124163, to the North West corner. The proposed building would have a width of 15m, a depth of 4m and a maximum height of 2.8m (eaves 2.6m). Its construction would partly be out of blockwork (rear elevation - north) and partly with glazing/uPVC framing (front elevation - south) above and a glass/plastic roof. The proposal is partially retrospective with footings/lower walls in place. 2.2 The applicants have advised that the need for the greenhouse is to grow vegetables/plants for their own personal use. The site has been chosen to have a south facing elevation, whilst also adjacent to the existing group of buildings. 37

2.3 As part of the application (following negotiations with the applicants and the Department) the applicant has already planted additional trees along the southern boundary of Field 124163. Furthermore, the western sod hedge which currently runs along the majority of Field 124163 is to be continued in a northerly direction which would form a new fixed and permanent boundary line, compassing the proposed greenhouse. This would also provide a clear separation of the overall site of Cronk Breck and agricultural land to the east. Across Field 124163 (east to west direction) a post and wire fence has been erected (can be undertaken under Permitted Development) and further tree planting has been undertaken.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area not designated for a particular purpose on 1982 Development Plan. As such, there is a presumption against development as set out in General Policy 3 and Environment Policy 1 of the Strategic Plan.

3.2 General Policy 3 states that 'Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of:

(f) Building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry'

3.3 Environment Policy 1 states: "The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. For the purposes of this policy, the countryside comprises all land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 at A.3.6 or which is not designated for future development on an Area Plan. Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative."

3.4 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."

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 There have been a number of previous planning applications associated with the site which included the replacement of the former dwelling approved under 09/01011/B and 10/00216/B and further alterations and extensions approved under 12/01362/B, 12/01363/B, 13/00311/B, 14/01002/B and 15/00820/B and car ports and storage buildings approved under 13/00306/B, and 14/00638/B. An application for a temporary access track and building were refused under PA 12/00582/B.

4.2 A previous planning application 16/00963/B for the erection of a replacement helicopter hangar, conversion of existing hangar in to an equipment store and extension to residential curtilage was also approved. There have also been applications (18/00882/B & 19/00676/B) for the conversion and extension of existing single garage to provide additional living accommodation ancillary to existing property.

4.3 A previous planning application and perhaps most relevant to this application was for the erection of a detached building to house trailers used for agricultural purposes (18/00894/B). This was refused by the Planning Committee on the following grounds:

"R 1. The applicant has not provided adequate justification to demonstrate that the agricultural need for a new building is sufficient to outweigh the general policy against development in the countryside proposal. The proposal therefore conflicts with General Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

R 2. The proposed building, due to its locations and the additional existing buildings in close proximity, will result in the proliferation of built development within the open countryside. Whilst the proposed building has been located as close as is practically possible to existing building group, as per Environmental Policy 15, it will be viewed as an extension to the applicants' extensive warehousing located within the curtilage of Cronk Breck, which will be unsympathetic to the character of the countryside and the landscape of which will form a part. In addition, the proposal will necessitate the removal of existing hedging and would physically and visually extend the curtilage of the built structures further into the open countryside. The proposal therefore conflicts with Environmental Policy 1 and Environment Policy 15 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016."

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.

5.1 Highway Services consider there is no highway implications (30.10.2019 & 27.11.2020).

5.2 Andreas Parish Commissioners have no objection (25.11.2019).

5.3 The owner/occupier of Ballachurry Farm Cottage, Bernahara Road, Andreas initially objected to application (10.11.2019) which can be summarised as: concern of accuracy of plans; proposal is of a commercial nature; suggest the applicants have more than enough means to purchase trees for any further planting without the need of yet another structure; no justification for proposal; the site with all the building in situ is more of an industrial nature; concerns of long term intention of use of site if further buildings are allowed.

5.3.1 Further to amend plans being submitted the owner/occupier of Ballachurry Farm Cottage, Bernahara Road, Andreas objected to application (14.11.2020) which can be summarised as the structure is already in place and I see no justification for this greenhouse in an agricultural field along with the spread of what can only be described as "stuff" into this area; there remains no clarity as to the extent of the applicants' residential curtilage, where it ends, to form any justification for the constant activity in this field; my neighbour does what he wants with no respect to policy or obligations that others have to comply with. 6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The key issues for this proposal are principle of development, whether there is an agricultural/horticultural need for the proposed greenhouse; the impact on the rural character of the site and the wider countryside and the impact to neighbouring properties.

The principle of the development

6.2 As outlined by Environment Policy 15 the Department must be satisfied that there is agricultural or horticultural need for a new building to outweigh the general policy against development in the countryside. Further justification was sought by the Department and the applicants provided the following comments:

"The need for the greenhouse at Cronk Breck for Mr Kelly is for use as a starter pad for the growth of shrubs, which are then planted in various parts of his land ownership, some as hedge toppers, some are planted in untidy corners of fields, or on patches where growth is poor. He uses a variety of shrub types for these purposes. Most are used around Cronk Breck, but some are, or will be, used at other sites in his ownership - e.g. site at Quarry Bends, another at Jurby Head."

6.3 The greenhouse (15m x 4m) is larger than what one may expect for most domestic properties; however, Cronk Breck is not a normal domestic property and has evolved to appear more as a country estate. Arguably, greenhouses as proposed are often found connected with such large properties. Having said this, the size of the greenhouse is no of a commercial size or nature and the Department is satisfied that the use of the greenhouse is in association with the Cronk Breck estate and other sites the applicants own.

6.4 The justification by the applicants would appear reasonable and sufficient to outweigh the general policy against development in the countryside and therefore comply with general Policy 3 and Environment Policy 15. However, other material considerations as outlined in paragraph 6.1 also need to be considered.

Character and appearance 6.5 As outlined with the previous refusal (PA 18/00894/B), a key consideration in the past has been whether such additional buildings would have any adverse visual or other impact on the environment, namely the proliferation of built development within the open countryside. This refused application sought approval for a much larger building (agricultural barn style building) within the same site to the south of the current proposed greenhouse. This was still a concern when the application was initially submitted. Following discussions with the applicant and the Department the inclusion of additional landscaping in and around the site has been proposed/already undertaken as well as the continuation of the existing sod bank in a northerly direction which will hopefully act as a clearer boundary and more permanent boundary. This is important as there are clear views of parts of the site when viewed from the B7 Regaby Road, which would include the current proposal. It should be noted that along the B7 Road the views of the site are not substantial and perhaps only in a few locations when views are fleeting. However, the fact remains there are views.

6.6 Certainly the landscape proposals outlined previously will not only in time screen the proposed greenhouse but also other parts of the site. Accordingly, these landscaping benefits are a significant positive factor in favour of the application.

6.7 The greenhouse, in terms of size/height compared to other buildings within the estate is arguably one of the smallest buildings. Its height of less than 3m and its location along the north boundary and closeness to the existing helicopter hangar; together with the landscaping proposals, would appear to comply with EP15 which requires 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.

Impact on neighbours 6.8 Due to the distance of the application site to the closest adjacent properties, the proposed development is unlikely to result in a significant adverse impact upon the living conditions of neighbouring residents.

CONCLUSION 7.1 Overall, it is considered the need for the proposed greenhouse is acceptable, whilst also not adversely affecting the countryside or any other public or private amenities. The proposal therefore complies with Environment Policy 1 & 15, General Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval.

INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested; (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.7 Proposal : Erection of a replacement detached dwelling with associated access, increase of residential curtilage within adjacent field to provide a parking area and erection of a barn Site Address : Fern Villa & Part Fields 410213 & 410216 Ballakillowey Road Colby Isle Of Man IM9 4BW Applicant : Mr David & Mrs Hannah Le Couteur Thomas Application No. : 20/01116/B- click to view Principal Planner : Miss S E Corlett

RECOMMENDATION: To APPROVE the application ______

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. Prior to the commencement of any works an Energy Statement shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Department (Planning and Building Control Directorate) which demonstrates the new dwelling has a Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP) rating of at least 92 (or similar rating system) which can been achieved. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with these details.

Reason: a reason why the application is considered acceptable is due to the overall environmental impacts as outlined on Housing Policy 14 and namely the eco efficiency credentials of the new dwelling

C 3. The development shall be undertaken strictly in accordance with the avoidance, mitigation and compensation measures for wildlife as detailed in Section 8 of the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) produced by the Island Biodiversity Consultants dated August 2020. The identified measures shall be adhered to and implemented in full and maintained thereafter.

Reason: to ensure that the development has an acceptable impact on the ecology of the area including species protected under the Wildlife Act 1990, and Environment Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan.

C 4. The accesses, splays, parking and turning facilities must be provided in accordance with drawings P02A and P09 prior to the occupation of the dwelling as hereby approved and such must be retained as such thereafter.

Reason: in accordance with highway safety. C 5. No development may commence until such times as there has been approved in writing by the Department a tree protection plan which identifies the position of all existing trees 42 together with a protection plan including construction exclusion zones, for the carrying out of the development works. The development must be undertaken in accordance with these details.

Reason: to avoid the unwarranted and unapproved loss of trees as part of this development.

C 6. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping must be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the completion of the development or the occupation of the dwelling, whichever is the sooner. Any trees or plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased must be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: the landscaping of the site is an integral part of the scheme and must be implemented as approved.

C 7. The outbuilding hereby approved may be used only for agricultural purposes and/or the storage of items associated with the maintenance of the site which are the areas edged red and blue on the plan reference P06A received on 23rd November, 2020.

Reason: the building is justified on grounds of ecological and agricultural maintenance as set out in the application.

N 1. The applicants' attention is drawn to the provisions of the Wildlife Act 1990 in particular in respect of the protection of nesting and breeding birds which may be affected by the timing of the works including site clearance.

Reason for approval: Whilst the replacement dwelling is not a traditional design, it is considered that the proposal will have an acceptable environmental impact, taking into account both the physical and visual impact of the property on the environment as well as the impact through energy efficient and environmentally friendly materials and as such the proposal, including the proposed barn which will assist the implementation of the management of the remainder of the site in an ecologically friendly manner, is considered to accord with Environment Policies 1, 4, 7, 10, 13 and 15, Housing Policies 12 and 14 and General Policy 2. ______

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the following Government Departments should be given Interested Person Status on the basis that they have made written submissions relating to planning considerations:

Manx National Heritage

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 4(2): The Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society as they do not clearly identify the land which is owned or occupied which is considered to be impacted on by the proposed development in accordance with paragraph 2A of the Policy ______

Planning Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THE PROPOSAL MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH HOUSING POLICIES 12 AND/OR 14

THE SITE 1.1 The site is the existing residential curtilage of Fern Villa, a detached residential property which sits on the western side of the A36 to the south of its junction with the Ronague Road (B44). The current residential curtilage has a frontage to the main road of 36m and is between 21m and 27m deep towards the west. To the rear is a larger open agricultural field, part of which is included in the application as being within the applicant's ownership and part of which is within the application site.

1.2 Fern Villa is a traditional Manx cottage which faces south and which has a largely traditional core, albeit that its front elevation window apertures have been lengthened and the substantial cills removed, a flat roofed annex added on the roadside elevation which continues around to the rear. The property also has a two storey pitched roofed annex on the western side of the house. The garden associated with the existing property extends to the south of the frontage and has self seeded trees on the roadside boundary and a smaller multi stemmed tree in the centre of the garden.

1.3 There is a gated access just to the south of the house in the stone wall which leads to a small area of hard surfacing which could accommodate one vehicle.

1.4 The western boundary of the site is bounded by trees and shrubs.

1.5 There is a lane to the south of the garden which leads up to the fields to the west of the house.

1.6 The site rises gently from east to west.

1.7 The site lies within an area where the speed of traffic is derestricted although there are signs at the north and south of the settlement recommending the maximum speed not exceeding 50 mph.

1.8 The area is characterised by a mix of building types - some traditional, some traditional with more modern/unsympathetic extensions and some completely modern.

THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the extension of the residential curtilage in an irregular shape together with the replacement of the existing dwelling with a new house. The existing house sits right alongside the road in the northern corner of the residential curtilage.

2.2 The existing house is mostly two storey and has a floor area measured externally, of 182 sq m.

2.3 The proposed dwelling will sit on top of the footprint of the existing but extending it to the south by 6m and moving the rear up to 2.6m further south. The new house will also sit slightly further (4.6m) from the road with the roadside wall continued in place of the existing flat roofed and pitched roof annexes in this part of the site. The existing field gate is also to be built up. The proposed dwelling has a floor area, measured externally, of around 237 sq m, an increase of 30 per cent of the existing floor area and an average increase in height of 1.8m.

2.4 The curtilage is to be extended up to 16m to the west to accommodate an area of hard surfacing for car parking. This will sit next to a new outbuilding, referred to as a barn.

2.5 The dwelling will have a main footprint of 6m by 13.5m with annexes which project 3.6m and 1.7m to the south. There is a general eaves height of 5m although the building steps down towards the road and a ridge level of 7.5 and 8.4m depending upon the slope of the ground.

2.6 The dwelling will be finished in a standing seam sheeted roof with larch cladding and painted timber windows and doors.

2.7 The outbuilding will have a floor area of 12.3m by 7.5m and an eaves level of 2m and 3.1m and a ridge height of 4.2m. The building will be finished in metal cladding of an unspecified colour with ten photovoltaic panels on the south facing roof plane.

2.8 The application includes supporting information in the form of a Design Statement, a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal and a Flood Risk Assessment.

Design Statement 2.9 Whilst not referring to any planning policies, the Design Statement explains that the existing property has been altered and extended and "now lacks any traditional features that would be typically associated with a traditional Manx cottage". They describe the roof as being largely intact although the flat roofs are showing signs of disrepair and the building has no foundations or central heating and being next to the field drain has made for a damp building. In 2018 the property was furnished and with personal effects throughout the property.

2.10 They submit a further design statement in December, 2020 which refers to the Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14, suggesting that the existing house has not lost its habitable status by abandonment as whilst the building is in poor repair this relates primarily to the external finishes and structurally it is sound. Whilst it could be repaired it does not make economic sense or would provide the architectural solution that the applicant is looking for. The site has not been used for any other purpose than residential and is understood to have been occupied within the last ten years..

2.11 In respect of its character and appearance, the property has, they suggest, undergone numerous changes and no longer appears as a traditional Manx cottage and in their opinion has no architectural or historic interest. To return the dwelling to its original appearance would involve the removal of the flat roofed extensions and the two storey addition at the side and would not provide the amount of information that the applicant requires.

2.12 The replacement dwelling is less than 50% larger than the existing. they acknowledge that the replacement does not follow the guidance in Planning Circular 3/91 Policies 2-7 but HP14 provides for modern, innovative design of high quality where there is no adverse visual impact. They explain that the proposed house is slightly taller than the existing to allow for increased ceiling heights on the first floor and to raise the new house out of the ground to allow for any issues with rising damp which is particularly important for a timber framed house and this will also allow for level access from the car park area in the field behind. The wider proportions of the proposed house reflect modern day living requirements for the applicant and the roof pitch is dictated by the off site construction method: any steeper and the panels become dangerously slippery to walk on once the finish has been applied. The overhang which is not a vernacular feature, helps protect the timber cladding from the rain. The house also includes a number of outdoor covered spaces which increase its apparent size but contributes to its functionality. They consider that the overall proposal has no adverse visual impact and the timber cladding complement the rural, treed setting including the stone wall which is to be retained. 45

2.13 The timber cladding is a renewable material sourced in the Scottish Highlands and the metal roof is recyclable. The timber will weather to a silvery grey and will complement the roof and stone. The larger windows will allow for greater solar gain and daylight with smaller windows in the northern elevation. They refer to two other applications, unfortunately not giving the addresses but these are added for convenience - 20/00651/B at Prospect Villa in Andreas and 20/00757/B at Knock-e-Loughan Cottage in Braddan which they feel are similar in some aspects to what is proposed either of which accord with Planning Circular 3/91.

2.14 They explain that the proposed house is in the same area as the existing but moved further away from the field drain and both have a similar footprint not including the external decked areas. It is proposed to upgrade the existing field access to the south of the existing garden leading to a new area of hard standing. They describe the existing as having a driveway which is only large enough for one vehicle accessed directly from the highway with no space for vehicles to turn. The visibility for the new means of access - 56m to the north and 49m to the south - will be improved by carefully removing the stone walls on each side and a sycamore on the corner of the garden will also be removed. The garden wall will be lowered to no higher than 1m above the adjacent carriageway up to the existing opening and within the field the wall will be lowered to no higher than 1m for 15m. The existing driveway will then be blocked up using stone from the former house with quartz top to match the existing garden wall. A beech or similar hedge will be introduced where the current garage sits to replace the ivy growing over the old garage.

2.15 They describe the proposed house as a contemporary response to global climate concerns, local micro climate, site and functional user requirements and is considered appropriate in both its time and place. They will undertake the demolition of the existing building carefully, removing any materials which can be re-used or re-purposed with the majority of the stone to be cleaned and stored either in the garden for facing the foundation level or to repair old walls or new sod hedges to mitigate habitat loss. They state that it is widely recognised that the only plausible way to deliver net zero carbon housing is through the use of timber-based systems and in this case Scottish grown timber will be used and environmentally friendly materials. The barn has been designed to accommodate 10 PV panels. They see no reason why this house will not achieve an A rating in the SAP calculations (which is equivalent to 92 and above).

2.16 Whilst the materials will be sourced from off Island, on Island contractors will be used for the foundations and associated groundworks with the internal fit out. Large structural floor, wall and roof sub-assembly panels are manufactured off site with insulation, cladding, doors, roof coverings and solar panels all in place and the average house takes 5 days to achieve a wind and water-tight stage. These methods are not, they suggest, available on Island.

2.17 The applicant has discussed the proposal with the Arboricultural Office of DEFA and tree protection areas are now shown on drawing 02A and the proposed house has been slightly re-orientated to help protect an existing sycamore to the south west. All new drainage will be in the same location as that serving the existing house. An arboricultural method statement is to be provided and tree protection plan is to be provided including the provision of the electrical supply.

PEA and bat survey 2.18 The Manx Bat Group undertook a bat assessment including an internal inspection in August 2020 and noted two inactive swallow nests but no evidence through droppings were found within the building although they consider it could be used as an occasional roost for bats and recommend that if bats are found during demolition work must stop immediately and either DEFA or MBG must be contacted for advice on how to proceed. If bats are in immediate danger they should be picked up using thick gloves and placed in a box. They 46 recommend the installation of bat boxes either within the buildings or attached to existing trees and MBG would advise on where to install these.

2.19 A preliminary Ecological Appraisal was undertaken in August 2020 and identified the need for surveys which were undertaken and which revealed that the grassland is not ASSI but its loss (300sq m) will require compensatory actions in the form of sensitive management of the remaining semi natural grassland. They suggest that the use of some turf on roof and bank tops will reduce the loss by 23 sq m. They refer to the translocation of 9 heath spotted orchid spikes where the barn is proposed. They refer to there being no protected lizards having been seen but the sod bank to the south of the entrance is lizard suitable and the managed demolition of the wall is included in the precautionary method of working as well as provisions for nesting jackdaws. Three invasive, non native species of flora are present on the lane and they provide advice on how to deal with that. Whilst the watercourse is close to the back of the site no significant frog habitat was found.

