Officer Report

Application No.: 25/90753/B Applicant: Dean And Wardens Of The Burial Authority Of German Proposal: Extension to cemetery Site Address: Field 315146 Douglas Road Peel Isle Of Man Planning Officer: Paul Visigah Site Visit: 12.11.2025 Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 08.12.2025 _________________________________________________________________

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. Prior to commencement of the development hereby approved, a detailed Woodland Planting and Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The Plan shall include a detailed landscaping layout for the site; planting plans (at a scale not less than 1:100); written specification of planting and cultivation works to be undertaken and schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/densities; hard surfacing materials; existing and finished site levels. The development shall thereafter be implemented and maintained in accordance with the approved Plan.

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 any unit, 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 secure landscape integration and habitat creation consistent with Strategic Policy 4, Strategic Policy 5, Environment Policy 5, and General Policy 2.

• C 3. Prior to commencement of the development hereby approved, a Surface Water Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The Plan shall include SuDS measures proportionate to the site (e.g., swales, shallow infiltration

features, cut off drains) designed to intercept and attenuate runoff, with exceedance routing that avoids the stream, and a maintenance schedule. The approved measures shall be installed prior to first use and thereafter maintained.

Reason: To manage runoff on the gently sloping, free draining fluvial deposits and avoid pollution or increased flood risk to the adjacent stream, in accordance with Environment Policy 7, General Policy 2.

• C 4. No graves, structures, hard surfaces, soil stockpiles, or excavation works shall be undertaken within 9 metres of the top of bank of the stream along the south-eastern boundary. The buffer shall be demarcated by protective fencing prior to any ground works and retained until completion of the works required by conditions 2 and 3 of this decision notice.

Reason: To prevent deterioration in water quality and protect bankside habitats, in accordance with Environment Policy 7.

• C 5. Prior to commencement of the development hereby approved, a BS 5837: Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction compliant Arboricultural Impact Assessment shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The submission shall:

• i. Identify all trees of note within and adjacent to the site, as advised by DEFA Forestry.
• ii. ii. Include a Tree Constraints Plan showing root protection areas and canopy spreads.
• iii. Provide a Tree Protection Plan specifying fencing and ground protection measures to safeguard retained trees and hedgerows during construction.

Tree protection measures shall be installed before any ground works commence and retained for the duration of all works.

Reason: To ensure protection of existing boundary trees, preventing damage or fragmentation of woodland features and supporting successful woodland establishment, consistent with Environment Policy 3, Strategic Policy 4, and General Policy 2.

• C 6. The new access connection into the existing cemetery driveway and the internal circulation (including passing places and pedestrian paths) shall be constructed in accordance with the approved layout prior to first use of the woodland cemetery and retained as such thereafter.

Reason: To provide safe and convenient access and on-site movement in accordance with Transport Policy 4, Transport Policy 7, and General Policy 2.

• C 7. No external lighting shall be installed at the site until a detailed low-level lighting scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The scheme shall be designed in accordance with the recommendations set out in the BCT and ILP Guidance Note 8: Bats and Artificial Lighting (12 September 2018). The submitted details shall include:

• i. Drawings of proposed lighting columns and fittings
• ii. Information on luminance levels and hours of operation
• iii. Measures to mitigate light spill and reduce ecological impact

The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved scheme and retained as such thereafter.

Reason: To safeguard ecological species on the site and in the immediate locality, consistent with Environment Policy 5 and Strategic Policy 4.

• C 8. As per the applicant's letter dated 11.11.25, no approval is hereby given for the installation of a Biodigester or any toilets on the site. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt.

N 1. Prior to any interments, the applicant is advised to undertake site checks within the preceding four weeks to confirm the minimum 1 metre vertical separation between the base of the grave and the seasonal high-water table at the proposed plot.

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

The proposal represents a proportionate extension to an established burial ground, meeting an overriding community need in a location directly adjoining the existing cemetery. This satisfies General Policy 3 (exceptions in the countryside where no reasonable alternative exists) and supports Strategic Policy 2 and Spatial Policy 5 for sustainable, integrated development. The woodland design, modest structures, and naturalistic layout respect rural character and, with secured planting and management, will enhance landscape quality in accordance with Strategic Policies 4 and 5 and General Policy 2. Engineering evidence confirms stable excavation and absence of groundwater to 2.5 m, while recognising seasonal variability and proximity to the stream; with appropriate safeguards for buffers, surface water management, and excavation practices, the scheme avoids demonstrable harm to the watercourse and protects water quality consistent with Environment Policy 7. The site's soils exhibit Class 3 characteristics, avoiding the permanent loss of the Island's best and most versatile land, consistent with Environment Policy 14 and Section 7.13. Access arrangements are acceptable; as the approved layout ensures safe entry, internal circulation, and parking provision are in accordance with Transport Policies 4 and 7. On balance, the proposal accords with the Strategic Plan and is acceptable.

Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the following documents and drawings:

• o Cover Letter - submitted 05 August 2025.
• o Location and Land Ownership Plan - submitted 05 August 2025.
• o Existing Site Plan - submitted 05 August 2025.
• o Proposed Site Plan - submitted 05 August 2025.
• o Engineer's Report - submitted 05 August 2025.
• o Covering Letter (Additional Information) - submitted 11 November 2025.
• o Planting Specifications - submitted 11 November 2025.

_________________________________________________________________ Right to Appeal

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

• o DOI Highways - No Objection

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should NOT be given the Right to Appeal because:

• o Creggan Bane, Peveril Avenue, Peel - No objection _________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THE PROPOSAL COULD BE CONSIDERED CONTRARY TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN BUT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site comprises Field 315146, Douglas Road, Peel. It is an existing agricultural field located to the southeast of Peel Cemetery, along Peel Road. The site has a frontage to Peel Road measuring approximately 96m, while its northwestern boundary, which directly adjoins the southern boundary of the existing cemetery, extends about 160.6m westwards into the field. - 1.2 The entire field extends to approximately 4.15acres/1.68 hectares (16,810sqm) and is generally open and grassed, enclosed by established hedgerows and natural vegetation along its boundaries. The frontage to Peel Road is clearly defined, providing direct visual and physical access to the site, with main access via a field gate. - 1.3 In terms of topography, the land is predominantly level near the frontage, with a gentle rise towards the interior of the field. The surrounding landscape is characterised by rolling countryside, with distant views of grassy fields and scattered trees. There are no significant slopes or abrupt changes in elevation within the site, although the site naturally slopes towards the southeast boundary. - 1.4 A stream runs along the southeastern boundary of the site, by about 94 metres along large sections of the site perimeter. The heritage trail (Footpath 362) is situated about 49.4 metres south of the southernmost part of the site, although it is largely screened by existing mature landscaping and trees adjoining the footpath.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Planning approval is sought for the extension of the existing cemetery to create a dedicated woodland cemetery area. The proposed development would include the following:

• 1. Creation of a new vehicular access and egress for users of the extended cemetery site. This will involve forming an opening in the existing southern boundary wall of the current cemetery. The new access will connect to a driveway that links into the main cemetery driveway, which in turn leads to the principal entrance gate.
• 2. Layout and landscaping of the woodland cemetery, comprising:

• a. Designation of burial plots integrated within a woodland setting.
• b. Extensive tree planting and natural landscaping to create a tranquil, environmentally sensitive environment.

• 3. Creation of three 25m long by 5m wide vehicle passing areas on site. One would be created on the southwestern ends of the site, while the others would be located on the northwestern and southeastern ends of the site, respectively.
• 4. Creation of a Covered Open sided shelter that would 7m in diameter.
• 5. The Cover Letter states that the cemetery will have the capacity for several plots (each plot allows 2-3 burials).

2.2 The submitted plan shows a Biodigester (Phase 2) as part of the scheme. However, the applicants have indicated that it is not part of this phase and is only considered as a possible future provision if a toilet is ever required. No toilets or effluent systems are proposed at this stage. - 2.3 The application is supported by an Engineers Report. Key Findings from the Engineer's Report are as follows:

• 1. Trial Pits Excavated: Five pits (TP1-TP5) were dug across fields 311902 and 315146.
• 2. Soil Conditions: All pits revealed medium compact uniform fine damp beach sand with Sulby Glen Formation characteristics, comprising sand, gravel, and alluvium (fluvial deposits).
• 3. Pit Stability: All pits were stable without support systems.
• 4. Groundwater: No groundwater was encountered in any of the pits, even those near the stream and at the bottom of the slope (TP2 and TP3).
• 5. Depth: Excavations reached 2.5 m, the full reach of the machine.

• 6. Implications for Suitability: The soil profile and absence of groundwater indicate good drainage and stable excavation conditions, suitable for burial purposes.
• 7. Environmental Considerations: The site slopes toward a stream and contains permeable fluvial deposits. While groundwater was absent during testing, seasonal variation could alter soil saturation. Heavy rainfall may cause surface runoff toward the stream, increasing potential for contamination.
• 8. Recommended Mitigation: Establish a vegetated buffer strip between burial areas and the stream, incorporate surface water management features (e.g., swales or French drains), and consider seasonal hydrological assessment and post-development water quality monitoring downstream.

