Officer Report

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No.: 25/91157/B Applicant: Ms Jacalyn Riding Proposal: Replacement of existing outbuilding with new outbuilding Site Address: Dhowin Cottage Smeale Road Andreas Isle Of Man IM7 4JA Planning Officer: Paul Visigah Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 02.03.2026 Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to 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 outbuilding shall only be used in association with the main dwelling house Dhowin Cottage, Smeale Road, and for purposes incidental to the use of main dwelling house as a single dwelling, for no commercial purposes and only in accordance with the internal layout as shown on the submitted Drawing No.104 received 9 December 2025, and being retained thereafter.

Reason: To ensure proper control of the development and to reflect the information provided in the application, as the Department has assessed the impact of the proposal on the basis of the specific use and the documents submitted.

• C 3. All external facing materials shall remain as shown on the plans and specified within the list of external finishes on the submitted Drawing No.104 received 9 December 2025. No new types of materials shall be added to the external elevations of the development. Reason: in the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.

Overall, it is concluded that the proposal would comply with the relevant sections of General Policy 2, 3, Environment Policy 1 and Strategic Policies 4 and 5 of the Isle of Man strategic plan

1. The principle of the development is acceptable, and development would have no adverse impact on the visual amenities of the site or surrounding area, or highway safety, and there would be no adverse impacts on neighbouring or public amenity.

Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to the documents and plans received 9 December 2025. Right to Appeal

It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal:

• DOI Highway Services - No objection, subject to condition which has been applied.

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE

1.1 The application site is the curtilage of Dhowin Cottage, Smeale Road, which sits on the eastern side of the B6 (Smeale Road), at the junction with a private lane that serves The Cronk, a large two-storey traditional Manx dwelling located to the eastern side of the Smeale Road, and set about 985m along the lane, and approximately 825m east of the application site.

1.2 The site in its current context houses the main dwelling, which is a two-storey traditional property finished in white render with a pitched slate roof, and an adjacent outbuilding which is also traditional in form. Both the cottage and the outbuilding directly abut the private lane, making them clearly visible from the approach. The cottage is set behind a small, landscaped garden enclosed by mature hedgerows and trees, which provide partial screening from Smeale Road but do not obscure views from the lane. Historic mapping indicates that both the dwelling and the outbuilding were present on the 1860s map, confirming their long-established presence within the rural landscape.

1.3 The outbuilding is positioned close to the lane and constructed from Manx stone with a white limewash finish and a corrugated metal roof. It is in poor structural condition, with substantial vertical and diagonal cracks and deteriorated pointing. The southern boundary is defined by hedgerows, with open agricultural land to the north and east. The openness of the junction and the absence of substantial screening mean the site forms a noticeable element within the rural roadside scene.

1.4 The surrounding area is strongly rural in character, comprising open fields and agricultural land defined by hedgerow boundaries and occasional mature trees. Built development is limited to sporadic traditional dwellings, generally clustered near road junctions and set back from the main road network. The landscape pattern is predominantly agricultural, with narrow lanes and hedgerow enclosures contributing to a sense of countryside seclusion. There are no urban features, and the overall setting is consistent with the rural character of the northern parts of the Island.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL

2.1 Planning approval is sought for replacement of existing outbuilding with new outbuilding.

2.2 The proposed works would include the demolishing the existing traditional outbuilding on site and erecting a new building within its footprint and of size form. The new building would measure 8.45m x 4.67m, which is the same footprint as the existing. The building would, however, be 3.9m tall (2.5m to the eaves), which is an increase in height over the existing which is 3.48m tall (2.1m to the eaves).

2.3 The replacement building would retain a traditional gable-ended form and occupy the same position as the existing structure. External finishes are proposed as sand/cement render painted white to match the existing barn, with a pitched roof finished in slate to match the existing dwelling. The roof incorporates new rooflights positioned similarly to the existing

• structure. Openings include full-height uPVC windows with frames finished in black, and thermally broken aluminium bi-fold doors on the west elevation, also finished in black.