2.20 The measures taken to minimise impact on ecology, the barn has been located to reduce the amount of track required and the majority of compensation will take the form of restoration of the remaining 5,300 sq m of grassland through sensitive grazing and hay meadow management and advice is provided on how to achieve this. Compensation is also recommended in the form of the installation of a jackdaw box and suitable swallow box on the buildings.

2.21 In order to manage the field in which there are known to be orchids the applicants explain that they will have a flock of up to 7 sheep (Ouessant - a small Celtic breed) and will cut and remove any additional grass from the fields on an annual basis and will purchase a small tractor, cutter and mini baler which will be stored in the barn with the hay bales.

Flood risk A FRS has been carried out and describes the existing house being separated from the watercourse which is between 0.5m and 1.5m in width, to the north by a short concrete wall. They describe the new house as being 2.4m further from the watercourse than is the existing and the wall will be repaired and replaced where necessary and its height increased to 1.5m faced in stone and capped with quartz. In their two and a half years of ownership they are not aware of the watercourse water level exceeding that of the wall. They acknowledge that there is a risk of the culvert under the road becoming blocked and water backing up although they deem this unlikely as there is no barrier between the stream and the highway which would stop water unable to use the culvert from flowing directly onto the highway and down the hill and the current wall is higher at all points than the highway above the culvert. The increase in height will avert the risk from the culvert becoming blocked and significant debris forms a blockage between the hedges on each side which would prevent water from escaping onto the highway and would flood onto the site.

PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South as not for a particular purpose and within the Southern Uplands Landscape Character Appraisal area where the following guidance is provided within the Area Plan Written Statement:

Southern Uplands (A2) The overall strategy for the area is to conserve and enhance the character, quality and distinctiveness of the open and exposed character of the moorland, its uninterrupted skyline and panoramic views, its sense of tranquillity and remoteness and its wealth of cultural heritage features. Key Views Open and expansive panoramic views out to sea and over the southern portion of the Island. Distant views in some areas enclosed by the surrounding peaks.

3.17i. A number of Landscape Character Types/Areas are identified in Rushen stretching from the Southern Uplands to the Meayll Peninsula. Care is needed in order to protect this array of different landscapes which include open and windswept coastal stretches and inland moorland, high and dramatic sea cliffs and pastoral and arable fields.

3.2 The site also lies within an area designated on the Town and Country Planning (Development Plan) Order 1982 as of High Landscape Value and Scenic or Coastal Significance and of ecological interest. Given the land use designation, the following parts of the Strategic Plan are relevant:

3.2.1 General Policy 2: "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:

(b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; (j) can be provided with all necessary services; (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."

3.2.2 Environment Policy 1: The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. For the purposes of this policy, the countryside comprises all land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 at A.3.6 or which is not designated for future development on an Area Plan. Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative.

3.2.3 Environment Policy 2: The present system of landscape classification of Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV's) as shown on the 1982 Development Plan and subsequent Local and Area Plans will be used as a basis for development control until such time as it is superseded by a landscape classification which will introduce different categories of landscape and policies and guidance for control therein. Within these areas the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration unless it can be shown that: (a) the development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape; or (b) the location for the development is essential.

3.2.4 Environment Policy 4: Development will not be permitted which would adversely affect: (a) species and habitats of international importance: (i) protected species of international importance or their habitats; or (ii) proposed or designated Ramsar and Emerald Sites or other internationally important sites.

(b) species and habitats of national importance: (i) protected species of national importance or their habitats; (1) Wildlife Sites are defined in Appendix 1 41 48

(ii) proposed or designated National Nature Reserves, or Areas of Special Scientific Interest; or (iii) Marine Nature Reserves; or (iv) National Trust Land.

(c) species and habitats of local importance such as Wildlife Sites, local nature reserves, priority habitats or species identified in any Manx Biodiversity Action Plan which do not already benefit from statutory protection, Areas of Special Protection and Bird Sanctuaries and landscape features of importance to wild flora and fauna by reason of their continuous nature or function as a corridor between habitats.

Some areas to which this policy applies are identified as Areas of Ecological Importance or Interest on extant Local or Area Plans, but others, whose importance was not evident at the time of the adoption of the relevant Local or Area Plan, are not, particularly where that plan has been in place for many years. In these circumstances, the Department will seek site specific advice from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry if development proposals are brought forward.

3.2.5 Environment Policy 7: Development which would cause demonstrable harm to a watercourse, wetland, pond or dub, and which could not be overcome by mitigation measures will not be permitted. Where development is proposed which would affect a watercourse, planning applications must comply with the following criteria:

(a) all watercourses in the vicinity of the site must be identified on plans accompanying a planning application and include an adequate risk assessment to demonstrate that works will not cause long term deterioration in water quality; (b) details of pollution and alleviation measures must be submitted; (c) all engineering works proposed must be phased in an appropriate manner in order to avoid a reduction in water quality in any adjacent watercourse; and (d) development will not normally be allowed within 8 metres of any watercourse in order to protect the aquatic and bankside habitats and species.

3.2.6 Environment Policy 15: 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.

3.2.7 Housing Policy 12: The replacement of an existing dwelling in the countryside will generally be permitted unless: (a) the existing building has lost its residential use by abandonment; or

(b) the existing dwelling is of architectural or historic interest and is capable of renovation. In assessing whether a property has lost its habitable status(1) by abandonment, regard will be had to the following criteria: (i) the structural condition of the building; (ii) the period of non-residential use(2) or non-use in excess of ten years; (iii) evidence of intervening use; and (iv) evidence of intention, or otherwise, to abandon.

3.2.8 Housing Policy 14: Where a replacement dwelling is permitted, it must not be substantially different to the existing in terms of siting and size, unless changes of siting or size would result in an overall environmental improvement; the new building should therefore generally be sited on the "footprint" of the existing, and should have a floor area(1), which is not more than 50% greater than that of the original building (floor areas should be measured externally and should not include attic space or outbuildings). Generally, the design of the new building should be in accordance with Policies 2-7 of the present Planning Circular 3/91, (which will be revised and issued as a Planning Policy Statement). Exceptionally, permission may be granted for buildings of innovative, modern design where this is of high quality and would not result in adverse visual impact; designs should incorporate the re-use of such stone and slate as are still in place on the site, and in general, new fabric should be finished to match the materials of the original building.

Consideration may be given to proposals which result in a larger dwelling where this involves the replacement of an existing dwelling of poor form with one of more traditional character, or where, by its design or siting, there would be less visual impact.

3.3 The Department has recently published the Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) which provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property.

3.4 The Climate Change Bill and Climate Change Mitigation Strategy 2016-2020 are both material considerations and require that developments should be taking account of the effect of development and buildings on climate change and reducing energy costs where possible and practicable and that emissions, particularly carbon emissions should be reduced.

3.5 Environment Policies 10 and 13 provide additional protection in respect of flooding.

PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 There have been no previous applications submitted for this site. Development has been proposed in the area, including refusal of two schemes for the replacement of Upper Kirkill (11/00839/B and 11/00840/B at appeal) and replacement of Kirkle Farm under 13/00116/B.

4.2 The issue of replacing older, traditional properties in the Island's countryside has recently become more prominent due to the increasing need and desire for properties to be more thermally efficient - as expressed in the draft Climate Change bill and the changes to the Building Regulations. It could be argued that such changes are consistent with Housing Policy 14's requirement for new dwellings to have a positive environmental impact. These arguments, and the subjectivity of some of the assessments required to be made in HP14 are summarised well in a recent application, 19/01441/B which was approved by the Planning Committee, recommended for refusal by the inspector who considered the appeal brought by a neighbour, and the application was finally approved by the deputising Minister.

19/01441/B 4.3 The inspector objected to the increase of the floor area (80%) and states:

"43. In itself, I consider that the proposed replacement building is well designed; and I do not share the view that it would be unattractive. I consider the proposal to apply Passivhaus design standards to be laudable, although I am not persuaded that this requires so large an increase over the floor area of the dwelling to be replaced. However, I consider that the enlarged footprint and mass of the proposed replacement dwelling would detract from the open character of this sensitive Area of High Landscape Value, contrary to the objectives of Housing Policy 14 and Environment Policies 1 and 2 of the Strategic Plan. For these reasons I conclude that the appeal should be allowed and that planning approval should be refused."

4.4 The deputising Minister however concluded that given that the proposed Passivhaus standard wholly accords with the Government's pursuit of reducing carbon emissions as set out in its Climate Change Strategy 2016-2020 and as such attached significant weight to the proposed dwelling's environmentally positive credentials. He also notes that the innovative yet modern design respects the sloping nature of the site and provides a palate of finishes incorporating both the re-use of Manx stone and slate as well as modern finishes resulting in a high quality building which will not have an adverse visual impact and he was strongly of the opinion that the development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape.

4.5 It is also relevant to consider two other recent decisions to replace traditional houses in the countryside with more modern dwellings, approved on the basis that the replacements would achieve higher levels of thermal efficiency - Hillside Cottage and Ardonan (19/01383/B and 19/00875/B) and both were subject to a condition along the following lines:

"Prior to the commencement of any works an Energy Statement shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Department (planning) which demonstrates the new dwelling has a Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP) rating of at least 90 (or similar rating system) can been achieved.

Reason: A reason why the application is considered acceptable is due to the overall environmental impacts as outlined on Housing Policy 14 and namely the eco efficiency credentials of the new dwelling."

REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Rushen Parish Commissioners are supportive of the application provided that the materials used allow water to soak through rather than run off onto the roads (23.10.20). They comment again on 19.11.20 stating that they support the application and again on 23.12.20 stating that they considered the application at their December meeting but make no further comment on it.

5.2.1 Highway Services note that whilst there is an upgrade to the access which is better than the existing, the access still needs to accord with requirements for a primary route noting also that the Ballakillowey Road is an A road. They comment on the narrowness of the approach from the dwelling and the visibility splays being substantially less than the 2.4m by 160m required here. They find the provisions for turning and parking acceptable and note that there is storage space available for bicycles and recommend the provision of an electric vehicle charging point (28.10.20).

5.2.2 Highway Services comment further following the submission of further information by the applicant, confirming that the additional information and revisions overcome the highway concerns. They no longer object and recommend conditions which ensure that the accesses, splays, parking and turning facilities are provided in accordance with drawings P02A and P09 and add that a Section 109A Agreement will be required (02.12.20).

5.3 Manx National Heritage note the provision of the PEA and recommend that a survey for nesting birds is undertaken prior to site clearance, that the recommendations in the PEA are undertaken and also that bat boxes are provided as part of the scheme (20.10.20). 51

5.4 DEFA's Ecosystem Policy Officer have no objection to the application and recommend the following condition:

The development shall be undertaken strictly in accordance with the avoidance, mitigation and compensation measures for wildlife as detailed in Section 8 of the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) produced by the Island Biodiversity Consultants dated August 2020. The identified measures shall be adhered to and implemented in full and maintained thereafter" (03.11.20).

5.5 DEFA's Arboricultural Officer states that the trees on site are medium in size and of fair form. The trees are prominent in the landscape when viewed from the Sloc Road as there are few road side trees in the area. Although the trees have an 'exposed form' meaning the crown has been shaped from the wind, they are worthy of retention and likely be identified as Category C&B trees if a tree survey was conducted in line with recommendations made in BS5837:2012. There have been no trees identified for removal but there may be some conflict between the trees and the proposed building, underground utilities and site access. I recommend you request a tree protection plan to access the potential impact to the trees and potential future loss of trees due to root damage (11.11.20).

5.6 DEFA's Inland Fisheries Office request the submission of a form relating to Development Within 9m of a Watercourse to ensure that there is no adverse impact on the adjacent watercourse (20.11.20). They comment again on 02.12.20 stating as the proposed works are in close proximity to the watercourse, precautions will be needed to reduce the possibility of harmful materials such as concrete or washings entering the river. Suitable precautions have been considered by the applicant on the received form. DEFA Fisheries have no objection to the proposed development, provided that these precautions are followed and there is no disturbance or alterations to the watercourse.

The applicant is however advised to contact DEFA when works are due to commence, which can be done by email or telephone. In the meantime please contact Inland Fisheries on 685857 with any further queries.

5.7 Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society comment that the house to be replaced is basically of traditional design and construction and in a prominent location and close to a road. They would have no objection to the removal of the flat roof and garage to provide access and to an appropriately designed extension. However, while the replacement may in itself be a good timber design, such a design and materials are not in keeping with the Manx Landscape, characterised as it is by stone buildings, sometimes rendered, and stone field boundaries. The Society believes that in such a prominent location, in a building which is open to the south-westerlies, the use of timber and partially covered balconies is inappropriate. The proposal is not in accordance with Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 Housing Policy 14 in terms of design and the reuse of traditional materials (02.11.20).

5.8 They comment further on 07.12.20 that they are not against new building in the countryside but consider that the proposal is not an isolated building and it can be seen to relate to other buildings along the Sloc Road and they do not believe that the policy regarding reuse of traditional materials was simply put forward to encourage such materials to be used in curtilage walls or as rubble rather than being part of the new house itself. The proposal does not do this. They consider that the new building will be very visible when travelling south and the proposed outbuilding may appear out of scale and character with the landscape. They maintain their concern with respect to this application.

ASSESSMENT

6.1 The issues here are whether the replacement of the existing dwelling is acceptable (Housing Policy 12), if so, whether what is proposed to replace it is acceptable (Housing Policy 14). It is also relevant to consider whether the development results in any adverse impact on highway safety (General Policy 2) or any adverse impact on ecology (General Policy 2 and Environment Policies 4 and 7). Finally, it is relevant to consider whether the development would result in any increased flood risk either to the site itself or to other land as a result of the development.

Principle of the replacement of the dwelling 6.2 Housing Policy 12 is clear that replacement dwellings will only be acceptable in the countryside where the existing house has retained its habitable status and where the house is not of sufficient interest to warrant its retention. In this case the house is apparently structurally sound and could be inhabited with some non structural work. Whilst the dwelling is traditional at its core, this character is detracted from by the garage, flat roofs, window alterations and to some extent, the side annex although in form and position it is not untraditional, however the window arrangement is. It is not considered to be a particularly good example of vernacular architecture. If it were retained, the opportunity for expansion is limited by its position towards the northern boundary of the site where extensions would normally be sited and forcing any new extensions to be on the sides: it would be unusual to have an extension on the front elevation and unlikely to be visually or architecturally successful.

6.3 The Isle of Man Government is clearly committed to addressing climate change (see 3.4 above) and the provision of housing has a key part to play in this. The Department has already seen a number of applications submitted for the replacement of existing traditional dwellings with ones of more environmentally friendly and more thermally efficient structures - see Planning History above.

6.4 These applications are just a few which were approved for the replacement of something of traditional character with a new property which is thermally more efficient than that which it replaced. Two of these are very modern properties and one is traditional. They demonstrate that it can be an argument that the provision of a thermally efficient and environmentally friendly dwelling can be considered as an acceptable replacement of an older, traditional cottage.

6.5 It is fully accepted that these principles should not be a blanket argument for the replacement of every last traditional cottage on the Island which would undermine the character and history of our landscape and there will be properties where their appearance and architecture and history presume in favour of their retention. However, this should be where these are good examples of traditional architecture and in the words of HP12 the existing property is "of architectural or historic interest and is capable of renovation". In this case, the property is a basic Manx traditional cottage but with some of its architectural detailing having been lost (the shape of the windows and the lack of cills) and having had a range of non traditional extensions with limited opportunities for their replacement in a form which would result in an architecturally pleasing property of modern standards of thermal insulation. It is considered that this is not a property of such interest as to warrant refusal of its demolition and replacement and thus the application would satisfy HP12.

Details of the proposed new dwelling 6.6 HP14 then provides advice on the type of dwelling which may replace an existing house. What is proposed is not substantially different to the existing in terms of siting and size, and the new building is generally sited on the footprint of the existing, and has a floor area which is not more than 50% greater than that of the original building.

6.7 The design of the new building is not in accordance with Policies 2-7 of the present Planning Circular 3/91. However, HP14 goes on to explain that "Exceptionally, permission may 53 be granted for buildings of innovative, modern design where this is of high quality and would not result in adverse visual impact; designs should incorporate the re-use of such stone and slate as are still in place on the site, and in general, new fabric should be finished to match the materials of the original building.

6.8 In this case the proposed dwelling is certainly modern and innovative in terms of its appearance, materials and design ethos and also particularly due to its intention to be as thermally efficient and environmentally friendly as possible. Given the context of the site which is relatively natural with existing trees and vegetation, and the mix of housing types in the area, it is considered that a timber clad building as is proposed would be an acceptable form of building here. It is not accepted that the only way in which thermally and energy efficient buildings can be built to try to address Climate Change is with timber framing and it would have been possible to build something which achieves A rated SAP calculations with conventional blockwork or other forms of construction. However, the form of construction is not a matter for the planning process and what is important here is the external finished which is not to be the traditional stone and/or render and slate. Given the natural setting of the building it is considered that the timber cladding would be acceptable here and that a non traditional design would not be out of keeping with the area in which it will sit.

6.9 This moves away from HP14 in that the materials of the existing property - the stone and slate are not to be re-used in the external finish of the new property although some of the stone will be used for walling and the construction of the property. In this case, given what is considered to be a high quality of design, it is not considered necessary to require the building to incorporate slate or stone from the site. The applicants have indicated that they are going to re-use or re-purpose the materials so they will not be lost.

Highway Safety 6.10 Highway Services has indicated that they are content with the proposal now that the plans have been amended and approval can relate to the conditions recommended by them.

Impact on Ecology 6.11 The application includes a PEA and Bat Survey and the conclusions and recommendations of this, included in Sections 8 and 9 can be referred to in the conditions of any approval.

Flood Risk 6.12 The applicant has provided a FRA which demonstrates that the property is neither at risk of flooding nor will the works result in increased flood risk to other properties or land in the area.

CONCLUSION 7.1 Whilst the replacement dwelling is not a traditional design, it is considered that the proposal will have an acceptable environmental impact, taking into account both the physical and visual impact of the property on the environment as well as the impact through energy efficient and environmentally friendly materials and as such the proposal, including the proposed barn which will assist the implementation of the management of the remainder of the site in an ecologically friendly manner, is considered to accord with Environment Policies 1, 4, 7, 10, 13 and 15, Housing Policies 12 and 14 and General Policy 2.

(d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

8.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given Interested Person Status.

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.8 Proposal : Erection of extension to provide garage and living accommodation Site Address : Cooil Shellagh Douglas Road Kirk Michael Isle Of Man IM6 1AU Applicant : Mr & Mrs Paul Hotchkiss Application No. : 20/01229/B- click to view Planning Officer : Mr Paul Visigah

RECOMMENDATION: To APPROVE the application ______

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. All external facing and roofing materials to be used shall match those of the existing building in respect of type, size, colour, coursing, profile and texture.

Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.

N1. In the event of trial holes or other works being required, in order to locate and then subsequently protect or divert the water mains, all associated costs would be the responsibility of owner(s)/applicant(s).

Reason for approval: Overall it is concluded that the planning application accords with the provisions set out in Housing Policy 15, Environment Policy 1 and Environment Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. ______

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the following Government Department should be given Interested Person Status on the basis that they have made written submissions relating to planning considerations:

Manx Utilities ______

Planning Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THE PROPOSED EXTENSION REPRESENTS AN INCREASE OF MORE THAN 50% OF THE EXISTING FLOOR AREA

1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The site is the residential curtilage of Cooil Shellagh, a detached property which sits within a small courtyard of buildings to the west of the A3 TT Course as it approaches Kirk Michael. The group of buildings in which the dwelling sits includes a modern sheeted agricultural building which sits behind a stone barn that has been converted to holiday accommodation in the form of four units (PA 01/02108). The group is situated some 300m from the main highway.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The planning application seeks approval for the erection of extension to provide garage and living accommodation.

2.2 The proposed works would involve the following: 2.2.1 Erection of a flat roof extension that would measure 7.7m x 7.6m and be 3m high to the top of the flat roof. This flat roofed extension would serve as a contemporary kitchen/dining room and would have its cavity walls finished externally in minimum 19mm smooth plain render, with sealer and masonry paint to match the existing dwelling. A roof light 2m x 2m would be installed centrally over this kitchen area. The windows to be installed on this extension would be dark grey thermally broken aluminium framed double glazed with opening lights, while the door units would be fitted with sliding or bifolding opening doors. There would be a section of glass roof linking this extension to the existing building. This extension would be built over the existing patio area situated south east of the existing lounge.

2.2.2 The erection of a pitched roof double garage extension that would be 8m x 6.7m. This 4.3m high extension (2.2m to eaves) would have its roof finished in dark blue/grey natural roof slates to match the existing dwelling. The north-east elevation (approach elevation) would be finished in 200mm thick traditionally laid Manx stone work to match the existing dwelling, while the other elevations would be finished externally in minimum 19mm smooth plain render, with sealer and masonry paint to match the existing dwelling. Included in the garage extension are a plant/store and logs store which would be positioned on the eastern end of the extension.

2.2.3 The final works would involve the erection of a new patio area around the kitchen/dining extension. The new window/door fitted in the new/altered openings formed in the existing dwelling will be fitted with timber framed sliding sash (traditional styled) double glazed units painted white to match the existing dwelling.

2.3 The applicants have provided additional information which indicates that none of the existing trees on site would be impacted by the development.

3.0 PLANNING STATUS AND POLICY 3.1 The site is not shown on the Kirk Michael Local Plan 1994 and as such is not located within the Kirk Michael settlement boundary. The site however lies within an area of an Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance and Woodland on the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982.

3.2 Given the nature of the application it is appropriate to consider General Policy 3, Environmental Policy 1, 3 and Housing Policy 16.

3.3 General Policy 3:

Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of:

(c) previously developed land(1) which contains a significant amount of building; where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environment; and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment; (h) buildings or works required for interpretation of the countryside, its wildlife or heritage.

3.4 Environment Policy 1: "The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. For the purposes of this policy, the countryside comprises all land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 at A.3.6 or which is not designated for future development on an Area Plan. Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative."

3.5 Environment Policy 2: The present system of landscape classification of Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV's) as shown on the 1982 Development Plan and subsequent Local and Area Plans will be used as a basis for development control until such time as it is superseded by a landscape classification which will introduce different categories of landscape and policies and guidance for control therein. Within these areas the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration unless it can be shown that: (a) the development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape; or (b) the location for the development is essential.

3.6 Housing Policy 15: The extension or alteration of existing traditionally styled properties in the countryside will normally only be approved where these respect the proportion, form and appearance of the existing property. Only exceptionally will permission be granted for extensions which measure more than 50% of the existing building in terms of floor space (measured externally).

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The application site has been the subject of four previous planning applications, one of which is considered to be relevant to the current application:

4.2 Planning permission was granted for alterations and extension to create additional living accommodation under PA 04/02509/B. These works resulted in the creation of the current lounge on the ground floor and utility/WC and Cloak area connected to the existing kitchen.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.

5.1 Representations from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division indicates that they 'Do not oppose' in a letter dated 20 November 2020.

5.2 There has been no written representation made regarding the current planning application by the Michael Commissioners at the time of writing this report, although they were consulted on 11 November 2020 and requested for a deferral of decision on the application until after their meeting on 2 December 2020.

5.3 Manx Utilities Authority (Drainage) have made the following regarding the application in a letter dated 01 December 2020:

With reference to the above application, please be advised there is a 63mm MDPE water distribution main passing under the extension built to the main property back in 2004. The same will apply to the proposed new living accommodation, as noted on the attached plan.

We are not writing to object to the application but to inform you that in the event of a distribution problem or burst, Manx Utilities Authority would require access to these services at all times.

Please note that the position of the water mains are shown as accurately as possible but cannot be guaranteed and must be regarded as approximate only. Please also be aware that there may also be buried items and/or mains for which no records exist and therefore are not indicated on the plan.

Notes: In the event of trial holes or other works being required, in order to locate and then subsequently protect or divert the water mains, all associated costs would be the responsibility of owner(s)/applicant(s).

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 Given the level and nature of the development proposed, the key issues to consider in the assessment of the current planning application are the impacts upon the existing character and appearance of the property, the impact upon the enjoyment of the existing dwelling, and the potential impacts upon the visual amnesties of the countryside.

6.2 IMPACT ON THE CHARACTER AND APPEARANCE OF THE EXISTING DWELLING 6.2.1 The proposed extension respects the proportion, design and form of the existing dwelling and would appear as a subordinate addition to the main dwelling. Whereas some elements are considered to be of a more contemporary design than the existing, it is not judged to unduly harm the character and appearance of the main dwellinghouse. This is hinged on the fact that the extension would be finished to match the external finishing of the existing dwelling and would appear as a subordinate addition to the dwelling. As well, the flat roof of the kitchen extension which is a new feature for the dwelling, given that the existing dwelling has a steeply pitched roof would be positioned at the rear and its roof structure would ensure that the key features of the main dwelling are not obscured by the addition of the extension; thus appearing as a contemporary but subordinate addition to the dwelling.

6.2.2 Whilst the new extension would result in an increase in the floor area when measured externally by about 61 percent, which would be 11 percent higher than would be generally acceptable as stipulated in Housing Policy 15, it is not considered that this would have a detrimental impact on the appearance of the existing dwelling as a significant proportion of the development would replicate the Manx vernacular form and proportion of the existing dwelling, as well as utilize natural materials (traditionally laid Manx natural stonework and timber sliding sash windows particularly on the principal elevation), although with modern features such as the picture windows and glass roof. Moreover, the fact that the extensions would be single storey would ensure that the development does not impose on the main dwelling but would fit into the existing building framework and site. Therefore the development proposed is deemed acceptable with regards to the impact on the main dwellinghouse.

6.3 IMPACT UPON THE ENJOYMENT OF THE EXISTING DWELLING 6.3.1 In terms of the impact on the amenities of the application dwelling, whilst the garage extension would result in the loss of part of the garden area, the site benefits from being in a large plot and there is still an adequate garden area remaining. Similarly, the proposed kitchen/dining extension would only result in the loss of part of the existing patio area and as 59 such this element of the proposal would have minimal impact on the broader site area. Besides, the kitchen/dining extension would provide for a contemporary kitchen/ding area which would serve the needs of the occupants of the dwelling. Moreover, the new garage would provide for an integral garage for the dwelling which currently does not have an indoor parking area; an element of the development that would serve the occupants during the winter months where indoor parking would especially be beneficial. As such, it is not considered that the proposed extensions would result in detrimental impacts upon the enjoyment of the application dwelling.

6.4 POTENTIAL IMPACTS UPON THE SURROUNDING COUNTRYSIDE 6.4.1 The proposed works would modernise the appearance of the existing property, albeit, it would be erected at a position on the property where it would not be prominent within the street scene or when viewed from the surrounding countryside. As well, the proposed extension in terms of its proportion, form, scale, design and finishing (particularly the extension that would be publicly viewable) are in keeping with the property and would not detract from the appearance of the property, which would make it a fitting addition to the site and area.

6.4.2 Another factor that would soften the impact of the development on the surrounding area is the thick line of trees and hedging which runs along both sides of the over 300m long driveway leading to the site and the abutting highway limiting views to the dwelling or the proposed extensions from the highway. As well, the proposed scheme would not result in the loss of any surrounding tree or impact on any tree on site, ensuring that the development does not cause harm to the visual amenity of the locality or surrounding countryside. Accordingly, it is considered the proposal is acceptable and would not adversely affect the countryside or harm the character and quality of the landscape and therefore comply with EP 1.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 Overall, it is considered the proposal would be in keeping with the character of the site and surrounding area as the resulting development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape complying with Environment Policy 1 and Environment Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.9 Proposal : Installation of multiple ground solar panels Site Address : Field 514066 Mill House Old Castletown Road Santon Isle Of Man Applicant : Mr Robert Currey Application No. : 20/01270/B- click to view Planning Officer : Mr Paul Visigah

RECOMMENDATION: To APPROVE the application ______

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. The Solar panels, the support units and stock fencing hereby approved shall be removed and the ground restored to its former condition in the event that it is no longer used or required for renewable and alternative energy generation.

Reason: The structures have been exceptionally approved solely to meet sustainable energy need and its subsequent retention would result in an unwarranted intrusion in the countryside.

C 3. No external lighting shall be installed.

Reason: To provide adequate safeguards for the ecological species existing on the site.

Reason for approval: Overall, it is concluded that the planning application is in accordance with Environment Policy 22 and Energy Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, as well as wider Government climate change strategy, having no adverse private or public amenities. ______

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None ______

Planning Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT. 1.0 THE SITE

1.1 The site is a parcel of land within field 514066 which is owned by the owners of Mill House, Old Castletown Road, Santon and the land associated with these. The land sits northeast of Mill House and the associated outbuildings and is positioned northwest of the Old Castletown Road with access gate situated on the southwest boundary with access via Mill House.

1.2 The land rises from southwest to northeast and is situated in between thick lines of trees on the south, west and east boundaries, with the boundary with the abutting highway rising to about 3m along this boundary as the land slopes upward towards the road (the Old Castletown Road). The land is currently open with no trees or plantings situated within the field.

1.3 The site area is a small piece of land within a larger agricultural field, measuring 12m x 20m and situated at the centre of the field with views facing south west due to the lie of the land.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the installation of multiple ground solar panels within an enclosed site on field 514066 that would be fenced off with stock fencing 1.3m high. Four rows of solar panels will be installed comprising 18 solar arranged together and measuring 2.9m x 9.3m. The solar panels will be placed on support units and will be angled at 30 degrees on frames. The top of the frames would be 2.3m high while the base would be 610mm above the ground level. These support units would be drilled into the ground with the front and rear support posts set 1.7m apart. A field gate about 3m wide would provide access to the enclosed area and provide access into the surrounding field and site access. Cable delivering power from the control box (250 x 90x 1200H) within the enclosed area for the solar panels will be connected to the Mill House below ground level.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area on the Isle of Man (Development Plan) Order 1982 recognised as being 'white land' where there is a presumption against development. The site also falls within an Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance. The land areas situated south of the site are classed as an Area of Ecological Importance on the Area Plan for the South Map 1 (Constraints), although no part of the site is within this area. The site is also not within an area of archaeological significance. Given the nature of the application and the location of the site, it is appropriate to consider Paragraph 12.2.8, Environment Policy 22 and Energy Policy 4.

3.2 Paragraph 12.2.8 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 states, "The Department is fully supportive of the need to secure greater energy efficiency in new and existing development and has recently introduced additional energy efficiency requirements in the Building Regulations 2003. Energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy sources are covered in General Policy 2(m) of the Building Regulations. At the same time the Department recognizes that renewable energy sources can have adverse environmental impacts. The idea of a wind turbine Installation is currently being investigated and considered by the Manx Electricity Authority. Any feasible site is likely to be exposed and have considerable visual impact. There may also be other impacts such as noise. On a smaller scale, the popularity of domestic wind turbines has been increasing in recent years in response to rising energy prices and increasing awareness of climate change. Planning applications for domestic wind turbines are unlikely to require the submission of an Environmental Impact Assessment. The Department will assess any proposals for wind turbine installations by weighing the benefits of using such renewable energy sources against the environmental impact arising in any particular site. It is likely that the visual impact would be less detrimental on a coastal site than on a rural or upland one. Accordingly:

3.3 Environment Policy 22 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 states: "Development will not be permitted where it would unacceptably harm the environment and/or the amenity of nearby properties in terms of: i) pollution of sea, surface water or groundwater; ii) emissions of airborne pollutants; and iii) vibration, odour, noise or light pollution."

3.4 Energy Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 states: "Development involving alternative sources of energy supply, including wind, water and tide power, and the use of solar panels, will be judged against the environmental objectives and policies set out in this Plan. Installations involving wind, water and tide power will require the submission of an EIA".

3.4.1 Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan identifies developments where an EIA is required. It states in part: (c) Energy industry i. Thermal power stations and other thermal installations ii. Surface storage of natural gas iii. Underground storage of combustible gases iv. Surface storage of fossil fuels v. Industrial briquetting of coal and lignite vi. Installations for the harnessing of wind power for energy production

3.4.2 There is no reference made to the installation of solar panels within appendix 5. The scale (covering an area 240sqm) is also not considered to be significant enough to warrant an EIA in any case, and the site is not a sensitive site as stated in paragraph 3.1 of this report.

3.5 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 also contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application.

3.5.1 Strategic Policy 1 states: "Development should make the best use of resources by: (a) optimising the use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and under-used land and buildings, and re-using scarce indigenous building materials; (b) ensuring efficient use of sites, taking into account the needs for access, landscaping, open space(1) and amenity standards; and (c) being located so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services."

3.5.2 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: (c) previously developed land(1) which contains a significant amount of building; where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environment; and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment; (f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry; (h) buildings or works required for interpretation of the countryside, its wildlife or heritage."

3.5.3 Environment Policy 1 states: "The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. For the purposes of this policy, the countryside comprises all land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 at A.3.6 or which is not designated for future development on an Area Plan. Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative." 63

3.5.4 Environment Policy 14: Development which would result in the permanent loss of important and versatile agricultural land (Classes 1-2) will not be permitted except where there is an overriding need for the development, and land of a lower quality is not available and other policies in this plan are complied with. This policy will be applied to (a) land annotated as Classes 1/2 on the Agricultural Land Use Capability Map; and (b) Class 2 soils falling within areas annotated as Class 2/3 and Class 3/2 on the Agricultural Land Use Capability Map.

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The application site has not been the subject of any previous planning applications although the broader site area has been the subject of six previous planning applications none of which are considered to be specifically material in the assessment of the current application.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.

5.1 The Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division who had previously written in to object to the application in a letter dated 16 November 2020 have sent in revised comments in a letter dated 8 January 2021, after receiving additional information from the applicant. The comments:

The additional information confirms that the panels will be fixed and not follow the sun path. This should reduce the risk of glare and glint issues and not cause an issue for highway safety. Accordingly, the proposal is acceptable from the highway viewpoint for no opposition to be raised. Recommendation: DNO.

5.1 There has been no written representation made regarding the current planning application by the Santon Commissioners at the time of writing this report, although they were consulted on 11 November 2020.

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The Department is supportive of proposals to harness renewable energy but must balance this against the other principles of the Strategic Plan, particularly those relating to preventing harmful development in the Island's countryside. In this respect, the provisions of Environment Policy 2 are particularly relevant where it states that within areas of high landscape value, "the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration unless it can be shown that: a) the development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape; or b) the location for the development is essential".

6.2 As such, the key issue in this case is whether the proposal has any adverse environmental impact and if so, if the environmental benefit of renewable energy outweighs this. 6.3 When one passes by on the Old Castletown Road (A25), the panels will not be visible due to the raised bank by the roadside and the trees which line the highway. Whilst it is noted that these solar panels would be positioned only about 40m from the Old Castletown Road (A25), they would be completely hidden behind the roadside hedge and trees. It is also considered that the panels would not be visible from the A 5 due to the thick vegetation which covers the land west of the site and the topography of the land by the A5. As such, the

64 position of the solar panels on the field would not spoil the character of the surrounding countryside, thus the development would comply with Environment Policy 1.

6.4 Based on the foregoing, it is considered that the installation of the proposed solar panels will accord with the general support given to the introduction of renewable and alternative energy sources as set out in the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. Their introduction here is expected to help contribute to the overall operation and energy efficiency of the Mill House and its surrounding outbuildings. In this respect the proposal is considered to comply with paragraph 12.2.8 and Energy Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan.

6.5 Since the solar panels would be installed on an agricultural field, the agricultural status of the land to which the solar panels would be installed was assessed. From details obtained from the Agricultural Land use capability map for the Isle of Man shows that the land is within an area with capability class 3/4, where both classes are approximately equal; with Class 3 land characteristics comprising land with moderate limitations which restrict the choice of crops and/or demand careful management, while Class 4 are poor quality agricultural land with severe limitations which significantly restrict the range of crops and/or level of yields. This implies that the land is not a high yield agricultural land where impacts of the solar panel installation would bear significant impacts on agricultural production. Besides, the land area to be occupied by the solar panels would be 240sqm which is not considered to be large enough to impact on agricultural activities within the surrounding fields; enabling the development comply with Environment Policy 14. Albeit, a condition should be attached such that should the panels become redundant or are removed, the support units and stock fencing must also be removed and the field returned to its original use.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 For the above reasons, it is concluded that the development proposed is acceptable when assessed against the relevant policies and the site context. It is recommended that the planning application be approved.

8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.10 Proposal : Erection of summer house for use as hair salon Site Address : 17 Broogh Wyllin Kirk Michael Isle Of Man IM6 1HU Applicant : Marta Louise Loader Application No. : 20/01288/B- click to view Planning Officer : Mr Paul Visigah

RECOMMENDATION: To APPROVE the application ______

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. The business use hereby approved is only for the provision of the hairdressing business and shall only be carried out by Mrs Marta Louise Loader and only whilst she is resident at 17 Broogh Wyllin, Kirk Michael and no other staff may be employed and/or work at the premises. Upon the cessation of occupation by Mrs Marta Louise Loader, the use for provision of hairdressing business hereby permitted shall cease.

Reason: This permission is granted exceptionally and the Department wishes to have the opportunity of exercising control over any subsequent use in the event of the applicant ceasing the use hereby permitted.

C 3. One of the parking areas within the curtilage of the dwelling shall not be used for any other purpose other than the parking and turning of vehicles associated with the development and shall remain free of obstruction for such use at all times unless otherwise approved in writing by the Department.