2.4 Comparison of Engineers Report with Agricultural Soils of the Isle of Man Document:

• 2.4.1 The Agricultural Land Use Capability Map (Harris et al., 2001) identifies the site as Class 3/2 soils, meaning a mixed unit with characteristics of both Class 3 and Class 2 land. Class 3 land represents the majority of agricultural soils on the Island (approx. 80%) and is defined as land with moderate limitations that restrict crop choice and require careful management. Class 2 land, by contrast, is higher quality with minor limitations and accounts for only about 4.87% of the Island's agricultural land.
• 2.4.2 The Engineer's Report confirms the site comprises medium compact sandy soils with gravel and alluvium (Sulby Glen Formation), which are free-draining and stable for excavation but have lower fertility and water-holding capacity compared to deep loams typical of Class 2 soils. These characteristics align more closely with Class 3 than Class 2, indicating that the dominant soil type at the site is Class 3.
• 2.4.3 The Engineer's Report provides further observations that support the classification of the site as predominantly Class 3 rather than Class 2:

• a. Topsoil Depth and Composition (Engineer's Report, p.3-5): Trial pit logs show shallow topsoil (0.5-0.6 m) overlying sandy subsoil, which is typical of lighter soils with lower nutrient reserves compared to deep loams associated with Class 2 land.
• b. Sulby Glen Formation Characteristics (Engineer's Report, p.3-5): The presence of fluvial deposits (sand, gravel, and alluvium) indicates high permeability and low water-holding capacity, limiting crop versatility and aligning with Class 3 characteristics.
• c. Absence of Groundwater at 2.5 m Depth (Engineer's Report, p.1): Confirms very freedraining conditions, which often correlate with drought susceptibility for agriculture, a common limitation of Class 3 soils.
• d. Excavation Stability (Engineer's Report, p.1): While pits were stable during excavation, this reflects temporary compaction and moisture rather than inherent fertility or structural strength. Sandy soils lack the cohesive binding agents typical of Class 2 loams.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY - 3.1 Site Specific:

• 3.1.1 The site is situated within an area depicted as 'White Land', which is land not zoned for any particular purpose, and part of the countryside on the 1982 Development Plan. The site does not lies within an area of High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance, or an area of archaeological interest. The site is not within or close to a Registered Tree Area and there are no registered trees on site. The site is also not prone to flood risks or an area of nature conservation. The site falls within an area of Class 3/2 Soils on the Agricultural Land Use Capability Map.
• 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. Strategic Policy 2 - Priority for new development to identified towns and villages.
• 2. Strategic Policy 4 - development proposals must protect or enhance the nature conservation and landscape quality of urban as well as rural areas.

• 3. Strategic Policy 5 - Design and visual impact.
• 4. Spatial Policy 5 - new development will be in defined settlements only or in the countryside only in accordance with GP3.
• 5. General Policy 2 - General Development Considerations.
• 6. General Policy 3 - Exceptions to development in the countryside.
• 7. Environment Policy 1 - Protection of the countryside and inherent ecology.
• 8. Environment Policy 4 - Protects biodiversity (including protected species and designated sites).
• 9. Environment Policy 5 - Mitigation against damage to or loss of habitats.
• 10. Environment Policy 7 - Development that would cause demonstrable harm to a watercourse, wetland, pond or dub and cannot be mitigated will not be permitted. Where works affect a watercourse, applications must identify all watercourses and include a risk assessment to show no long-term deterioration in water quality, provide details of pollution and alleviation measures, and phase engineering works to avoid reducing water quality. Normally, development will not be allowed within 8 metres of any watercourse to protect aquatic and bankside habitats and species.
• 11. Environment Policy 14 - Seeks to prevent the permanent loss of important and versatile agricultural land (Classes 1-2).
• 12. Section 7.13. Agriculture - provides guidance on developments that impacts agricultural soils.
• 13. Transport Policy 4 - Highway safety.
• 14. Transport Policy 7 - Parking considerations/standards for development.
• 15. Community Policies 7, 10 and 11 provide guidance in respect of minimising criminal activity and reducing spread of fire, while Infrastructure Policy 5 deals with methods for water conservation.