2.4 Internally, the building would accommodate an open plan living/kitchen area, bedroom, and ensuite bathroom facilities.

2.5 No changes are proposed to the existing access arrangements from the private lane, and the development would continue to rely on the established curtilage for parking and servicing. Landscaping within the garden area would remain largely unchanged.

2.6 The scheme is similar to that refused under PA 25/90884/B, with the key change being the removal of the use as tourist accommodation. The proposed building would remain ancillary to the main dwelling, as is the case with the existing outbuilding.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY

3.1 Site Specific:

• 3.1.1 The application site is within an area recognised as land not zoned for development under the Isle of Man Development Plan Order 1982, and the site is not within a Conservation Area. There are no registered trees within the site, and it does not lie within or adjoin any designated tree protection area. The site does not lie within a flood prone area.

3.2 National: STRATEGIC PLAN (2016)

• 3.2.1 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:

• 1. General Policy 3 - Exceptions to development in the countryside.
• 2. General Policy 2 - Development Criteria, ensuring developments are appropriate for

their location, support sustainable economic and social outcomes, and do not harm the character of the area.

• 3. Environment Policy 1 - Protection of the countryside and inherent ecology.
• 4. Strategic Policy 2 - Priority for new development to identified towns and villages.
• 5. Strategic Policy 4 - development proposals must protect or enhance the nature

conservation and landscape quality of urban as well as rural areas.

• 6. Strategic Policy 5 - Design and visual impact.
• 7. Spatial Policy 5 - new development will be in defined settlements only or in the

countryside only in accordance with GP3.

• 8. Transport Policy 4 - Highway capacity and safety considerations.
• 9. Transport Policy 7 - Parking considerations/standards for development.

4.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

4.1 The Isle of Man's Biodiversity Strategy (2015 - 2025)

• 4.1.1 The Department's Biodiversity Strategy is capable of being a material consideration. It seeks to manage biodiversity changes to minimise loss of species and habitats, whilst seeking to maintain, restore and enhance native biodiversity, where necessary.

4.2 Residential Design Guide (2021)

• 4.2.1 This document 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 properties and sustainable methods of construction.

5.0 PLANNING HISTORY

5.1 The application site has been the subject of the following planning applications which are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of the current application:

• 1. PA 96/00014/B for Alterations and extensions to form additional living accommodation,

Dhowin Cottage, Smeale Road, Andreas. This was approved by the Planning Committee on 26.04.1996.

• 2. PA 98/00640/C for Change of use of dwelling to tourist accommodation, Thie Dhowin,

Smeale Road, Andreas. This was approved by the Planning Committee on 24.08.1998.

• 5.1.1 Both applications confirm that the dwelling and outbuilding are within the same curtilage, reinforcing their presence within the historic curtilage depicted on the 1860s map, although the site layout has changed slightly since that time.

5.2 The most recent application under PA 25/90884/B for Replacement of existing outbuilding with new outbuilding including additional use for tourist accommodation (Class 3.6) in considered to be specifically relevant. This application was refused for the following reasons:

• R1: The proposed tourist accommodation is located in an isolated countryside setting and does not comply with Strategic Policy 2 and Spatial Policy 5, which direct new development to defined settlements and restrict development in the countryside to exceptional circumstances. While the replacement of the outbuilding aligns with General Policy 3(c) as redevelopment of previously developed land, the introduction of tourist use does not meet any of the exceptions identified in General Policy 3 and is therefore contrary to the Strategic Plan's spatial strategy.

Although Business Policy 13 supports the use of private residential properties for tourist accommodation where amenity impacts are acceptable, this provision does not override the Strategic Plan's spatial strategy or the presumption against new development in the countryside. The proposal introduces a new detached building for tourist use rather than adapting the existing dwelling and therefore falls outside the scope and intent of BP13.