Reason: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for off-street parking during the business operational hours in the interest of highway safety.

C 4. No clients of the Hair Dressing Business use hereby approved shall remain on the application site outside of the operational hours stipulated in the application.

Opening Hours: Wednesdays, Thursdays and Fridays: 10am and 3pm Mondays, Tuesdays, Saturdays and Sundays: Closed.

Reason: In the interest of protecting neighbouring living conditions.

C 5. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2019 or Town and Country Planning (Change of Use) (Development) (No. 2) Order 2019 or any order amending, revoking or re-enacting these Orders, the building hereby approved 66 shall be used only for the purpose hereby approved (Hair Dressing Business) and shall not be used for any other purpose within Use Class 1.1 without the express grant of planning approval from the Department.

Reason: To enable the Department to consider the implications of any subsequent change of use on the amenities of the area.

C 6. For the avoidance of doubt, should the building cease to be used for the business use hereby approved as specified in Condition 5 of the approval, the building may either be removed or used for purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house and shall only be used for purposes incidental to the enjoyment on the main dwelling house at 17 Broogh Wyllin.

Reason: To enable the Department to consider the implications of any subsequent change of use on the amenities of the area.

Reason for approval: Overall, it is concluded that the proposed development accords with the provisions set out in Business Policy 1, General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. ______

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None ______

Planning Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS IT PROPOSES DEVELOPMENT CONTRARY TO THE LOCAL PLAN ZONING BUT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL

1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 17 Broogh Wyllin, a semi-detached, two storey modern dwelling situated on the north eastern side of Broogh Wyllin which ends in a cul-de-sac. The property forms part of a modern residential development in the south- western part of Kirk Michael Village.

1.2 Generally, each property within Broogh Wyllin is served by two off street spaces with the application site and the semi-detached properties within the immediate vicinity of the proposal site having a tandem parking arrangement.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The planning application seeks approval for erection of summer house for use as hair salon.

2.2 The proposed works wold include: 2.2.1 The erection of a log cabin 4m x 3m and 2.5m to the roof ridge (2.1m high to the eaves) within the rear garden of the property, and on the site of the existing decking within the garden. The cabin would front towards the existing driveway, with two feature windows (0.7m x 1.7m) situated on the left of the patio door (1.4m x 1.9m) on the front elevation. No other windows or doors would be installed on the other three elevations. The cabin would feature a pitched roof (material not stated), with the general construction made of timber. Plumbing would be installed in the cabin for the sink/wash basin and customers would be allowed to use the toilet in the dwelling if required. Access to the cabin would be via the side 67 gate connected to the driveway or through the house. As well, a ramp would be installed to facilitate access to the cabin for wheelchair users.

2.2 The purpose of the cabin would be as a private hairdressing salon to serve a hairdressing business. The applicant has provided additional information to indicate that the proposed hours of opening would be between 10am and 3pm three days a week (precise days not stipulated). The applicant has also stated that customers would come in cars or by foot.

2.3 There would be a maximum of one client in the log cabin at a time with the applicant as appointment would be chosen by applicant from existing clients with daily client numbers to the business not exceeding three clients a day. None of the clients will be coming together as time would be staggered to allow sufficient gap between client visits. There would be no additional staff on site as the applicant would be running the salon on her own as sole trader.

2.4 The applicant has also provided additional information which indicates that there are two (2) off road parking spaces at the property, with eight (8) additional parking spaces opposite the house also available for use by the customers. The parking spaces outside the property are only taken up in the evenings by residents after work but remain free during office hours as they are intended to serve resident and visitor parking.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The application site is located within an area identified as being predominantly residential on the Kirk Michael Local Plan (1994) and the site is not within a conservation area. As such, the following Strategic Plan policies are relevant:

3.2 General Policy 2 states "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development: b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways;

3.3 Business Policy 1: The growth of employment opportunities throughout the Island will be encouraged provided that development proposals accord with the policies of this Plan.

3.4 Paragraphs 9.3.3 and 9.3.4 of the Strategic Plan 2016 provide key considerations that will be integral to the assessment of the application.

9.3.3 The Department has supported the location of offices in town and village centres for several reasons: (a) such centres are accessible to all members of the community, staff and visitors alike; (b) the activity and range of services contribute to the vitality and success of the centres; and (c) the investment in property can be used to renew the ageing fabric of our town centre buildings.

9.3.4 There are exceptions to this general approach: 68

(c) working from home; where this does not result either in staff being employed or in day to day callers, there need be no detriment to the residential area, and there should be less travelling involved; this is also one way of encouraging the formation of new local businesses.

3.5 Transport Policy 7: The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards.

3.6 Appendix A.7.6 of the Isle of Man Strategic plan 2016 stipulates that, for a typical residential development, two (2) spaces should be provided per unit, at least one of which is retained within the curtilage and behind the front of the dwelling.

With regard to the parking standards, there are none specifically relating to the proposed use, although for 'Assembly and leisure (includes cinemas, meeting halls, swimming baths, leisure centres, and the conference and leisure facilities of hotels), 1 space per 15 square metres gross floor space.

3.7 Section 11.4 of Manual for Manx Roads: Allocated and Unallocated Parking

11.4.1 The allocation of spaces to individual dwellings can have an adverse impact upon the efficiency of car parking provision. Allocated parking spaces include any spaces within the curtilage of a property (e.g. garage or driveway parking) and any spaces in communal areas where the space is reserved for one particular property.

11.4.2 On-street spaces upon public highways are always unallocated. However they can be reserved for a particular purpose such as disabled persons or residents' parking through the making of relevant Traffic Regulation Orders. The costs associated with making such Orders will need to be funded by the developer.

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The site has not been the subject of any previous planning application that is considered to be materially relevant in assessment of the current application.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.

5.1 The Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division have made the following comments regarding the application in a letter dated 25 November 2020:

The proposed salon is to be used for commercial purposes, therefore requiring additional parking for customers. There are two driveway spaces counting as the minimum requirement for parking for a residential dwelling; however, there are another eight car spaces for use by local residents and their visitors nearby.

The use of these spaces will be acceptable for customer parking during the 10am-3pm proposed operating hours. This should not cause disruption to the usual residential use or cause a road safety hazard or network efficiency issue. Accordingly, Highway Services raise no opposition.

5.3 No comments have been received from neighbouring properties.

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 In assessing this application, the key issues to consider are; the use of the building, impact on parking demand and road safety, impact on neighbours and the Visual Impact.

6.2 The use of the building/principle of development

6.2.1 As the proposed use of the cabin would be for the operation of a small business run from home, it is important that the probability of the use is considered, so as to limit any larger commercial operation.

6.2.2 When considering this matter it is important to acknowledge that permission has been approved and refused for the operation of businesses (i.e. beauty treatments, hairdressers & tutoring) from a residential property, on the Island. In fact the Departments Permitted Development Order permits a number of business operation to be run from a dwelling, these including child minding (up to 6 children), Bed and Breakfast (up to 3 bedrooms) and an occupant of a dwelling can operate any business from home (no visitors/staff allowed) via a home office within the property. With regard to the current application, however, the key issue of concern here lies in the parking/highway demand from potential visitors given that the property has only two parking spaces.

6.2.3 A further issue in terms of the principle is the impacts on the nearby village centre. It is generally presumed that new commercial uses will be directed towards existing commercial areas. However, the impact of a single employee operating in this location is unlikely to draw materially harmful levels of trade away from the village centre. Moreover, such small businesses could enable the growth of a business that would eventually achieve a sufficient turnover as to encourage its moving into larger, more attractive and more appropriate commercial premises in that town centre in due course.

6.3 Impact on parking demand and road safety

6.3.1 As noted, customer usage is likely to be kept to a minimum since the maximum allowable customer visit a day would be 3 clients. Whilst there are only two parking provisions within the curtilage of the dwelling, there are eight additional parking areas available to the properties within the cul de sac; provided to serve visitors to the area and residents which would be free for use during the operating hours of the business.

6.3.2 In terms of road safety, it is important that there is no noticeable increase in parking demand, and that any increase is kept to an absolute minimum so as to comply with General Policy 2 (h&i). Whilst the applicant has indicated that only a fraction of the customers would come in cars, in addition to a client cap which would only allow a maximum of three customers a day, a condition should be attached to ensure this. As such, a condition would be imposed to ensure that one of the two on-site parking spaces would be reserved for the business during its operational hours in order to forestall any undesirable impacts on highway safety as a result of the development.

6.4 Impact on neighbours

6.4.1 With regard to impact on neighbours, it is not considered that there would be any impacts on the neighbouring dwellings. This is hinged on the fact that the proposed work area would be completely enclosed by the fencing enclosing the rear garden; and the visits of clients would be no more prominent than domestic visitors to the property given that only three clients would be attended to three days of the week. It is also noted that none of the neighbours have raised any concerns regarding the proposed development.

6.5 Visual Impact

6.5.1 There would be limited views to the log cabin from the public thoroughfare of Broogh Wyllin or any other road given that the log cabin would only be 2.5m high (500mm higher than a 2m fence or wall, although the existing fence is 1.8m high). Besides, its appearance is sympathetic and low impact due to its timber construction, scale and mass and the shed could pass as permitted development due to its height and footprint. Based on the foregoing, it is not considered that there would be any adverse impact on the character or appearance of the site or surrounding area.

CONCLUSION 7.1 It is considered that the proposal would have a neutral impact on the appearance and character of the dwelling, with negligible impacts on parking provisions and as such it is supported.

8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested; (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.11 Proposal : Alteration and extension to dwelling Site Address : Ballacomish Cottage Ronague Road Ballabeg Castletown Isle Of Man IM9 4HF Applicant : Mr & Mrs Colin Duggan Application No. : 20/01289/B- click to view Principal Planner : Miss S E Corlett

RECOMMENDATION: To APPROVE the application ______

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no fences, gates, walls or other means of enclosure shall be erected or placed within the curtilage of the dwelling house without the prior written approval of the Department.

Reason: to control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.

N 1. The applicant's attention is drawn to the provisions of the Wildlife Act 1990 in respect of protected species including breeding and nesting birds.

Reason for approval: It is considered that there would not be any adverse impact on the character or appearance of the countryside from the proposed development and there would be benefits to highway safety therefrom and as such the application is considered to accord with Housing Policy 16 and Environment Policy 1 and with no adverse impact on ecology, thus complying with General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan. ______

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the following Government Departments should be given Interested Person Status on the basis that they have made written submissions relating to planning considerations: Manx National Heritage ______Planning Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THERE IS PROPOSED AN INCREASE IN THE RESIDENTIAL CURTILAGE INTO LAND NOT DESIGNATED FOR THAT PURPOSE (I.E. COULD BE SEEN AS A DEPARTURE FROM THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL)

THE SITE 1.1 The site is the residential curtilage of an existing dwelling which sits on the eastern side of the Ronague Road (B42) which leads from Ballabeg to Ronague Chapel. The existing dwelling is a single storey dwelling whose gable sits on the roadside and where there is vehicular parking to the north in the form of a single vehicle parking space at right angles to the highway. To the north of this a 1m high wall and vegetation which block visibility of and from vehicles approaching from this direction. To the south the visibility is impaired by the gable of the house.

1.2 The dwelling comprises a mix of ridge levels with no real semblance of traditional architecture: there is a large chimney on the front plane of the mid section of the house with a small pitched roofed porch to the left of this section and another, lower annex between this and the road. To the other side is another lower annex and the property extends 4m to the rear.

1.3 To the south of the property is the remains of a former stone outbuilding, the rear wall abutting the highway and much of the building is ivy covered. There is a short section of vertical fencing between the front of the house and the roadside gable of this building. There is an existing access immediately to the south of this leading into the field in which the property sits. The house is separated from the field by a low stone wall giving the property a very small curtilage - approximately 195 sq m with the property occupying approximately 139 sq m of this. The stone wall/hedge in front of the property is a low collection of stones arranged into a wall but without any mortar or coping.

THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the extension of the dwelling. The existing front porch is to be removed and a new front, pitched roofed annex added which projects 4m from the existing front elevation and will be finished in reconstituted stone in a sandstone colour and with a line of windows across the ground floor front with a longer window above with an angled top to match the slope of the roof.

2.2 At the rear of the property a square extension is to be added, squaring off the footprint of the property. This will be finished in painted render to match the existing house around it.

2.3 Also proposed is an extension of the residential curtilage in front of the house, extending the curtilage by 20m to the south and incorporating the ruined stone building alongside the road and the access to the immediate south of that.

2.4 No information about the definition of the curtilage is provided but as the remainder of the field is to be continued to be used for agriculture, it may not be appropriate to define the curtilage by planting or fencing.

2.5 An existing multi stemmed sorbus tree will be removed at the front of the house to facilitate the front extension.

PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South (2013) as not for a particular purpose. On the Landscape Character Appraisal the site lies within a wider area of Incised Inland Slopes where the following guidance is provided:

Ballamodha, Earystane and St Marks (D14) 73

The overall strategy is to conserve and enhance the character, quality and distinctiveness of the area, with its wooded valley bottoms, its strong geometric field pattern delineated by Manx hedges, its numerous traditional buildings and its network of small roads and lanes. The strategy should also include the restoration of landscapes disturbed by former mining activities.

Key Views Distant views prevented at times by dense woodland in river valleys and by the cumulative screening effect of hedgerow trees, which tend to create wooded horizons. Open and panoramic views out to sea from the higher areas on the upper western parts of the area where there are few trees to interrupt views.

3.2 The implications of the landscape character appraisal include

"i. To protect the tranquil, rural character of the area with its open views. ii. Sensitive location of new buildings and the use of screen planting. iii. Avoidance of physical or visual amalgamation of roadside housing. iv. Protection and enhancement of the identity of Ballabeg and Colby by the conservation of the rural character of the adjacent landscape.

3.3 As such, the following parts of the Strategic Plan are relevant: Environment Policy 1 which protects the countryside for its own sake and

General Policy 2: "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:

(b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."

3.4 The Department has recently published the Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) which provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property.

3.5 General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 4 provide protection of ecology and GP2 also provides a requirement that development is acceptable in highway safety terms.

PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 There have been no previous applications submitted for this site. Planning approval is currently being sought for the clearance of the stone outbuilding and the erection of a garage in its place (20/01290/B).

REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services have no highway interest in the application (11.12.20).

5.2 Manx National Heritage draw attention to the provisions of the Wildlife Act 1990 in respect of the potential removal of trees and vegetation and the impact it may have on nesting and breeding birds, suggesting that ideally such work should be carried out outside the bird nesting season (April to August). They also suggest that a bat survey should be carried out prior to any development and care should be taken in respect of the removal of any hedging (07.12.20).

5.3 Arbory Parish Commissioners confirm on 23rd December, 2020 that they considered the application at their December meeting but make no further comments about the application.

ASSESSMENT 6.1 The issues in this case are whether the extension of the residential curtilage would result in any adverse impact on the character and appearance of the area and whether the proposal will result in any increase in the impact of the dwelling (Housing Policy 16). It is also relevant to consider the implications for highway safety from the potential increase in use of the existing access to the south of the ruined building and whether there would be any adverse impact on ecology given the comments from Manx National Heritage.

Extension of the dwelling 6.2 The test is whether the proposed works would increase the visual impact of the property as viewed by the public. At the moment the public view of the property is of a building which is neither modern nor traditional. What is proposed will not significantly increase the size of the property and the use of stone (if the appropriate colour) will reduce any potential increase in the impact of the front extension. The rear extension will not be visible by anyone other than those within the site. It is considered that the proposed works satisfy HP 16.

Extension of the curtilage 6.3 Similarly, the extension of the curtilage will not be particularly noticeable: at present there is nothing to prevent the users of the field parking their agricultural vehicles in front of the southern access where they would be visible which is the same as what could happen with the extension of the curtilage as proposed. There is no proposal for hard surfacing or any material change in the area into which the curtilage is to be extended. It is not considered, therefore that the proposed extension to the curtilage will have any adverse impact on the character or appearance of the countryside, thus satisfying EP 1.

Highway safety 6.4 The proposals will provide an additional means of access to the property and sufficient parking and turning space to accommodate more safely the traffic from the existing and proposed works. There is no objection to the application from Highway Services.

Ecology 6.5 The proposal will result in the removal of the stone wall. The removal of this feature does not require planning approval. The scheme also involves the removal of a small tree. No other vegetation is to be removed as part of this application. None of these features is considered valuable to wildlife and as such it is not considered appropriate to attach a condition to any approval of this application although a note drawing attention to the provisions of the Wildlife Act is recommended. CONCLUSION 7.1 The works will change the appearance and character of the property but not significantly or adversely given that the existing cottage is not traditional nor is it of any particular style. The increase in the curtilage as proposed will increase the likelihood that cars will be parked here so that they are visible from the highway, although it would be possible to see legitimately parked vehicles in this area which are associated with the management of the field. The gap in the roadside hedging is not large and as such the opportunity for seeing any vehicles or change in character is limited.

7.2 There are benefits to the applicant and highway safety in having the use of this access as there is insufficient space in the existing parking area for vehicles to turn and visibility from this parking area is more limited than that serving the new parking area.

7.3 It is considered that there would not be any adverse impact on the character or appearance of the countryside from the proposed development and there would be benefits to highway safety therefrom and as such the application is considered to accord with Housing Policy 16 and Environment Policy 1 and with no adverse impact on ecology, thus complying with General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan.

7.4 It is considered appropriate to attach a condition to suspend the provisions of the Permitted Development Order in respect of boundary treatment as the permitted fencing and walling could have an inappropriate visual impact on the site.

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.12 Proposal : Erection of detached garage & store, alterations to improve vehicular access and partial expansion of residential curtilage into field no 421122 Site Address : Ballacomish Cottage & Part Field 421122 Ronague Road Ballabeg Castletown Isle Of Man IM9 4HF Applicant : Mr & Mrs Colin Duggan Application No. : 20/01290/B- click to view Principal Planner : Miss S E Corlett

RECOMMENDATION: To APPROVE the application ______

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. Prior to the undertaking of any works in association with the approval hereby granted, details of the boundary of the extended residential curtilage must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department and the development must be undertaken in accordance with these details. The boundary must be formed by either a planted hedge of native species or a Manx hedge constructed in accordance with Planning Circular 1/91.

Reason: to ensure that the development has an acceptable environmental impact on the area.

C 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no fences, gates, walls or other means of enclosure shall be erected or placed within the curtilage of the dwelling house without the prior written approval of the Department.

Reason: to control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.

N 1. The applicants' attention is drawn to the provisions of the Wildlife Act 1990 in respect of the protection of bats and breeding birds and it is recommended that the existing outbuilding and its vegetation is inspected for the presence of bats prior to its demolition.