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.
• 5.0 PLANNING HISTORY

5.1 The broader site area (cemetery) has been the subject of a number of applications which are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of the current application:

• 1. PA 92/00653/B for Provision of car parking facilities, Peel Cemetery. Approved by the Planning Committee on 28.08.1992.
• 2. PA 97/01865/B for Creation of off-road car parking & turning space, Douglas Road Cemetery, Peel. Approved by Planning Committee on 23.03.1998.
• 3. PA 01/00035/B for Creation of new car park and alterations to access, Douglas Road Cemetery, Peel. Approved by the Planning Committee on 22.06.2001.

5.2 All previous applications associated with the cemetery have focused on ancillary infrastructure improvements rather than changes to the primary burial function. These include the provision of car parking, turning spaces, and alterations to access arrangements.

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

6.1 DOI Highways Division find the proposal to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and/or parking as the existing access and proposed site layout is acceptable for the proposals (12 August 2025).

6.2 The DEFA Environmental Health Team raised no objections to the submitted application and confirmed there were no comments on the proposal. They noted, however, that under section 7 of the Burials Act 1986, once planning consent is granted, the Dean and Wardens of the Burial Authority of German must seek consent from the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture to extend the burial ground, which would be given in principle (17 October 2025). - 6.3 DEFA Environmental Protection Unit (EPU) noted the inclusion of a biodigester in the submitted plans and requested clarification on whether sewage treatment works form part of this application. They advised that if any discharge to the nearby stream is proposed, a discharge licence would be required under the relevant regulations (25 November 2025).

• 6.3.1 In response to the comments made by DEFA EPU, the applicants have confirmed that the biodigester is to be removed from the current application. They clarified that if a biodigester becomes necessary in the future, a separate planning application will be submitted with full details. For the present proposal, the biodigester is excluded (5 December 2025).

6.4 DEFA Forestry Comment:

• 6.4.1 DEFA Forestry initially stated that they could not support the proposal in its current form. Their concerns included the absence of a BS5837-compliant tree survey for trees of note, lack of detailed landscaping information beyond indicative dots on the plan, and the inclusion of a biodigester close to trees and a watercourse without sufficient detail on potential discharge impacts. They advised that these matters should be addressed before the proposal could progress (17 October 2025).

• 6.4.2 Following review of additional information provided by the applicants on 11 November 2025, DEFA Forestry confirmed they have no objections to the proposal. They reiterated concerns regarding the biodigester but acknowledged that, as it is not part of the current phase and would require a separate application, it should be addressed if and when submitted. For clarity, they recommended its removal from the present application. They also advised that any future application for a biodigester would need to include an arboricultural impact assessment and a tree protection plan (3 December 2025).

6.5 No comments have been received from German Parish Commissioners although they were consulted on 6 August 2025. - 6.6 The owners/occupiers of Creggan Bane, Peveril Avenue, Peel, have made the following comments on the application (20 August 2025):

• o They noted that several documents submitted with the application refer to Field No. 311902, which relates to an earlier application from 2010 that has since lapsed.
• o They requested clarification that the current proposal does not in any way involve Field No. 311902 and asked that any references to it within the submitted information be disregarded.

- 7.0 ASSESSMENT

7.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this application are:

• 1. Whether the principle of the use of the land as proposed is acceptable;
• 2. Whether the layout as shown would have acceptable visual and landscape impacts;
• 3. Loss of High Quality Agricultural Soils;
• 4. Potential Environmental concerns in terms of impacts on adjacent water course, and
• 5. Highway safety Impacts.

7.2 THE PRINCIPLE (General Policy 3, Strategic Policy 2, Spatial Policy 5)

• 7.2.1 The starting point for assessing the principle of development is the land designation. The application site is identified as 'White Land' on the 1982 Development Plan, meaning it is not zoned for any specific purpose and is therefore treated as countryside for planning

• purposes. Under Strategic Policy 2 and Spatial Policy 5, new development should be directed to defined settlements unless it meets an exception under General Policy 3.
• 7.2.2 General Policy 3 sets out a presumption against development in the countryside unless it falls within specific exceptions. The proposed cemetery extension does not fall within any of the listed categories. However, the policy also recognises that development may be permitted where it is of overriding national need and where no reasonable and acceptable alternative exists. While burial provision is not expressly referenced, it is a statutory and essential community function, and the evidence indicates that Peel Cemetery is approaching capacity. In this context, the proposal is considered to meet the aims of GP3 (g) by addressing an overriding need for burial space in a location that is functionally linked to the existing cemetery and avoids fragmentation of provision.
• 7.2.3 This locational relationship reinforces the justification set out above. By directly adjoining the existing cemetery, the extension will operate as a seamless continuation of the current facility, rather than as a detached site that could undermine functional efficiency. This proximity ensures that existing access arrangements and infrastructure such as parking and turning areas can be utilised, reducing the need for additional works and avoiding the fragmentation of burial provision, which would conflict with the principle of sustainable and integrated development.
• 7.2.4 On balance, while the site lies in the countryside, the proposal meets the intent of GP3 by providing an essential community facility where no reasonable alternative exists. The principle of development is therefore considered acceptable, subject to compliance with environmental and design policies.