• R2: The proposal conflicts with Strategic Policy 8 and Business Policies 11-14, which collectively require rural tourism development to reuse existing built fabric of interest, support rural diversification, and comply fully with countryside protection policies. Business Policy 11 applies the same weight of countryside protection to tourist development as to other forms of development, while Business Policy 12 encourages conversion of redundant rural buildings rather than demolition and new build. Business Policy 13 permits the use of private residential properties for tourist accommodation only where amenity impacts are acceptable, but this does not extend to the creation of new detached buildings. Business Policy 14 confirms that rural tourism may be permitted only where it complies with all relevant policies and prioritizes farmhouse accommodation or barn conversions linked to rural activities. This proposal involves demolition and new build, provides no functional or economic link to rural land management, and relies on private car access, contrary to the sustainability objectives of the Strategic Plan. Accordingly, the scheme falls outside the scope and intent of Business Policies 11-14 and Strategic Policy 8.

• 5.2.1 Section 6.2 is particularly relevant, given the advice offered by the Registered Buildings Officer regarding the building. "6.2 The DEFA Registered Buildings Officer has made the following comments on the application (7 October 2025):

• 1. He notes that both the dwelling and the outbuilding appear on historic mapping from

the 1860s, confirming their long-established presence at this location.

• 2. The outbuilding is not a registered building and does not fall within a conservation area.
• 3. No objection is raised to the demolition and replacement of the outbuilding.
• 4. The replacement building should respect the traditional form and maintain compatibility

with the rural character of the setting."

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

6.1 DOI Highways find the proposal to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and/or parking providing the outbuilding remains ancillary to the existing dwelling on the site for highway safety and parking (24 January 2026).

6.2 Andreas Parish Commissioners have not made any comments on the application although they were consulted on 21.01.2026.

6.3 No comment has been received from neighbouring properties.

7.0 ASSESSMENT

7.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this application are: Spatial Policy 5, and Environment Policy 1);

• 1. The principle of the proposed development (General Policies 3 and 2, Strategic Policy 2,

• 2. Design, Landscape, and Heritage Considerations (Strategic Policy 5, Strategic Policy 4,

General Policy 2(b, c, e), Residential Design Guide 2021; and Planning Circular 3/91);

• 3. Highway safety and access (Transport Policy 4, Transport Policy 7, General Policy 2(f));

and

• 4. Residential Amenity and Neighbour Impact (General Policy 2(d), Residential Design

Guide 2021).

7.2 The Principle of the Proposed Development

• 7.2.1 The site lies within the established curtilage of Dhowin Cottage, as evidenced by historic mapping and previous planning approvals. The existing outbuilding is not registered, does not fall within a conservation area, and is of limited architectural or historic interest. Its poor structural condition means retention is not justified. The proposal occupies the same footprint, avoids encroachment into open countryside, and maintains the spatial relationship between built form and surrounding land. On this basis, the principle of replacement as an ancillary outbuilding is acceptable under General Policy 3(c), which permits redevelopment of previously developed land in the countryside where the continued use is redundant and where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or wider environment.

• 7.2.2 This conclusion is reached without prejudice to the detailed assessment of visual and landscape impacts, amenity impacts, highway considerations, and ecological impacts, the principle of development is acceptable in policy terms.