Reason for approval: The works will change the appearance of this part of the site but not adversely given the appearance of the existing building and any impact is considered justified given the provision of a safer and more convenient form of access and parking which will also serve the

77 agricultural field without any adverse impact on ecology, thus satisfying Environment Policies 1 and 4 and General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan. ______

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None ______

Planning Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THERE IS PROPOSED AN INCREASE IN THE RESIDENTIAL CURTILAGE INTO LAND NOT DESIGNATED FOR THAT PURPOSE (I.E. COUDL BE SEEN AS A DEPARTURE FROM THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL)

THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the same extension to the residential curtilage as is proposed in 20/01289/B but where the existing stone building is to be demolished and in its place built a new garage which has stone facing to the rear and southern elevation (the ones which may be publicly visible) and with a hipped, slated roof. The garage will accommodate two vehicles side by side and the remaining space to be used as a log and garden store.

2.2 Unlike 20/01289/B the area in front and to the side of the garage will be hard cored and the area edged in a post and wire fence.

Ballamodha, Earystane and St Marks (D14) 78

3.2 The implications of the landscape character appraisal include

3.3 As such, the following parts of the Strategic Plan are relevant: Environment Policy 1 which protects the countryside for its own sake and

(b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."

3.5 General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan provide protection of ecology and highway safety.

PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 There have been no previous applications submitted for this site. Planning approval is currently being sought for the extension of the dwelling and the residential curtilage (20/01289/B).

REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services suggest that as the access remains the same as the existing and considering that the geometry of the road results in relatively slow speeds, the application is 79 acceptable and they recommend the provision of electric vehicle charging points and bicycle storage (10.12.20).

5.2 Despite this application resulting in the removal of the existing stone outbuilding and the roadside vegetation attached to it, Manx National Heritage have not commented as they have for 20/01289/B. It is considered relevant to consider the points raised in respect of that other application in respect of the loss of the vegetation and the potential for the existing building to accommodate bats although the building could be demolished without the need for planning approval.

ASSESSMENT 6.1 The issues in this case are whether the extension of the curtilage and hard surfacing of the new area would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the site and also whether there will be any adverse impact from the erection of the replacement garaging/outbuilding. It is relevant that no planning approval is required for the removal of the existing building.

6.2 The existing building is clearly ruinous and arguably does not contribute positively to the character or appearance of the area. If the residential curtilage were approved, planning approval would be required for the erection of the garage as it is larger than that allowed under Class 17 and also further forward towards the road than is the house.

6.3 As the new garage will have stone walling on the roadside and southern elevation, despite its hipped roof, it should not have an adverse visual impact and in terms of highway safety, the relocation of the roadside wall slightly further back from the road will improve visibility to the north.

6.4 Whilst the hard surfacing of the area in front of the garage will affect the character and appearance of the field, having an area of hard surface will assist agricultural vehicles coming in and going out of the access and should assist the road surface through not tracking mud from the field onto the road. The provision of parking and turning space for the dwelling in this area and using this, better access, will also assist highway safety.

6.5 Whilst the site is not designated for development, there is insufficient space within the existing curtilage in which a garage with enough space for turning and manoeuvring could be accommodated. A garage is generally considered something which could reasonably be provided for a dwelling and what is proposed, whilst larger than that allowed under Permitted Development (6m by 6m), is appropriate given length and impact of the ruined building which is currently in situ very near where the proposed building is to be built.

6.6 The new residential curtilage should be formed by a planted boundary or traditional Manx hedge not just a post and wire fence so that it has an acceptable visual impact on the area.

6.7 The vegetation to be removed does not include mature trees and the roadside vegetation is largely ivy attached to the building. Whilst there may be bats and wildlife within the building, it should be noted that the building has no roofing although there may be crevices within the walling which may be suitable for bats. Given that no permission is required for the demolition of the building and its condition, it is not considered appropriate to attach a condition which requires the submission of a bat report prior to the commencement of works and it is recommended that a note drawing the applicants' attention to the provisions of the Wildlife Act 1990 is attached instead.

CONCLUSION 7.1 The works will change the appearance of this part of the site but not adversely given the appearance of the existing building and any impact is considered justified given the provision of a safer and more convenient form of access and parking which will also serve the 80 agricultural field, thus satisfying Environment Policy 1 and General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan. A note is recommended drawing the applicants' attention to the provisions of the Wildlife Act 1990 and a condition requiring the boundary to be finished in planting and also suspending the provisions of the Permitted Development Order in respect of boundary treatment so that inappropriate walling or fencing may not be erected without permission.

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.13 Proposal : Variation of condition 2 to PA 20/00909/C Additional use of residence as brewery business and distributor to public houses, to increase the number of staff Site Address : Lough Ned Oak Hill Port Soderick Isle Of Man IM4 1AN Applicant : Michael Andrew Cowbourne Application No. : 20/01322/B- click to view Planning Officer : Mr Paul Visigah

RECOMMENDATION: To APPROVE the application ______

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. The business use hereby approved is only for the provision of service as a small scale commercial brewery for sale to pubs and shall be carried out by Mr Michael Cowbourne and only whilst resident at Lough Ned, Oak Hill, Port Soderick, and only one (1) support staff may be employed and/or work at the premises. Upon cessation of occupation by Mr Michael Cowbourne, the use as a small scale commercial brewery hereby permitted shall cease.

C 3. The home brewery business, hereby approved, shall not be open to visiting clients/customers at any time and shall only operate a delivery service to external clients/customers.

Reason: In the interest of protecting the amenity of the neighbouring properties and highway safety of A25 Old Castletown Road in accordance with General Policy 2, parts g, h & i of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

C 4. There shall be no display, sales or services at the site, relating to the approved small scale commercial brewery use to any visiting members of the public.

Reason: The application has been assessed for brewing only and any other use would require being assessed as part of a separate planning application and in the interest of amenity and highway safety.

C 5. There shall be no outside storage of waste by-products associated to the approved use. Any waste by-products from the process which are to be picked up from the site by others 82 shall be kept in sealed containers and shall not be left stored externally for more than a 24 hour period.

Reason: In order to prevent the pollution of the local environment and to protect the health and safety of people.

Reason for approval: Overall and on balance, it is considered that the proposal complies with Business Policy 1, Environment Policy 22 and Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan 2016, and Policy 7.7 of the Braddan Local Plan 1991. ______

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None ______

Planning Officer’s Report

THE APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS IT MAY BE CONSIDERED CONTRARY TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.

1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site is the curtilage of Lough Ned, Oak Hill, Port Soderick which is sited on the northern side of the A25 Old Castletown Road, Port Soderick. The property has a significantly large estate and accommodates three buildings; one of which serves as a home brewery and workshop with attached garage.

1.2 The site entrance is situated about 10m south west of the junction between Marine Drive and Oakhill and about 40m northeast of the entrance to Oakhill House. The railway line runs along its southern boundary and demarcates the application site from Woodville the abutting dwelling which has its frontage facing the A25.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The planning application seeks to vary condition 2 to PA 20/00909/C (Additional use of residence as brewery business and distributor to public houses), to increase the number of staff. Condition 2 states:

"The business use hereby approved is only for the provision of service as a small scale commercial brewery for sale to pubs and shall only be carried out by Mr Michael Cowbourne and only whilst resident at Lough Ned, Oak Hill, Port Soderick, and no other staff may be employed and/or work at the premises. Upon cessation of occupation by Mr Michael Cowbourne, the use as a small scale commercial brewery hereby permitted shall cease.

2.2 The applicants have provided the following supporting information as justification for the need to increase staff on the site:

2.2.1 Reasons why I can't work alone in the Brewery: Condition 2 states that "and no other staff may be employed and/or work at the premises". I have been home brewing for two years here and I always have help when I brew. It is a two-

83 man operation as the process is not automated and is impossible to run on a solo basis. I therefore would like this clause amended to one other staff may be employed and/or work.

The other major factor besides the brewing process being a two-man job is Health and Safety. The brewing process deals with extremely hot and boiling liquids, any accident or malfunction of equipment could result in personal injury. There is also electrical equipment being operated in a wet environment. It is therefore, necessary always to have another person in situ on Health and Safety grounds.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site lies within an area zoned as Existing Low Density Housing in Parkland under the Braddan Local Plan 1991. Policy 5.6 of the Planning Circular 6/91, the written statement that accompanies the local plan identifies Oak Hill Cottages as an area proposed for further examination of residential development.

3.2 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan contains the following policies that are considered materially relevant to the assessment of this current planning application:

3.3 Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan identifies developments where an EIA is required. In particular it refers to sub-paragraph A.5.2 (g) which includes 'Brewing and Malting' as development requiring an EIA. It states in part: "It is proposed that the following types of development would require EIA in every case. (g) Food industry o Brewing and malting"

3.4 Environment Policy 22: Development will not be permitted where it would unacceptably harm the environment and/or the amenity of nearby properties in terms of: i) pollution of sea, surface water or groundwater; ii) emissions of airborne pollutants; and iii) vibration, odour, noise or light pollution.

7.17.2 In addition to the above, changes in the activities associated with the current permitted use of land or a building, which in themselves do not constitute development and therefore do not require planning permission, can have an adverse impact on adjacent properties by virtue of noise, light or general disturbance. For example the addition of security lighting on a property may cause light pollution affecting adjacent properties and the wider area. The introduction of new activities into established parks and recreation areas can have an impact on neighbours. In such cases the Department would advocate the person or organisation considering the change to give careful consideration to the potential impact of such activity in terms of location, siting and design.

3.5 Paragraph 7.18.3 A Planning Policy Statement will be issued specifying the manner in which the Department intends to deal with applications which should be subject to EIA. Pending the adoption of the proposed Planning Policy Statement the Department will adopt current practice on EIA's from England and Wales set out in the publication "Environmental Impact Assessment: A Guide to Procedures" (1).

3.6 Environment Policy 24: Development which is likely to have a significant effect on the environment will be required: i) to be accompanied by an Environmental Impact Assessment in certain cases; and ii) to be accompanied by suitable supporting environmental information in all other cases.

3.7 Paragraph 7.19: Pollution-Sensitive Development

7.19.1 Development will not be permitted where it would be incompatible with an existing use of land. In the case of new residential development, this will not be allowed where properties would suffer unacceptable loss of amenity due to exposure to existing sources of pollution whether this is from noise generation, odours or airborne pollutants such as dust. Not only could this reduce the quality of life of future residents but it could lead to future complaints that may prejudice any future development or expansion of an existing land use.

3.8 Business Policy 1: The growth of employment opportunities throughout the Island will be encouraged provided that development proposals accord with the policies of this Plan.

3.9 General Policy 2 of the strategic Plan would also provide guidance in the assessment of the proposal. General Policy 2 states that:

"Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development: (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways;

3.10 The Braddan Local Plan 1991 has the following policy which is considered to be relevant to the current application:

3.10.1 Policy 7.7 The standard for car parking will be applied in the appropriate situations with the exception of change of use. Change of use will necessitate the provision of additional car parking if this can be satisfactorily accommodated on site.

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The previous planning application is considered to be specifically material in the assessment of the current application:

4.2 Additional use of residence as brewery business and distributor to public houses - 20/00909/C - approved with the attached condition:

"C 2. The business use hereby approved is only for the provision of service as a small scale commercial brewery for sale to pubs and shall only be carried out by Mr Michael Cowbourne and only whilst resident at Lough Ned, Oak Hill, Port Soderick, and no other staff may be employed and/or work at the premises. Upon cessation of occupation by Mr Michael Cowbourne, the use as a small scale commercial brewery hereby permitted shall cease. Reason: This permission is granted exceptionally and the Department wishes to have the opportunity of exercising control over any subsequent use in the event of the applicant ceasing the use hereby approved."

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.

5.1 The Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division have made the following comments regarding the application in the letter dated 28 August 2020:

Reference made to planning approval 20/00909/C.

The proposal is acceptable in Highways terms. The brewery is located in a place of residence and therefore requires a minimum parking allocation of two spaces. With the addition of brewery staff, the parking requirements increase also. The applicant has stated that he seeks to employ one additional member of staff to assist in the brewery works. For this increase in brewery staff, the area highlighted in "Block Plan" for car parking is sufficient.

The proposal gives rise to no significant road safety or highway efficiency issues. Accordingly, Highway Services raise no opposition.

Recommendation: DNO

5.2 Braddan Parish Commissioners have no objection to the current planning application in the letter dated 26 November 2020.

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The main material considerations is whether the principle of having an additional staff on site is acceptable and whether there is any highway safety concerns given additional traffic would be generated by the proposal.

6.2 In terms of the principle of having an additional staff on site to support the operations of the business, it is noted that the proposal seeks to ensure that the business operates in a safe manner, adhering to Health and Safety requirements for such operations given that the additional staff would ensure that the operation is seamless and that eventualities are safely catered for as the equipment operations could sometimes present hazards. It is also considered that since the operation is not automated, the additional staff would help to ease the operations and ensure that the business meets its desired supply targets to its clients. This alteration to the scheme is relatively minor given that the comings and goings of the additional staff would be no different from visitors or residents coming and going since the property is well set within its large curtilage, sufficiently secluded from the neighbouring properties. As such, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable and would not considerably alter the controls sought by the Department on business operations within residential curtilages.

6.3 In relation to highway safety impacts potentially caused by additional traffic to and from the site. Given that only an additional staff would be permitted to support the distillery it is unlikely that this would have a significant impact on parking or highway safety. The site currently has 6 parking spaces which is more than is required to support the residential use of the site as well as the additional parking requirement for a single staff. Based on the foregoing, it is not considered that the proposed development would result in detrimental impacts on parking or highway safety.

7.0 RECOMMENDATION 7.1 Overall, it is considered the proposal complies with Business Policy 1, Environment Policy 22 & Transport Policy 7 of the IOMSP. Accordingly it is recommended that the application be approved.

8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.14 Proposal : Additional use of garage as a fitness studio/gym Site Address : 1 Laureston Avenue Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 3AE Applicant : Laura Smith Application No. : 20/01330/C- click to view Planning Officer : Mr Peiran Shen

RECOMMENDATION: To APPROVE the application ______

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. The use hereby approved shall only be undertaken between 08:00 and 20:00 on weekdays and 10:00 and 16:00 on Saturdays and Sundays. The use shall not be undertaken at any time on Public Holidays.

Reason: To ensure that the development is undertaken in accordance with the application details and in the interest of protecting neighbouring living conditions.

C 3. There must be no more than one customer/client using the gym at any one time.

Reason: In the interest of highway safety and residential amenity.

C 4. The area of the building to be used for personal training service shall be limited to that shown on the floor plans forming part of the application and the use hereby permitted shall not extend into any other part of the premises.

Reason: To minimise the disturbance to adjacent residential occupiers and to protect the residential character of the locality.

C 5. The use hereby approved shall only be for the benefit of the applicant while they are resident at 1 Laureston Avenue, Douglas and no staff may be employed and/or work at the premises.

Reason: Although the specific details of this application have been found acceptable, any change to its operation will require fresh assessment.

C 6. The driveway and access shall be kept available and unobstructed for parking at all times.

Reason: To ensure construction of a satisfactory access and in the interests of highway safety. 88

Reason for approval: This application is considered to comply with General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan. ______

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None ______

Planning Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS IT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BUT CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 1 Laureston Avenue, Douglas, a two- storey detached property located on the northwest of Laureston Avenue and north of Scoill yn Jubilee. It has a double garage as the ground floor.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The proposed work is the additional use of the south side of double garage of the residence (3.3) as a personal training gym (4.4).

2.2 The applicant states that the gym is purposes to operate 10:00-19:30 on weekdays, except 8:30-9:30 and 15:00-16:00, which are school drop-off/pick-up time. It also proposes to open 10:00-16:30 on the weekends except 12:30-3:00. The applicant states that he will be the only person working in the personal training gym.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 There is no previous application considered materially relevant to this application.

3.2 On a similar site and of a nature, PA 17/01295/B was APPROVED for use of part of garage as gym for one to one training sessions/lessons at 124 Fairways Drive, Mount Murray, Douglas. The assessment considers the principle acceptable but does have concerns regarding long operation hours and potential noise level, both of which are limited with condition for the benefit of residential amenities. The same concerns were brought up in the planning committee meeting as well.

4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 In terms of local policy, the site lies within an area designated as Predominantly Residential in the Area Plan for the East.

4.2 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered materially relevant to the assessment of this current planning application:

4.3 General Policy 2: "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development: (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; 89

(h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan;".

4.5 Transport Policy 7: "The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards."

5.0 REPRESENTATION 5.1 Douglas Borough Council has no objection on this application (04/12/2020).

5.2 DoI Highway Services does not oppose this application (03/12/2020). The comment states that as only the left garage is converted, there are still two parking space left, which complies with the parking standard. The number of parking required for the gym can be accommodated with the Disc Zone parking. The proposal also raises no significant road safety or highway efficiency issues.

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of the planning application are the principle of the additional use and the potential impacts of the proposal on the wider amenity.

6.3 The use class for a personal training service is considered as assembly and leisure (Class 4.4). Although the proposal is only one-to-one training, the use is for people to exercise and it should be considered as a gym regardless of its size.

6.4 The site is within an area designated as predominately residential use. As such, the proposal could be seen as contrary to the land use designation. However, the application site will remain as a dwellinghouse in its majority. The proposed use is connected to the ancillary use of the dwelling and not a use in its own right over the existing use. There is also no external physical alteration proposed to the property, so there will be no visual impact in General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 based on the small-scale of its use.

6.5 It should be noted that although the site is not close to a town centre or commercial area, the impact of the proposed change of use is often run with an appointment-based system and it's unlikely to draw away trade from the town or village centre by a materially harmful level.

Operation Hours 6.6 The main concerns for this application relate to the impact upon on-street parking provisions and noise & general disturbances though people coming and going from the site. The applicants are the full-time occupants of the property, living within the dwelling and will be the only person working from this address. The supporting information with the application indicates that the business is to operate seven days a week and will take clients 10:00-19:30 on weekdays, except 8:30-9:30 and 15:00-16:00, which are school drop-off/pick-up time. It also proposes to open 10:00-16:30 on the weekends except 12:30-3:00, with a typical client spent about 1-2 hours within the property.

6.7 The operation time for PA 17/01295/B is conditioned to between 09:00 and 20:00 Monday to Friday, between 10:00 and 1600 on Saturdays, no Sundays or Bank Holidays. These are the hour of operation considered acceptable in term of impact on the neighbouring properties. This proposal ends before the condition sets for PA 17/01295/B but starts earlier than it. The proposal also involves working on Sundays. This means new assessment should be conducted for the beginning hours and Sunday Hours.

6.8 In assessment is for the PA 17/01295/B, operation hours were limited to avoid unacceptable over-intensification of the business use within a residential area. As the two applications has a similar setting, it could be considered to apply the same limit on operation hours to maintain the residential amenities of the area. This was discussed with the applicant who requested an 08:00 start on weekdays, and on balance this is considered acceptable and reflected in the condition suggested condition.

THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS UPON NEIGHBOURING AMENITIES 6.9 In terms of neighbouring properties, due to the nature of the business, with only a single client at a time, it is considered unlikely to be a significant impact on the neighbouring properties.

