Officer Report

Application No.: 25/90643/B Applicant: Mrs Andrea Stallard Proposal: Erection of extension to south-west elevation Site Address: Wayside Gordon Peel Isle Of Man IM5 3AT Planning Officer: Vanessa Porter Photo Taken: 31.07.2025 Site Visit: 31.07.2025 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 04.08.2025 _________________________________________________________________

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. No development shall take place until a tree protection plan is submitted and approved by the Department and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The applicant is advised to discuss the tree protection plan with the Forestry Directorate. Such tree protection plan should include the following:

• a) Clearly indicate the precise location of the protective barriers that will be erected to form an exclusion zone around the retained trees which conform with British Standard 5837:2012;
• b) Clearly show where construction activity cannot/will not be excluded from the RPA;
• c) Consider the 'buildability' issues (In the placement of protective barriers) e.g.

• I. Access
• II. Contractors parking
• III. Space needed for excavations and construction work
• IV. Working space for cranes, plant & scaffolding
• V. Space for site huts, temporary toilets etc.
• VI. Space for storage REASON: the site is situated within Registered Tree band RA1220

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposal is considered to comply with Housing Policy 16 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and therefore acceptable.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This decision relates to the following plans and drawings, date stamped received on 4th July 2025;

• o Drawing No. 01
• o Drawing No. 02
• o Drawing No. 03
• o Drawing No. 04

_________________________________________________________________ Right to Appeal It is recommended that the following organisations should be given the Right to Appeal: DOI Flood Risk Management - objection. _________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report THE APPLICATION SITE

1.1 The application site is within the curtilage of "Wayside" which is rooms within the roofspace bungalow situated to the Western side of the main road which runs from Patrick to Glen Maye. THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The current planning application seeks approval for the erection of an extension to the South of the site which is to measure 7.010m by 3.62m with an overall height of 5.51m. The proposal is to have a rooflight to the rear elevation to match the existing and double doors with windows to the South elevation. PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 There is one previous application, which is relevant to the assessment of this application, PA22/00169/B which was for "Erection of extension and change of use of land from agricultural to residential." It should be noted that the proposed extension was removed from the application, which in turn was just for the change of use of the land.

3.2 The following relevant condition was attached onto the above application," 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."

PLANNING POLICY 4.1 The site lies within an area zoned as "not for development" and an "Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance" and an "Area of Private Woodland or Parkland" on the 1982 Development Plan, North Map. The site is not within a Conservation Area nor a Flood Risk Zone. The site has registered trees to the South under RA1220.

4.2 These policies are then followed by Strategic Policy 5 which seeks that new development should make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island, General Policy 2 sets out

general development control standards in connection with the Residential Design Guidance and General Policy 3 states that development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan other than a number of stated exceptions, which do not include the extension of existing dwellings, Environment Policy 2 sets out that development within an AHLV's would not harm the character and quality of the landscape and that the development is essential, Environment Policy 3 which seeks that development would not result in unacceptable loss of or damage to woodland areas, Environment Policy 4 which seeks to protect species and habitats, in connection with Environment Policy 5 which states that in exceptional circumstances where development is allowed conditions will be imposed and Environment Policy 10 which seeks that development within a Flood Risk zone is accompanied by a Flood Risk Assessment.

4.3 The Department has published the Residential Design Guide (2019) which, although focused on dwellings within settlements, does offer advice in relation to visual impact and the impact on neighbours. - 4.4 It is also relevant to note Planning Circular 3/91 "Guide to the design of residential development in the countryside," which provides advice on residential development within the countryside.

REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 The following representations can be found in full online;

5.2 Highway Services and Patrick Commissioners were consulted on the 8th July 2025 of which at the time of writing this report (04.08.25), there has been no correspondence received.