7.3 DESIGN, LANDSCAPE, AND HERITAGE CONSIDERATIONS

• 7.3.1 The Strategic Plan establishes clear expectations for rural design quality, and these are set out in Strategic Policy 4, 5, and General Policy 2. Strategic Policy 4 seeks to protect and enhance the landscape character of rural areas and the setting of heritage assets, while Strategic Policy 5 requires new development to make a positive contribution to the Island's environment through high-quality design. General Policy 2(b) and (c) reinforce these objectives by requiring proposals to respect siting, scale, form, and design and to avoid adverse effects on rural character. In addition, Planning Circular 3/91 and the Residential Design Guide (2021) provide detailed guidance on rural design principles, including proportion, materials, and fenestration, which inform the assessment of this proposal.
• 7.3.2 The existing outbuilding is a modest, single-storey structure of simple rectangular form with a pitched roof and whitewashed stone walls. While its vernacular finish contributes to the rural scene, the building is in poor structural condition and lacks architectural or historic interest. Its retention would not deliver the objectives of Strategic Policy 4 in terms of conserving heritage value.
• 7.3.3 The proposed replacement respects the established footprint and gable-ended form, maintaining the spatial relationship within the curtilage. It retains key rural characteristics, simple massing, pitched slate roof, and white-painted walls, consistent with Circular 3/91 Policies 3 and 4. However, the scheme introduces contemporary elements, notably full-height glazing and bi-fold doors, which conflict with Circular 3/91 Policy 5 on fenestration and door proportions. The absence of a chimney also departs from Policy 6. These features create a more domestic and modern appearance than the restrained vernacular advocated by the Circular.
• 7.3.4 Despite these departures, the overall design remains low-profile, avoids encroachment into open countryside, and preserves existing topography and vegetation. The building's scale and siting mitigate visual impact, and no harm arises with regard to impacts on the surrounding countryside.

7.4 HIGHWAY SAFETY AND ACCESS

• 7.4.1 In terms of highway impacts, it is considered that there would be no changes to the parking arrangement within the site, or the access arrangement, such that there would be variations with the existing relationship between the site and adjoining highway.
• 7.4.2 Further to the above, the Department of Infrastructure Highways Division has confirmed that the development would not adversely affect highway safety or network

• functionality, provided the building remains ancillary to the host dwelling. This reinforces the position that any impacts in terms of parking and highway safety would be acceptable.
• 7.4.3 It is also worth noting that visibility at the junction with Smeale Road is unaffected, and no alterations are proposed to the lane or boundary treatments that could compromise safe ingress or egress. On this basis, the scheme satisfies the access and parking requirements of General Policy 2(f) and accords with Transport Policies 4 and 7, which seek to ensure safe and efficient operation of the highway network.

7.5 RESIDENTIAL AMENITY AND NEIGHBOUR IMPACT

• 7.5.1 With regard to impacts on the living conditions of neighbouring properties, having regard to General Policy 2(d) and the Residential Design Guide (2021), which seek to prevent unacceptable impacts from overlooking, overshadowing, or noise, it is considered that the scheme as proposed would be result in adverse impacts. This is hinged on the fact that the site sits isolated from other neighbouring dwellings, with the nearest property situated approximately 825 metres to the east.

• 7.5.3 Moreover, the replacement building is single-storey and occupies the same footprint as the existing outbuilding, avoiding any increase in massing or change in orientation that could alter considerably the relationship with other properties in the area. On this basis, the proposal does not give rise to harm to residential amenity or the functioning of nearby land uses. It satisfies the requirements of General Policy 2(d) and accords with the guidance in the Residential Design Guide (2021).

8.0 CONCLUSION

8.1 The proposed development is considered to be acceptable in principle in this countryside location, without detriment to the character or amenities of the wider landscape or the amenities of surrounding residential properties. The application is, therefore, considered to comply with Environment Policy 1, General Policies 2 and 3, and Strategic policies 4 and 5, and is recommended for approval.

9.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE

9.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted).

9.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to:

• applicant (in all cases);
• a Local Authority; Government Department; Manx Utilities; and Manx National Heritage

that submit a relevant objection; and o any other person who has made an objection that meets specified criteria.

9.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10.

9.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required):

• any appellant or potential appellant (which includes the applicant);
• the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, the Department of Infrastructure and the local authority for the area;
• any other person who has submitted written representations (this can include other Government Departments and Local Authorities); and
• in the case of a petition, a single representative.

I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status, and/or rights to appeal.

Decision Made : Permitted Date : 04.03.2026 Determining Officer

Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management

Customer note This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/customers and archive record.