6.10 There could be concerns about the additional traffic and the parking available on site. The property has more than two parking spaces in the front driveway. This means at least one space could be made available to the client. It is noted that DOI Highways has not objected. Whilst the traffic relates to the property is likely to increase above the existing, the additional traffic is hard to differentiate from that of a general household with frequent visitors, and therefore it is unlikely that the business would be significantly more disruptive than normal domestic activities that would otherwise be acceptable in a dwelling.

6.11 On balance, the proposal is considered to have provided with sufficient parking and thus not expected to result in any adverse highway safety impacts on the area. However, it is considered necessary to include a condition ensuring that the driveway is made available and unobstructed for the parking of vehicles at all times.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 The proposal is considered to comply with General Policy 2, Business Policy 10 and Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan. Therefore, it is recommended for approval.

8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land which the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

8.2 The decision-maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and

91 o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status.

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.15 Proposal : Erection of a replacement detached dwelling, detached garage and wood store with associated landscaping, relocation of vehicular access and extension of residential curtilage to rear of dwelling Site Address : Ellan Ash Clenagh Road Sandygate Ramsey Isle Of Man IM7 3AE Applicant : Mr David & Mrs Rebecca Griffin Application No. : 20/01441/B- click to view Principal Planner : Mr Chris Balmer

RECOMMENDATION: To APPROVE the application ______

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the conditions

C 1. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no extension, enlargement or other alteration of the dwelling(s) hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, shall be carried out, without the prior written approval of the Department.

Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.

C 2. Prior to the commencement of any works a Habitat Management Agreement shall be submitted to and approved by the Department which demonstrates how the existing curtilage and the wildflower meadow within the new residential curtilage and adjacent field will enhance biodiversity and the development shall be undertaken in full accordance with this Agreement and maintained as such thereafter.

Reason: A reason why the application is considered acceptable is due to the overall environmental impacts and the improvement and enhancement of biodiversity throughout the site is one measure to achieve this.

C 3. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or operated until the means of vehicular access has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans which includes the provision of the visibility splays as shown on drawing 2006-005, and all shall be retained thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

C 4. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or operated until the parking and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans. Such areas shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking and turning of vehicles associated with the development and shall remain free of obstruction for such use at all times.

Reason: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for off-street parking and turning of vehicles in the interests of highway safety.

C 5. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no extension, enlargement or other alteration of the dwelling(s) hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, shall be carried out, without the prior written approval of the Department.

Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.

C 6. No development shall take place until full details of soft and hard landscaping works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department and these works shall be carried out as approved. Details of the soft landscaping works include details of new planting (including tree planting/hedgerow) showing, type, size and position of each. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping must be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the completion of the development or the occupation of the dwelling, whichever is the sooner. Any trees or plants which die or become seriously damaged or diseased must be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species. Details of the hard landscaping works include footpaths, hard surfacing materials and fencing along the southern garden of the new dwelling fronting onto the "Grass Access Track". The hard landscaping works shall be completed in full accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the dwelling hereby permitted.

Reason: To ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development.

C 7. No site works or clearance shall be commenced until protective fences which conform with British Standard 5837:2012 (or any British Standard revoking and re-enacting British Standard 5837:2012 with or without modification) have been erected around any existing trees as shown in drawing 1006-006. Unless and until the development has been completed these fences shall not be removed and the protected areas are to be kept clear of any building, plant equipment, material, debris and trenching, with the existing ground levels maintained, and there shall be no entry to those areas except for approved arboricultural or landscape works.

Reason: To safeguard the areas to be landscaped and the existing trees and planting to be retained within the site.

N 1. Bats are listed on Schedule 5 of the Wildlife Act 1990. It is an offence to intentionally or recklessly kill, injure or take, or to damage or destroy, or obstruct access to, any structure or place bats use for shelter or protection, or to disturb bats while they occupy a structure or place which they use for that purpose.

Due to the potential for bats within the property to be demolished, the applicant is recommended to obtain an assessment for bats from a suitably qualified ecological consultancy prior to demolition to ensure that an offence is not committed under the Wildlife Act 1990.

Reason for approval: It is considered the proposal would be acceptable having not adverse impacts upon public or private amenities, complying with Environment Policy 1, HP12 & HP14 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None 94

______

Planning Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS IT PROPOSES A REPLACEMENT DWELLING THAT HAS A GREATER THAN 50% INCREASE IN FLOOR AREA OVER THE DWELLING TO BE REPLACED AND IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of Ellan Ash, Clenagh Road, Sandygate located on the eastern side of the Clenagh Road, and south of the Sandygate crossroads. The site is access via an existing pedestrian entrance off the Clenagh Road. There is not vehicular access/off road parking spaces associated with this dwelling. There is a field gate to the southern boundary albeit this leads to overgrown gravelled areas at the rear of the site and the fields to the rear which are also within the applicant's ownership (8.5acres). The area to the rear of the question appears in the past to have been used in parts for tipping of waste (not current applicants who have only recently purchased the site) and the land does not appear to have been used for agricultural purposes for a number of years. There is also a single storey outbuilding along the roadside boundary, two cabins/trailers and the area to the rear of the dwellings has areas of gravels hard standing, which in places have overgrown in the last few years.

1.2 Within the site there is the single storey dwelling which has traditional elements. It is currently unoccupied, but is habitable, albeit a poor state of repair and would need substantial renovation to be lived in to a reasonable standard. It has not lost its habitable status.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application seeks approval of erection of a replacement detached dwelling, detached garage and wood store with associated landscaping, relocation of vehicular access and extension of residential curtilage to rear of dwelling.

2.2 The proposed replacement dwelling is in two clear elements, the first is a two storey traditional Manx farmhouse/cottage dwelling, albeit with three upper windows (flush dormers) over a central doorway which is flanked by single windows either side at ground floor level. The basic footprint of the proposed dwelling measures 9.9 metres in width, a depth of 6 m and an eaves height of 4.5m metres and a ridge height of 7 m. The proposed dwelling would be finished in painted render, a grey nature slate roof and dark grey aluminium windows.

2.3 The second aspect is a single storey building which would be attached to the north- eastern corner of the new main dwellinghouse and runs in a easterly direction. This building is made up of two elements a flat roofed linked which leads to the larger lean-to roof building. This building is finished in a dark green cladding and has the finishes and form in the main to appear as a more modern agricultural barn, albeit on a smaller scale. The floor area of this proposed property is 174sqm.

2.3 For information the previous refused scheme proposed; a basic footprint of the proposed dwelling measures 10 metres in width, a depth of 6.7m and a eaves height of 5m metres and a ridge height of 8.2 m. The proposed dwelling would be finished in painted render, a grey nature slate roof and dark grey aluminium windows. The second aspect is a single storey building which would be attached to the north-eastern corner of the new main dwellinghouse and runs in a easterly direction. This building is made up of two elements a flat roofed linked which leads to the larger pitched roof building. This building is finished in a dark green cladding and has the finishes and form in the main to appear as a more modern agricultural barn, albeit on a smaller scale. The floor area of this proposed property was 259sqm. 95

2.4 A detached garage (similar finish and form to the single storey pitched roof extension mentioned above is located to the northern boundary of the site, opposite the main dwelling house with a new courtyard parking/turning area in between. This area is accessed via a new vehicular entrance which is off the Clenagh Road.

2.5 The existing front boundary in the main (hedgerow) is to be removed, to enable the required visibility splays. However, a brand new hedgerow is proposed along the entire roadside boundary of the site which also includes seven new trees. Two small trees are lost be the creation of the new access.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 Erection of a replacement detached dwelling, detached garage and wood store with associated landscaping, relocation of vehicular access and extension of residential curtilage to rear of dwelling - 20/00122/B - REFUSED (by the Planning Committee) on the following grounds: " R 1. The proposed dwelling by virtue of its height, size, position and design would not comply with the provisions of Housing Policy 14 and Environment Policy 1 and would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the countryside." 3.2 Construction of front porch - 87/00451/B - APPROVED

4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 The application site is within an area recognised as being an area which is not designated for development under the IOM Development Plan Order 1982. The site is not within a Conservation Area.

4.2 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of the planning application.

4.3 Strategic Policy 1 states: "Development should make the best use of resources by: (a) optimising the use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and under- used land and buildings, and re-using scarce indigenous building materials; (b) ensuring efficient use of sites, taking into account the needs for access, landscaping, open space(1) and amenity standards; and (c) being located so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services."

4.4 Environment Policy 1 states: "The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. For the purposes of this policy, the countryside comprises all land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 at A.3.6 or which is not designated for future development on an Area Plan. Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative."

4.5 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: (a) essential housing for agricultural workers who have to live close to their place of work; (Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10); (b) conversion of redundant rural buildings which are of architectural, historic, or social value and interest; (Housing Policy 11); (c) previously developed land which contains a significant amount of building; where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environment; and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment; (d) the replacement of existing rural dwellings; (Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14); 96

(e) location-dependent development in connection with the working of minerals or the provision of necessary services; (f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry; (g) development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative; and (h) buildings or works required for interpretation of the countryside, its wildlife or heritage."

4.6 Housing Policy 12 states: "The replacement of an existing dwelling in the countryside will generally be permitted unless: (a) the existing building has lost its residential use by abandonment; or (b) the existing dwelling is of architectural or historic interest and is capable of renovation. In assessing whether a property has lost its habitable status(1) by abandonment, regard will be had to the following criteria: (i) the structural condition of the building; (ii) the period of non-residential use(2) or non-use in excess of ten years; (iii) evidence of intervening use; and (iv) evidence of intention, or otherwise, to abandon."

4.7 Housing Policy 14 states: "Where a replacement dwelling is permitted, it must not be substantially different to the existing in terms of siting and size, unless changes of siting or size would result in an overall environmental improvement; the new building should therefore generally be sited on the "footprint" of the existing, and should have a floor area, which is not more than 50% greater than that of the original building (floor areas should be measured externally and should not include attic space or outbuildings). Generally, the design of the new building should be in accordance with Policies 2-7 of the present Planning Circular 3/91, (which will be revised and issued as a Planning Policy Statement). Exceptionally, permission may be granted for buildings of innovative, modern design where this is of high quality, and would not result in adverse visual impact; designs should incorporate the re-use of such stone and slate as are still in place on the site, and in general, new fabric should be finished to match the materials of the original building.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 The Department of Infrastructure Highways Services initially made the following comments (23.12.2020): "Reference made to refused planning application 20/00122/B.

The geometric layout of the access is acceptable, being recessed with corner radii and of sufficient width at 3m to allow for vehicle use given the intended provision of a separate path to be provided. The area from the carriageway edge for the vehicle access is to be formed in a consolidated and bound material of 6m in length, exceeding the minimum length of 5m. The gates are suitably positioned, again exceeding the minimum for a dwelling of 5m and should open inwards. This allows a driver of a vehicle to pull off the road and prevents debris tracking onto the highway.

The visibility splay extents at the proposed new dwelling access by all variants shown are below requirements of 160m in each direction for a 60mph speed limit. These have been accepted, previously; the extents being maximised and recognised as betterment over the existing position and a setback of 2.5m being used instead of 2.4m.

The proposal includes the existing access becoming a field access. Previously, under 20/00122/B, Highway Services requested that this access be stopped up and the boundary and any highway features reinstated given the safety concerns and the rationale for creating a new access. To ensure its continued use as an access, further details are necessary of its layout including visibility splays due to fronting onto a primary route, the A19. It would require compliance with the: o Design Manual for Roads and Bridges standard, CD123 o Manual for Manx Roads o Making a Planning Application - A Guide for Applicants: Supplementary Guidance on Highway issues.

The field access would require to be recessed and splayed, with a width of 3.5m, 2 x 2m entry splay, inward opening gates set back a minimum of 6m from the carriageway edge and formed in a consolidated and bound material for a minimum length of 6m. For the exit visibility splay, the 'x' distance setback would be 2.4m with extents in each direction of 160m unless otherwise justified.

The existing field access at north appears to be unchanged. This requires clarification. If, it is to be altered, then further details are necessary for its entrance as well. Again, this would need to be DMRB standard CD123.

No gravel should be installed between the highway and the property and differing surface treatment is necessary north from the field gate to beyond the pedestrian gate. All the works in the highway will require a separate technical approval under a S109 (A) highway agreement.

As drawn, the internal layout is acceptable from the highway viewpoint. The proposed new access leads to a substantial area of hardstanding within a courtyard arrangement to allow parking for several vehicles above the minimum requirement in the Strategic Plan of two car parking spaces. The triple garage is of an acceptable size to count as parking and accommodate the storage of bicycles and other items. It is to include electric vehicle charging points. Surface water should drain into the site.

The proposed new access and internal pedestrian and vehicle area s for the dwelling do not raise significant highway safety or network efficiency issues. Concerns do arise over the use of the existing access as field entrance and use of gravel along part of the frontage. Further clarification is necessary over any changes to the field access at north. Accordingly, additional information is necessary to full satisfy highway requirements of the entire proposal.

Recommendation: Additional information"

5.1.1 Following these comments the applicants provided the following comments (13.01.2021): "I write in response to your email of 13-01-21 and to Highways response to the application dated 23-12-20.

The response from Highways refers to the existing access and suggests either its removal or its improvement. We in the application illustrate the gate as remaining and annotated as being with irregular use.

The current position in respect of this gate and it use remains unchanged from that in the previous application, 20/00122/B, in that: o There is a caveat registered on the applicant's land by a neighbour claiming a right of way through that gate and along the southern boundary to fields somewhere east of the site. o No right of way has been proven by the neighbour. 98 o A request to remove the caveat has not been accepted. o This entrance was gated and locked by the applicant on the 1st September 2017. The gate has not been opened in the intervening time.

Whilst the applicant would very much like to remove the entrance they feel unable to at this point in time.

As with the previous application, 20/00122/B, we confirm that the entrance will not be used in connection with the new dwelling, but the applicant feels it will have to remain as it stands while it is disputed. In the plans we purposely separated the dwelling from that entrance in case any right of way was ever upheld.

Should a claim for a right of way fall away, the access would be removed and access to the remaining the land in the ownership of the applicant would be via the existing field access further north towards Sandygate.

In this application we would ask that the Highways Dept. accept the assurances of the applicant that every effort will be made to restrict the use of this access and that the access will not at any point be used for purposes in connection with Ellan Ash or its connected land.

We trust the above clarifies the current position and sufficient to allow the application to progress."

5.1.2 Following, these comments Highway Services made the following comments (14.01.2021): "The agent’s comments on behalf of the Applicants are understood and the additional information clarifies the position on the field accesses. On the proviso that the field accesses remain as existing until resolution of any claims, Highway Services do not oppose the proposed development subject to conditions to cover the access, internal pedestrian and vehicle elements, including parking and advisory for a s109(A) Highway Agreement."

5.2 The Ecosystem Policy Officer (DEFA) makes the following comments (07.01.2021); "I refer to my comments made on the previous application for this site - PA 20/00122/B. Once again I welcome the considerations on site for biodiversity but, though not a matter for this planning application, we do have concerns about potential impacts on bats from the demolition of the existing property.

If approved, the Ecosystem Policy Team request the following note on the approval notice:

Bats are listed on Schedule 5 of the Wildlife Act 1990. It is an offence to intentionally or recklessly kill, injure or take, or to damage or destroy, or obstruct access to, any structure or place bats use for shelter or protection, or to disturb bats while they occupy a structure or place which they use for that purpose. Due to the potential for bats within the property to be demolished, the applicant is recommended to obtain an assessment for bats from a suitably qualified ecological consultancy prior to demolition to ensure that an offence is not committed under the Wildlife Act 1990."

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 Under the provisions of General Policy 3 and Housing Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 the erection of a replacement dwelling on a one for one basis is an accepted exception to the general presumption against development within the countryside. Whilst the existing dwelling is in poor condition it is considered the dwelling has been occupied in the last 10 years as a dwelling and therefore still retains its full habitable status and therefore also accords with Housing Policy 12. The second aspect of HP 12 indicates that; "the existing dwelling is of architectural or historic interest and is capable of renovation". The 99 existing dwelling has lost a number of traditional features/poor alterations; these include enlarged windows from vertical proportion to square portions, installation of an uPVC porch to front elevation, rear extension again with inappropriate window proportions. The applicants comment that the dwelling now appears more like a bungalow rather than a cottage in appearance. They also comment that the cost of renovating and modernising of the existing dwelling relative to its scale would be uneconomically viable. While no figures have been included to support this argument and it could be argued that the property is capable of renovation; albeit the question needs to be add whether it is of an "architectural or historic interest" also. It is noted visiting the site that significant works/costs would likely be required to make the dwelling to a reasonable standard and to make the property more energy efficient which would also require additional cost, albeit not to as level a new build could achieve. If it were, it is not considered the dwelling is of a significant "architectural or historic interest", it is a common style; albeit there are better examples of Manx cottages throughout the IOM (which should be retained), but not of a quality which is considered essential to retain. Accordingly, one must ask whether the retention is key and when considering the proposal against HP12, it is perhaps important to consider if there are any benefits of the new dwelling, which would perhaps overcome any potential concerns of HP12. In terms of the principle the Department is comfortable that there is no real architectural or historic interest. Whether the dwelling could be converted is perhaps open for interpretation. It is also of significant material consideration that the previous application was not refused on the grounds of the removal of this existing property.

6.2 The second Policy to consider is Housing Policy 14 which raises a number of issues that need to be taken into account. In terms of siting approximately ¼ of the new dwelling would sit on the existing footprint, the rest of the new footprint extending further inwards of the site away from the Clenagh Road. The dwelling would also be re-orientated 90 degrees, so that the western gable end elevation of the two storey aspect of the dwelling would face towards the road. This elevation (closets aspect of new dwelling to road) would be 8m away from the road (1m more than the previous application), compared to the existing dwelling which closets aspect is 1.5m to the road. In terms of the new siting, the principle does not raise any concern.

6.3 The application does propose to increase the residential curtilage of the site; albeit there could be argument that it does not. In 1987 the planning application showed the curtilage of the site having a depth of 18m (575sqm in area) measured back form road; however, in recent times (visiting site and aerial photograph) it does appear this has been extended, with the installation of hardstanding and fencing. Currently, fencing is partially in place along the rear boundary of the new proposed curtilage which extends 32m back from the road (1200sqm) and this area clears appears to have been used as part of the curtilage of the use of the dwelling. It is noted on Google Street View (taken in 2010) that the previous owner appeared to be operated a seafood business form the site which included a number of crab/lobster baskets / trailers/cabins within the rear section of the site, which is proposed to be the new curtilage. There is also hardstanding through this area. Clearly therefore the rear aspect has not been used for agricultural purposes but rather as uses associated with the dwelling/business run from dwelling. There is also evidence of tipping in this area and the field beyond. The applicants where advised during pre-application stage that in the interest of clarity they should seek to extend the residential curtilage; albeit there are argument that the use of this section of the land may have become lawful for other uses. Again, the extension of the curtilage was not given as a refusal of the previous application.