5.3 DEFA Forestry have considered the proposal and do not oppose subject to a precommencement condition regarding a tree protection plan. (16.07.25) - 5.4 DOI Flood Risk Management have considered the proposal and defer there comments pending further information on a Flood Risk Assessment. (14.07.25)

ASSESSMENT 6.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are:

• - Principle of development
• - Character and appearance
• - Neighbouring Amenity
• - Ecology impact
• - Flood Risk
• - Other Matters

- 6.2 PRINCIPLE

• 6.2.1 The site is not designated for development, nor does it meet the expectation criteria in General Policy 3. However, Housing Policy 16 and it's supporting text allows for residential extensions and alterations in the countryside where they would not detract from the countryside which, in the case of non traditional dwellings or those of poor or inappropriate form, is that the proposal does not increase the impact of the building when viewed by the public.
• 6.2.2 The site itself is situated between two bands of registered trees, RA1220 to the South and to the North of the site and it has a mature sod bank to the front of where the proposed extension is to be. Whilst these features do not mean that the proposal wont be seen within the overall streetscene, when taking into account that vehicles will be driving past the site, the overall impact of the proposal will not increase the overall impact of the site when viewed by the public. As such the principle of the proposal is acceptable.

• 6.2.3 Whilst the principle in general is acceptable, it is required to see whether the proposed works on this site would be acceptable.
• 6.3 CHARACTER AND APPEARANCE

• 6.3.1 There is a general presumption in favour of extensions or alterations to existing properties as per Paragraph 8.12.1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, where such works would not have an adverse impact on adjacent properties or the surrounding area in general, this is also mirrored in Housing Policy 16.
• 6.3.2 The existing dwelling in itself is of no particular architectural merit, as such the proposed single storey nature of the proposal, the stepping back from the main roadside and in turn the slight reduction of the roofline will assist in the proposal looking subordinate to the main dwelling. The proposed alterations to the doorway and the addition of the windows and doors within the main extension will only be slightly seen within the streetscene and as such deemed acceptable from a character and appearance point of view.

- 6.4 NEIGHBOURING AMENITY

• 6.4.1 With regards to neighbouring amenity, the closest neighbours to the site are situated across the main road, as there are no additional windows situated within this elevation, the proposal is deemed acceptable from a neighbouring amenity point of view.

6.5 ECOLOGY IMPACT

• 6.5.1 It's noted that the proposal within this application is an almost replication of the proposed extension which was withdrawn from PA22/00169/B. The reason for withdrawing the extension was due to the impact of the works on the existing registered trees. Confirmation was sought from both the agent and DEFA Forestry, which has confirmed that the trees which were initially impacted by the works had to be felled due to the recent (2025) storms.

• 6.5.2 Whilst the above is the case, it's noted that DEFA Forestry have requested a precommencement condition regarding the existing trees on site and for a Tree Protection Plan, due to the registered trees on site is agreed that this should be conditioned in this instance.

6.6 FLOOD RISK

• 6.6.1 Whilst it's noted that the proposal has a consultation with DOI Flood Risk Management Division stating that the site is within a surface water flood risk area, when viewing the property via the DOI Flood Risk Viewer map, the site of the proposed extension is not situated within a flood risk zone. As such no additional information regarding this has been sought.

6.7 OTHER MATTERS

• 6.7.1 The proposal is an extension and alterations to an already existing property, as such the proposal is not expected to create any changes or new issues in respect of criminal actively or spread of fire. The proposal whilst increasing the surface area of the dwelling, any water runoff will be dealt with as per the existing arrangement of the main dwelling. The proposed extension will not increase water usage of the dwelling and therefore there are no new issues in this respect.

CONCLUSION

7.1 The proposed decking extension is deemed acceptable in terms of their form, mass and design by providing a suitable extension to an existing residential property and as such complies with General Policy 2 and Housing Policy 16 with one condition regarding a Tree Protection Plan.

TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE

8.1 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).

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

• o applicant (in all cases);
• o 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.

8.3 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. - 8.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required):

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

8.5 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 the Right to Appeal.

I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Principal Planner 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: 05.08.2025 Determining Officer

Signed : C BALMER Chris Balmer Principal Planner

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.