6.4 In terms of both the siting and the extension of the curtilage, the main issue is whether by undertaking such development whether this has an adverse visual impact upon the countryside. This will be considered latter in this report.

6.5 In relation to the size of the new dwelling, this would be much greater than the existing. The proposed dwelling is greater than the 50% referred to within the policy. This 100 proposal would equate to a 132% increase (proposed floor area 174sqm & existing floor area 75sqm). The previous application equates to a 245% increase (proposed floor area 254sqm). However, this is not automatic reason for refusal of the planning application as Housing Policy 14 goes onto to state that consideration may be given to larger dwellings where this involves the replacement of an existing dwelling of poor form with one of more traditional character, or where, by its design or siting, there would be less visual impact. In this instance the existing dwelling is in very poor condition; however, this is not a reason for it to be considered "poor form". The property as outlined previously in this report, has been unsympathetically altered and/or extended over time, and this certainly reduces its original character. It does however retain it original form i.e. pitched roof with gable end chimneys at either end, so when passing the site it does have its original traditional form; however, only on closer inspect does this reduce. It is considered the existing in some elements is not of poor form, while other aspects it is. However, what can be concluded is the new two storey dwelling, which has similarities to original single storey cottages on the Island which have been extended upwards in the past, would have a more traditional character. There is of course the smaller single storey element of the proposal which is a more innovative design, however, the main element of the dwelling is of a traditional element and the element most apparent form pubic views.

6.6 In terms of the visual impact and whether "by its design or siting, there would be less visual impact"; whilst the previous application it was difficult to argue it has "less visual impact" given the amount of development contained within the site and its full two storey height; it is considered this proposal with its smaller floor area, further setback position, reduced footprint and height clearly has a less visual impact over the previous application and arguable to what exists on site today, which is a property located directly along the highway and which main frontage (8.3m in width) facing directly onto the highway.

6.7 The potential visual impact of the works from some aspects are considered to be reduced, namely when travelling from the north or south along the Clenagh Road. The setting back of the dwelling into the site helps and with mature trees and mature roadside hedgerows to the northern and southern boundary of the sites would reduce the impact of the dwelling further. When passing the site, as mentioned previously it is considered the new scheme would have a reduced or at least overall similar impact to the existing property. For example the gable end of the property which faces the highway has a width of 6m, where has the front elevation of the existing property has a width of 8.3m. Therefore the built development facing the highway is smaller from this perspective. However, in terms of height the new proposal would be taller have a ridge height of 7m whilst the existing is approximately 5m in height. However, given the new dwelling is setback 8m from the highway, the perspective is likely that the height difference is not observed as much, compared to the existing property which is very close to the highway. Again, with the amount of roadside landscaping proposed (hedgerows and tree planting), in the near future this would help reduce the visual appearance of the dwelling, garaging and courtyard area. Again it should be noted that the roadside boundaries to the north and south of the site which are made up with substantial hedgerows/trees/bushes would potential hid the majority of dwelling from pubic views.

6.8 Previously, it was commented that having a gable end facing the road would have a "very bland and unattractive feature"; this is not agreed. The neighbouring property to the south of this site has the same design and this does not have an unacceptable feature along this section of the street scene. In fact this arrangement is a very common throughout the IOM and therefore the proposed orientation with gable facing the road does not raise a concern.

6.9 Arguably, it is considered that the proposal could be consider to comply with HP14, whereas previously (the office who had recommended an approval to the previously refused scheme) it was accepted the proposal may not comply with certain elements of HP14, namely 101 having less visual impact given its height and size. It is consider the main element of the dwelling would be of a more traditional character than the existing and comply with HP14. The single storey element of the new dwelling has a more contemporary style; albeit the use of green corrugated cladding (found on agricultural barns) adds significant interest and arguable is better than just a normal painted render extension, which arguably would be more "traditional". However, HP 14 does allow buildings of "innovative, modern design where this is of high quality, and would not result in adverse visual impact; designs". Arguable this proposal falls within "traditional and innovative, modern design" in some elements and traditional in others. It is considered this approach should be supported and encouraged. Furthermore, if the existing property where to be extended in should a way the Department would likely support this approach. It is therefore reason to consider the proposal which includes a very traditional dwelling with a modern element (will appear as an extension to the property in the future) is acceptable.

6.10 However, it is important to consider the site and partially the character and size of dwellings in the area, especially along Clenagh Road. There are a number of properties in the area and this dwelling would be not appear out of place with these along Clenagh Road, especially given the size of the site and context which it sits. The main element viewable from pubic views (when passing site) would be the upper section roof element of the traditional dwelling, which would fit well with the majority of properties which have a similar appearance.

6.11 An additional consideration is the ecology and environmental benefits of the new scheme. Recently the Department refused (contrary to EP1, GP3 & HP14) an application (19/00182/B) for a replacement dwelling due to the siting of the new dwelling not being on the original footprint and also given a new and much larger residential curtilage was also being proposed. This was appealed by the applicant's where the Planning Inspector recommends an approval, which was subsequently agreed by the Minister. In reserving the decision the Inspector stated: "28. With regard to whether or not the proposal constitutes an overall environmental improvement, the PA takes the view that the improvements simply relate to a better house on a larger site and that these are for the convenience of the appellant and her family. Again, at first sight, that stance is understandable considering the significant difference in size of the two sites. The PA considers, that the differences of siting and size do not result in an overall environmental improvement and, therefore that the proposal is contrary to policy HP14.

29. On behalf of the appellant it is argued that there would be significant overall environmental improvements. These range from the reduced carbon footprint of the new dwelling against that of the cottage, through to landscaping the site; the formation of the new Sod bank; the creation of a natural habitat corridor between the 'dubs'; returning the existing cottage land to agricultural use; the introduction of a bio-disk treatment plant; the natural management of the two 'dubs'; the thinning out of dense undergrowth and the transformation of the existing garden into a wildlife site."

6.12 The Inspector (and Minister) accepted this line of argument and that "overall environmental improvements" did not just related to the visual impact upon the environment which the Department had initial concerns, but also other environmental implications i.e. wildlife/habitats/carbon footprint/energy efficiency etc.

6.13 In this case the applicants comments that they are proposing solar power heating and energy with the installation of solar panels on the garage roof; thermal insulation will greatly exceed current Building Regulations standards; management of existing and proposed trees; planting of wildflower gardens; Swift nesting boxes installed; management of existing agricultural land to rear of site to become a valuable wildlife habitat (they have been in discussion already with Manx Wildlife Trust to advise); replacement of existing septic tank with new sewerage system to reduce impacts on water course (Lhen Trench is adjacent to 102 site and near existing tank); and solar powered vehicle charging points will be installed within garage. These works have been full supported by the Ecosystem Policy Officer (DEFA - see comments section). The applicant's ambitions are to ensure this proposal will be carbon neutral and will enhance the environment and be of benefits to wildlife.

6.14 With regard to comments made from Highway Services, it is noted the existing entrance is proposed to be retained. This access does not serve the dwelling but rather the fields to the rear. It is also proposed to erect fence along the southern part of the site which runs along the existing lane which links the existing field gate access to the fields to the arear. Accordingly, this field's gate access would not be used by the occupants of the new dwelling and it is therefore not required to be blocked up. Discussions with the applicants they have stated:

"The entrance will not be used in connection with the new dwelling, but it will have to remain a right of way to the fields while it’s disputed. In the plans we purposely separated the dwelling from that entrance in case a right of way was ever upheld.".

Also

"Should the claim for right of way not be upheld / fail, then access to the remaining the land in the ownership of the applicant would be via the existing field access further north towards Sandygate."

6.14 However, given this existing field access would not serve the new dwelling (doesn't appear to be used for existing dwelling either as evidence on Google Street View that parking was half on verge and half on the road to front of site) it is not consider it blocking up is required in this case.

6.15 The submission includes a tree protection plan which seeks to protect the boundary trees to the north and southern boundaries of the site. The proposal does include the removal of four trees (two adjacent to existing dwelling and two fronting the site); however these are not mature and not of any particular quality. The Forestry Division where consulted with this application (and previous application) but have made no comments in either application. It is therefore presumed they have no objection. The loss in terms of the street scene/ecology will have little to no impact. The proposal does include to plant additional trees within the site a landscaping condition is attached.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 In conclusion, due to the size increase of the proposed dwelling, it cannot be ignored that the proposal is an increase in size over that of the existing, However, unlike the previous application for the reasons outlined in this report it is considered the proposal could be considered will all elements of HP14. Further, for the reasons indicated within paragraphs 6.5 to 6.10 of this report, it is considered the proposal would not harm the character or appearance of the site or landscape of the area. This is important as the requirements of Environment Policy 1 indicate that the countryside should be protect for its own sake and that development that would harm the character and quality of the landscape should not be allowed. From these policies Housing Policy 14 was introduced to help control the redevelopment of existing sites in the countryside. The pre-amble of HP14 indicates that; "It is important that replacement dwellings should relate closely to the buildings they replace in terms of siting and size, that the resulting visual impact is appropriate for the countryside…". Again it is considered the resulting development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape which is arguable the most important consideration. It is considered the resulting development would result in a well-designed and high quality development which should be supported and encouraged, especially as the visual impacts are not considered significant.

103

7.2 There are also clear ecology and environmental benefits and with the proposal, given the applicants are proposing to undertaken a number of environmental improvements within the site (see par 6.12) which would fully comply with EP1.

7.3 For the reason indicated within this report, it is considered the proposal would be acceptable, complying with Environment Policy 1, HP12 & HP14 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. It is recommended that the application be approved.

104

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.16 Proposal : Alteration and erection of two storey extension and erection of detached garage with ancillary living accommodation above. Site Address : Hillside Cottage Ballavale Road Santon Isle Of Man IM4 1EH Applicant : Mr Jason & Mrs Leona Price Application No. : 20/01473/B- click to view Principal Planner : Miss S E Corlett

RECOMMENDATION: To APPROVE the application ______

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. No approval is granted to the creation of the additional parking spaces shown on drawing JPL_01 or the alterations to the existing garage as shown in drawings JPL_04. The existing garage must remain as shown in the drawing JLP_02 with garage space on the ground floor behind the two garage doors and the remainder of the building to be used only as accommodation which is ancillary to that of the main house, Hillside.

Reason: to clarify the extent of the approval.

C 3. The garaging and accommodation proposed in the new building and shown in drawing JPL_03 may be used only for the proposed incidental to the enjoyment of the main house, Hillside, within the site defined in red on drawing JPL_01. No separate curtilage shall be formed and the residential annex shall at no time be used as an independent dwellinghouse without the express grant of planning approval from the Department.

Reason: The application has been assessed only in terms of this restricted use and to ensure that no new dwelling in the countryside is created which would be contrary to Strategic Policy 2, Spatial Policy 5 and Housing Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan 2016.

Reason for approval: It is considered that the alterations to the dwelling comply with Environment Policies 1 and 2 and Housing Policy 16. It is considered that the erection of the garage will accommodate living space which is limited in area and whose visual impact would be acceptable, thus according with Environment Policies 1 and 2.

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

105

None ______

Planning Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE AS IT COULD BE CONSIDERED A DEPARTURE FROM THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL

THE SITE 1.1 The site is the residential curtilage of an existing dwelling which sits on the western side of the B26 Ballavale Road which links the Old and New Castletown Roads (A25 and A5). The curtilage is a long rectangle which runs parallel with the highway and which accommodates a detached dwelling with a garage block which sits to the rear (north). Vehicular access sits between the two buildings.

1.2 The existing dwelling is not traditional, has a front door which sits on the southern elevation to the right of centre with two sets of windows to the right and one to the left over two floors. The rear elevation accommodates an asymmetric two storey extension and wrapped around this a window storey pitched roofed annex.

1.3 The existing garage has a more steeply sloping roof with two floors of accommodation. On the ground floor there are parking spaces with a kitchen and dining room alongside with a set of stairs and two bedrooms above. This is not what was approved (see Planning History below).

THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Originally proposed was the creation of two parking spaces (an area 6m by 6m) to the north of the existing garage block and the erection of a new garage between the two existing buildings and projecting slightly further west than does the existing dwelling but still within the existing curtilage. Also proposed was the raising of the height of the roadside wall but this was not included in the application drawings which were submitted to the Department. The applicant does not wish to pursue this in this current application.

2.2 Also proposed is an extension on the western side of the existing house and the removal of the garage doors on the existing garage and the conversion of the internal space into a lounge and the replacement of the garage doors with windows.

2.3 Following discussions with the applicant, and clarification of the "ancillary" nature of the proposals, the applicant has amended the proposal to remove the creation of the two new parking spaces and the replacement of the garage doors with windows, leaving the existing garage as it is.

2.4 The proposal is now, therefore:

The extension of the house and The erection of a new garage

Extension of the house 2.5 The extension will be on the western side of the existing house and will add 5.2m across the full depth of the house (11.4m). This is entirely at the rear and only partially visible from the Ballavale Road, although could just be visible above the roadside stone wall on the A5 from where the top part of the existing house and the top of the existing garage are visible. This extension will provide a family/dining room at ground floor level and two bedrooms above. The property will result in having a lounge, two family/dining rooms and a kitchen at ground floor level and five bedrooms above. The applicant has explained that they are a family of six along with future aspirations of accommodating elderly relatives and that all of 106 the buildings are on the same oil tank and rates although have a separate electricity meter that they pay. In their deeds they are prevented from selling the garage separately and it is not their intention to do so.

2.6 The design and finish of the extension are to match the main house to which they would be attached forming a second gable separated by a link and removing the view of the asymmetric current rear annex.

Proposed new garage 2.7 The new garage will sit between the existing house and the existing garage which is now not to be changed. This will accommodate a double garage space served by a double garage door with a pedestrian door alongside which leads to accommodation above which will be around 30 - 36 sq m of floorspace above 1.5m ceiling height. The Housing (Standards) Regulations 2017 advise that single occupancy permanent flats should be no smaller than 30 sq m and up to 25 sq m.

2.8 The building will have an asymmetric pitched roof with the lower part facing the road and with a central dormer. The accommodation shown is a lounge-kitchenette area with a bedroom and shower room. The building will be finished with natural slates and rendered walls to match the existing buildings on the site.

2.9 A new retaining wall will be required to the north of the new garage to accommodate the slope of the site.

PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Town and Country Planning (Development Plan) Order 1982 as not for a particular purpose and also within areas of Woodland and High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance. On the Area Plan for the East which has recently been approved, the site is also in an area not designated for a particular purpose and also within the Landscape Character Appraisal, as Incised Inland Slopes where the following policy is available:

Landscape Proposal 7 (Santon) In cases where new development is proposed, applications must demonstrate that it can be suitably integrated into the surrounding landscape setting through reasonable mitigation measures and considering siting, colours, materials, finishes and the general scale.

3.2 As such, there is a presumption against development here as set out in Environment Policies 1 and 2 which protect the countryside for its own sake and also which protects the landscape as the most important consideration. General Policy 3 sets out exceptions to the presumption against development in the countryside and whilst it does not include policies which allow extensions to existing residential properties (Housing Policies 15 and 16) these provisions do exist elsewhere in the Strategic Plan. There is nothing within the Plan which allows for the erection of garages although it is generally acknowledged that permission is not required for the erection of garages where they can be erected under the provisions of the Permitted Development Order. This only allows one garage or car port per property and generally requires that the garage is only a garage with limited opportunity for accommodation above. Both the existing garage and that proposed are larger than would be allowed were the other not to be in existence.

3.3 The Strategic Plan is clear at Strategic Policy 2, Spatial Policy 5 and Housing Policy 4 that new housing in the countryside is discouraged as it should be within existing settlements.

3.4 General Policy 2 sets out general standards for development to achieve and could be considered relevant to this application despite the site not being designated for development and the existing and proposed may not be considered in accordance with the development 107 plan: "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:

(b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; (j) can be provided with all necessary services; (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."

3.5 The Department has recently published the Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) which provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property.

3.6 Ancillary accommodation is not the subject of any particular policies within the Strategic Plan. Planning guidance on such development can be found elsewhere. This is all on the following basis:

First, a severability test, and second, an environmental impact test. Applying the first test, one would ask whether the alleged ancillary use could practically and viably operate on its own were the primary use of the premises to cease. If it could, then the use is very unlikely to be ancillary as there is clearly no linkage or dependency. The second test would look to any outward effects of the use, in terms of the appearance of the premises, the amenity of the surrounding area or neighborhood traffic conditions. If it could be shown that there would be a significantly greater impact following from the introduction of the alleged ancillary activity than one could reasonably expect from the existing use, then it is unlikely that the use could be so described.

In the UK there was the following example: The proposals concerned the conversion of an existing domestic garage and rear storage area to residential use. The property was located at the end of a long drive, which also served the main dwellinghouse and it was proposed to convert the garage into two bedrooms, lounge, bathroom and kitchen/dining room. The appellants claimed that the building would be occupied by close family or as holiday accommodation. The inspector in noting that the garage was located within 1.5m of the dwellinghouse, held that it would be difficult for the council to ensure that the occupation of the unit generated the necessary degree of dependency upon the host dwelling so as to render its use ancillary to the primary residence. Occupants would have a limited amount of amenity space within a rear courtyard and accordingly this would impinge upon the amenity of occupiers of the main dwelling. She considered that a condition would not enable the ancillary link to be maintained since it could be breached without the council knowing. Consequently she held that the conversion was unacceptable (Chichester 30/4/02 DCS No.050-329-284).

108

Ancillary in planning terms means that the said building is used by and for the people of the main property, in a secondary manner and the whole planning unit (including the additional building) remains as a single unit of accommodation. You cannot have an entirely independent property 'ancillary' to another (except rare occasions for staff).

What needs to be considered when determining this is HOW a building is being used. It boils down to whether something is a single household. A household contains either a single person, a family or people who live as a family. A good way to explain it is imagining a college house. If a group of you get together and rent a house, you divide up all the bills, watch telly together and have the occasional meal together, then you are living as a single household. If you rent a room from the landlord and pay your bills separately to him and watch television in your room, then you are not living as a single household (it is a matter of fact and degree).

Consequently, it is neither here nor there if someone owns the additional accommodation on the farm, in the garden and so on: what matters is whether they live separately (ie come and go, watch television, eat, have different visitors etc) . If they do, then it is a separate dwelling. This also applies to relatives - even if it is someone's granny, or son, if they live separately, then it is a separate household. If there is a kitchen and lounge accommodation included, then there is no need for the occupants to cook or spend time with anyone in any of the other adjacent dwellings and of course it is beyond planning control to ensure that someone spends a particular length of time in a particular place.

PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The existing garage was approved as a garage and stable with tack room and games room above (85/00980/B). The applicant has stated that the garage was as it is shown in the submitted existing drawings when they purchased the site two years ago and that the owners before that confirmed that it was also like that when they owned the property. They suggest that the internal fittings suggest that it has been like that for a considerable time - beyond the ten years in which enforcement action would be possible under the 1999 Town and Country Planning Act. No changes are now being proposed to this building.

4.2 The two storey extension at the rear of the property was added under 85/00980/B with the single storey wrap around added under 87/00014/B.

4.3 88/01788/B saw the addition of a boundary wall and 94/00780/B saw permission for a rear porch.

4.4 Whilst not within the application site, it is relevant that planning approval in principle was refused for the erection of 6 dwellings in the field to the north, for reasons relating to the land use designation and unsustainable location as well as the visual impact and lack of information to demonstrate a safe means of access is available as well as noting that the Area Plan for that area was at the time being progressed and debated and that was the appropriate means of finding out whether the land should be designated for development.

REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services do not oppose the application subject to conditions relating to the drawings submitted (06/01/21).

ASSESSMENT 6.1 The application now involves an extension to a non traditional dwelling and the erection of a detached garage which will sit between the existing house and the existing garage.

6.2 The alterations to the dwelling will not increase its impact and is well designed and finished. It will not have an adverse impact on the countryside and thus is considered to comply with Environment Policies 1 and 2 and Housing Policy 16. 109

6.3 The garage will be a new structure in the countryside which provides living accommodation. The amount of accommodation is limited, possibly to less than is accepted under the Housing (Standards) Regulations 2017 to permanently accommodate one person. This accommodation will also share the same access and the garaged spaces are also likely to be shared with the main house, particularly with the increased levels of ownership of electric vehicles which benefit from covered space for charging and electric and non electric bicycles - all of which support sustainable forms of transport, which also benefit from undercover and secure storage.

6.4 The visual impact of the new garage is limited by between two existing structures and within the residential curtilage although it will be seen from the highway. Its appearance is that of a garage with accommodation above and a condition could be applied to retain the ground floor garaging as parking for the site in general.

CONCLUSION 7.1 It is considered that the alterations to the dwelling comply with Environment Policies 1 and 2 and Housing Policy 16. It is considered that the erection of the garage will accommodate living space which is limited in area and whose visual impact would be acceptable, thus according with Environment Policies 1 and 2.

110

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.17 Proposal : Erection of a two storey extension to provide ancillary living accommodation Site Address : Minglestone Glen Roy Laxey Isle Of Man IM4 7QD

Applicant : Mr Darrill & Mrs Helen Pearson Application No. : 20/01478/B- click to view Principal Planner : Mr Chris Balmer

RECOMMENDATION: To APPROVE the application ______

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. No development shall commence until a schedule of materials and finishes and samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces, including roofs, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.

C 3. The ancillary accommodation within the ground floor and first floor of the two storey extension hereby approved shall only be used in association with the main dwelling house "Minglestone" and for purposes incidental to the use of main dwelling house "Minglestone" as a single dwelling. No separate curtilage shall be form and the residential annex shall at no time be used for commercial purposes or as an independent dwellinghouse.

Should the ancillary accommodation no longer be required the accommodation shall only be used as accommodation for the use of the main dwelling house, "Minglestone", as a single dwelling.

Reason: The dwelling is within a single residential plot within an area not designated for development and has only been considered acceptable for the reasons identified within the application. The application does not propose to create separate units of accommodation within the site and has been assessed only in terms of this restricted use and any other use may have an adverse effect on the character and amenity of the area and amenity for future occupiers contrary to relevant Polices in the Strategic Plan 2016.

C 4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or 111 without modification) no additional fences, or extensions, enlargement or other alterations of the final development hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, shall be carried out, without the prior written approval of the Department.

Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area and in the interests of the character and appearance of the development

C 5. No development shall take place until full details of soft landscaping works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department and these works shall be carried out as approved. Details of the soft landscaping works include details of new planting (tree planting) showing, type, size and position of each. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping must be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the completion of the development or the occupation of the shed, whichever is the sooner. Any trees or plants which die or become seriously damaged or diseased must be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: To ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development.

C 6. Within 3 months of the ancillary accommodation use ceasing the new entrance door way shall be replaced with a window as shown on plan P/703/22 'Removal of Grannex's Access' received on the 4th November 2020 and retained thereafter.

C 7. The development hereby approved shall be carried out only in accordance with the internal layout shown on plan P/703/20 (a) received on the 4th November 2020.

Reason for approval: Overall, whilst "ancillary accommodation" can cause concern that the accommodation now or in the future could be used independently and tantamount to the creation of new dwellings in the countryside. However, for the reasons indicated within this report and with appropriately worded conditions in place, it is considered the proposal would comply with the IOMSP; having no public or private impacts amenities nor having an significant adverse impact upon the character or quality of the countryside and therefore complying with Housing Policy 16 and Environment Policy 1 of the IOM Strategic Plan. Therefore the application is recommended for an approval. ______

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None ______

112

Planning Officer’s Report

THE APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of Minglestone, Glen Roy, Laxey which is a detached single storey modern bungalow. The site is located to the eastern side of the Baldhoon Road and west of Laxey Village. Within the curtilage of the site is also a single storey flat roofed detached garage block, which is positioned between the main dwelling and the Baldhoon Road.

1.2 The boundaries of the site and the roadside boundaries in the area are characterised by mature landscaping made up of a mixed of hedgerows and trees.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application seeks approval for the erection of a two storey extension to provide ancillary living accommodation. The works are to the side/rear of the existing dwelling. Two storey extension to the north eastern gable wall of the existing dwelling. This extension would have a width of 9.3 metres, a depth ranging from 13.7m and 18.4m metres and a ridge height ranging between 7.6m & 8.4m.

2.2 The proposals would include the rendering of the lower section of the extension (light grey in colour) and composite grey cladding (wood affect) to the upper section.

2.3 The approved extensions would accommodate two ancillary units (one at ground floor and one at first floor) of ancillary each with two bedrooms, bathroom and a lounge. There would be an entranceway (side of dwelling which would serve the accommodation. A loft can also be found in this entrance hallway. There are internal links over both floors form the main dwelling house to the two ancillary units.

2.4 The applicants have provided detailed information (recommended this should be read in full) to why the accommodation is needed. They outline that they purchased the property in 2013 to create a family home for them and their children (aged 15 & 12 now). They indicated that they are very close to their parents who currently reside in Glen Vine and Douglas. However, as they advance in age the applicants are hoping to erect a purpose built grannex that will provide them with a comfortable space to live. Unfortunately in 2020 the applicants 82 year old Mother (Mrs Pearson) suffered a catastrophic stroke that kept her in Nobles Hospital for over 12 weeks. The stroke has left the applicants Mother severely disabled and requires constant care which is largely provided by my 78 year old Father. Mr Pearson Mother has an active social life with her circle of retired/widowed friends but we are her only family on the Island (Moved to IOM 15 years ago). In 2017 unfortunately her husband passed away and she does not enjoy living on her own. The applicants were also very concerned about her during the COVID-19 lockdown as she felt isolated and her mood was very low and even though the applicants tried their best they could see her struggling with her mental health.

2.5 The applicants also highlight that Mrs Pearson is an only child and Mrs Pearson and Mr Pearson has one sibling who lives in Switzerland with her young family, so this put the applicants as 'sole carers' for our parents. When we came up with the suggestions of the idea of building a grannex for our parents, there was no hesitation, all three of them are very keen to make it work.

2.6 The applicants explain that the existing accommodation at the property does not offer disabled-friendly access facilities required by their parents, now and in the long term. The 113 proposed extension has been designed specifically to meet the practical needs of our parents, with close and immediate access to physical and emotional family support. Additionally, the design and configuration of the grannex will provide a desired level of privacy, calm and independence for all family members.

2.7 Since the applicant’s mother has her stroke, she sleeps in a hospital bed and requires other specialist equipment (hoist, Sara Steady walking device, Zimmer Frame, two wheel chairs and an electric scooter) to help her move round her home. All of these items are large and rather cumbersome, so we have created a spacious main bedroom to make it easier to support her mother and getting her in and out of bed. Specialist equipment is also needs din the bathroom which again takes up considerable amount of space, so a large wet room is the most sensible solution. Further a second bedroom is included as the applicants Mother goes to bed early, which givens her husband some downtime before retiring to a separate bedroom. The applicants indicate which this is not ideal, they expect it to be necessary for the foreseeable future.

2.8 The applicants indicate that they have no intention of repurposing the grannex space as separate accommodation, either on a long term rental or holiday accommodation let arrangement. They indicate their 15 year old son has Asperger's Syndrome (on the autism spectrum) and it is highly likely he would make use of the space further down the line. This would be a long term arrangement as he will probable struggle to live independently. As a later date, the applicants advise that the rest of the grannex space into general family accommodation. The applicants have also proposed to remove the doorway and replace it with a window when the external access (created by this new proposal) is no longer required. A separate drawing has been provided which shows this arrangement.

2.9 The applicants advise that the accommodation would be connected through to our home, on both levels, via a lobby area with a lift to ensure easy access throughout. The floor levels of the existing dwelling and the new would be the same. Further the main windows of the two units would be over the rear main garden and family leisure space and the access/parking would be shared on the existing driveway.

2.10 Finally, the application includes a detail Doctor letter (applicants Mother Doctor) which has considered the proposed scheme and the requirements of the applicant’s parents. This is incudes within the submission and should be read in full. In summary the Doctors notes the reasoning for the accommodation proposed and how this will support the applicants and their parents and therefore is fully supportive of the application and the need for the level of accommodation.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The previous planning application is considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application:

3.2 Alterations and extensions to dwelling to provide additional living accommodation - 16/00147/B - APPROVED

4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 The site is not designated for development under the Area Plan for the East. The site is not within a Conservation Area. The following planning policies are relevant in the determination of the application:-

4.3 Environment Policy 1 states: "The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. For the purposes of this policy, the countryside comprises all land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 at A.3.6 or which is not designated for future development on an Area Plan. Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms 114 which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative."

4.4 Housing Policy 16 states: "The extension of non-traditional dwellings or those of poor or inappropriate form will not generally be permitted where this would increase the impact of the building as viewed by the public".

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services make the following comments (received on 08.01.2021): "After reviewing this Application, Highway Services find it to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network efficiency and /or parking. The Applicant to note the Public Right of Way should not be obstructed during construction or at any other time. There may be need for a separate temporary closure and / or diversion order of the path on construction and the Applicant is advised to contact DOI customer services for further information."

5.2 Garaff Commissioners have no objection (received on 13.01.2021)

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The two main considerations are the principle of the proposed ancillary accommodation and the potential visual impact of the development upon the countryside.

Principle of the proposed ancillary accommodation 6.2 The proposal would result in a two, two bedroom units with their own bathrooms and lounges each measuring approximately 113sqm internally. Concerns of such accommodation can cause concern that the unit could potentially be used as a self-contained unit, totally independent from the main house for any provisions and could not be considered to be ancillary accommodation as proposed. If a building, or part of a building, contains sufficient facilities to be used in a self-contained manner then they are generally considered to be a separate planning unit, whether or not they are occupied by a relative of occupants of the primary property, or used by guests.

6.3 There is some case law that has accepted fully self-contained accommodation as being ancillary to the principal residence, i.e. when they have been occupied by a dependant relative or disabled child, or even a servant, and certainly who pays the bills is a factor. However, in most cases the test of whether it is a separate planning unit rests upon its severability. i.e. if the alleged ancillary use could practically and viably operate on its own were the primary use of the premises cease or cease to be in the ownership of the same person.

6.4 In this case there is substantial comfort that the two ancillary units would be used in associated with the main dwelling house (Minglestone), which include the ancillary units would utilise the same access/driveway and parking area as the main dwelling house and it proximity to the main dwelling house adjacent to gardens would potentially lead to conflicts if occupied by separate parties/families. Further, the design of the main windows (outlook/views) of the new ancillary units have directly and are in close proximity to the main garden area of the main dwellinghouse. Due to this it is much less likely that the occupiers of the main dwellinghouse would want non-family members living in these units, as the occupiers of all units and main dwelling house would have little privacy. The internal access arrangement over both levels also given more comfort and as the accommodation could easily be incorporated into the main dwellinghouse in the future with little or no alterations. Further the internal layout and use can be conditioned to again given additional comfort to the Department. The applicants have clear indicated what they propose to utilise the ancillary units (see section 2.0 of this report) for, both now and in the future and it would seem a reasonable request, and is perhaps a type of application which will become more common in the future, given the Island has an increasingly older population, cost of care 115 home care, capacity of care homes and families wishing to live under one house. Accordingly, with appropriate conditions in place it is considered the proposal from this respect is acceptable.

Potential visual impact of the development upon the countryside 6.5 It is considered that the existing dwelling is not traditional and as such, the fundamental issue to address, given the location and age of the dwelling, is whether the proposed extension would increase the impact of the dwelling as viewed from the public highway.

6.6 In terms of siting, the extension to the side/rear elevation, would not be readily apparent from public views given the works are away from the public highway (between 35m and 50m away) and given the mature landscaping along the boundaries of the site but also in the surrounding fields and road side boundaries. The applicants are also proposing to reinforce the existing boundaries with native hedgerow planting along the northern boundary of the site which will further mitigate any potential views.

6.7 In terms of design and finish the extension is in keeping with the existing properties. The use of grey coloured render and cladding will also potentially help reduce the starkness of built development (i.e. compared to painted white render) having a similar impact to Manx stone finished properties. Accordingly, the extension is considered appropriate.

6.8 Overall, whilst the proposal would increase the mass of the dwelling, on balance, it is not considered the works would significantly increase the impact of the building as viewed by the public, to warrant a refusal. As such, it is considered the proposal complies with the provisions of Housing Policy 16 and Environment Policy 1 and is therefore acceptable.

7.0 RECOMMENDATION 7.1 Overall, whilst "ancillary accommodation" can cause concern that the accommodation now or in the future could be used independently and tantamount to the creation of new dwellings in the countryside. However, for the reasons indicated within this report and with appropriately worded conditions in place, it is considered the proposal would comply with the IOMSP; having no public or private impacts amenities nor having an significant adverse impact upon the character or quality of the countryside and therefore complying with Housing Policy 16 and Environment Policy 1 of the IOM Strategic Plan. Therefore the application is recommended for an approval.

8.2 The decision maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and

116 o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status

117

PLANNING AUTHORITY AGENDA FOR 4th February 2021

Item 5.18 Proposal : Installation of air source heat pump Site Address : 3 Spring Gardens Douglas Isle Of Man IM1 3JN Applicant : Manx Utilities Authority Application No. : 20/01254/B- click to view Planning Officer : Mr Peiran Shen

RECOMMENDATION: To APPROVE the application ______

Recommended Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes (if any) attached to the conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. The only model of the Air Source Heat Pump can be installed is the Ecodan Monobloc Standalone PUHZ-W112VAA[-BS].

Reason: To ensure the development is implemented according to the plan submitted and in the interest of protecting amenities of neighbouring property.

C 3. The Air Source Heat Pump must be installed according to the plans and supporting information and must be maintained as such thereafter.

Reason: To ensure the development is implemented according to the plan submitted and in the interest of protecting amenities of neighbouring property.

Reason for approval: This application is considered to comply with General Policy 2, Environment Policy 23 and Energy Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan. ______

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None ______

Planning Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION HAS BEEN REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE BECAUSE THE APPLICANT IS AN EMPLOYEE OF PLANNING AND BUILDING CONTROL DIRECTIVE, DEFA

1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 3 Spring Gardens, Douglas, a three- storey mid-terrace dwelling located on the east of Spring Gardens. 118

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The current planning application seeks approval for the installation of an air source heat pump (ASHP) to generate renewable heating for the building. The ASHP would be located near the southeast corner of the site.

2.2 The sound power level of the air source heat pump provided by the product specifications submitted is 60dB.

2.4 The noise assessment position is related to the first-floor window on the rear elevation of 3 Falcon Street. The measured distance from the heat pump to the assessment position is 9m.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 There is no previous application considered materially relevant to this application.

4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is within an area designated as Predominantly Residential in the Area Plan for the East.

4.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains a few policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of the planning application:

4.3 The Strategic Objectives of the Strategic Plan provides a framework for the detailed policies and it sets the following objectives: "3.2 Resources (d) to support energy generation from renewable resources. (e) to embrace the principles of Sustainable Development 3.3 Environment (g) to minimize environmental pollution to air, water and land"

4.4 Strategic Policy 5 states: "New development, including individual buildings, should be designed so as to make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island."

4.5 General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan states: "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development: (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."

4.8 Environment Policy 23 states: "When considering alterations and improvements to existing facilities, the Department will require that consideration be given to the potential adverse impact of the proposed changes to existing neighbours."

4.9 The Strategic Plan also provides guidance on the installation of renewable energy apparatus (12.2.8) which states: "The Department is fully supportive of the need to secure greater energy efficiency in new and existing development ……At the same time, the Department recognises that renewable energy sources can have adverse environmental impacts. ……There may also be other 119 impacts such as noise…… The Department will assess any proposals … by weighing the benefits of using such renewable energy sources against the environmental impact arising in any particular site."

4.10 Accordingly it is required to assess Energy Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, which states: "Development involving alternative sources of energy supply, including wind, water and tide power, and the use of solar panels, will be judged against the environmental objectives and policies set out in this Plan."

5.0 REPRESENTATION 5.1 Douglas Borough Council has no objections on this application (17/11/2020).

5.2 DoI Highway Services states there is no highway interest in this application (20/11/2020).

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The key issue relates to the potential impact (noise) on neighbouring amenities by the development and the visual impacts upon the character of the area.

6.2 The proposed ASHP is promoting the reduce consumption of fossil fuels and therefore positively contribution to Strategic Policy 5 and should be encouraged. The ASHP generally has higher energy efficiency than typical modern boilers and therefore also fits in GP2 (n).

6.3 The installation of Air Source Heat Pump has been classified as a Permitted Development when it complies with certain conditions within the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development and Change of Use)(Amendment) Order 2020. This proposal does not comply with condition (b), which requires the ASHP to be at least 1m away from the site boundary. For this reason, the proposal is being assessed under this application.

6.3 According to EP 23, the addition of noise is a material consideration. The units would be located to the rear of the site and would be approx. 0.5m away from the closest neighbouring boundary. Accordingly, the proposal may have some impact on neighbouring property.

6.4 In terms of noise impact, the assessment is conducted under MCS 020 Planning Standards for permitted development installations of wind turbines and air source heat pumps on domestic premises. This standard has been approved by the Steering Group of the Microgeneration Certification Scheme. It was prepared by MCS, Defra (UK), DECC (UK) and DCLG(UK). It is a compulsory standard for ASHP to be Permitted Development in the UK. The standard set a 42dB or under at the assessment position as an acceptable level of noise. This is compared to a background noise level of 40dB.

6.5 Under this assessment, the noise level is considered to be 41dB, which is under the 42dB limit. Therefore, the noise impact is considered to be acceptable.

6.6 In relation to the potential visual impact upon the area, it is not visible to the public and therefore has no impact on the character of the area.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 The proposal is considered to comply with General Policy 2, Environment Policy 23 and Energy Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan. Therefore, it is recommended for an approval.

8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: 120

(a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land which the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

8.2 The decision-maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status.

121