7.3 VISUAL AND LANDSCAPE IMPACTS (Strategic Policy 4, Strategic Policy 5, Environment Policy 1, & General Policy 2)

• 7.3.1 The application site comprises an open grassed field enclosed by established hedgerows, with a defined frontage to Peel Road and a gentle rise towards its interior. Although not within an Area of High Landscape Value, it forms part of the open countryside where Strategic Policy 4 and Environment Policy 1 require development to safeguard rural character. The surrounding landscape is characterised by rolling fields and scattered trees, and views from Peel Road are currently open, filtered only by hedgerow boundaries. The proposal introduces a woodland burial area, which is inherently low-intensity and visually recessive compared to built development, reducing the potential for adverse impact.
• 7.3.2 It is also worth noting that the design approach responds positively to this context. Extensive tree planting and natural landscaping will soften views and create a tranquil setting that complements the rural character. The proposed shelter is modest in scale (7 m diameter), open-sided, and intended to blend with the woodland concept rather than compete with the landscape. Internal roads and paths are narrow and informal, ensuring that circulation infrastructure does not dominate the site or erode its natural qualities.
• 7.3.3 The site is clearly visible from Peel Road, particularly where hedgerow cover is intermittent, and its openness contributes to the rural character of the approach to Peel. While some change to this character is inevitable, the proposed woodland planting and retention of boundary vegetation will filter views and create a natural transition over time. The heritage trail to the south is screened by mature vegetation and will not experience significant intrusion. On balance, the scheme introduces ecological and visual benefits that will mature over time and is considered to comply with Strategic Policy 4, Strategic Policy 5, and General Policy 2 by protecting landscape quality, respecting the site and surroundings, and making a positive contribution to the rural environment.
• 7.4 LOSS OF HIGH-QUALITY AGRICULTURAL SOILS (Environment Policy 14 & Section 7.13)

• 7.4.1 The Strategic Plan places strong emphasis on safeguarding the Island's most productive soils, particularly Classes 1 and 2, which are regarded as 'best and most versatile' for agriculture. These categories represent only a small fraction of the Island's resource, approximately 4.87%. By contrast, the majority of farmland, around 80%, falls within Class 3, which is characterised by moderate limitations requiring careful management and restricting crop choice. The application site is mapped as Class 3/2, a transitional category combining attributes of both grades. While this mixed classification warrants consideration, the higher protection afforded under Environment Policy 14 applies primarily to land that is demonstrably Class 1 or 2.
• 7.4.2 The Engineer's Report provides detailed soil analysis confirming that the site comprises medium compact sandy soils with gravel and alluvium (Sulby Glen Formation). These soils are free-draining and stable for excavation but exhibit low fertility and limited water-holding capacity compared to deep loams typical of Class 2 land. Trial pit logs show shallow topsoil (0.5-0.6 m) overlying sandy subsoil, which is characteristic of lighter soils with lower nutrient reserves. The presence of fluvial deposits further indicates high permeability and drought susceptibility, both common limitations of Class 3 soils. While the pits were stable during excavation, this reflects temporary compaction rather than inherent structural strength, as sandy soils lack the cohesive binding agents associated with higher-grade loams.
• 7.4.3 These findings align with the Strategic Plan's position in Section 7.13, which recognises that the majority of agricultural land on the Island falls within Class 3 and that only Classes 1 and 2 warrant the highest level of protection. The site does not constitute land with soils afforded the highest protection under EP14. While the proposal will result in the loss of approximately 1.68 hectares of agricultural land, and Class 3 soils do contribute to agricultural production, this loss is not considered significant in strategic terms and is outweighed by the overriding community need for burial provision adjacent to the existing cemetery.
• 7.4.4 On this basis, the development is judged to comply with Environment Policy 14 and the guidance in Section 7.13, as it avoids the permanent loss of prime agricultural land and utilises land of lower quality for an essential community function.
• 7.5 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS (Environment Policy 4, Environment Policy 5, & Environment Policy 7:)

• 7.5.1 In assessing potential environmental concerns related to the cemetery extension, it is considered that the southeastern boundary of the site is defined by a stream for approximately 94 metres, introducing an environmental sensitivity under Environment Policy 7, which presumes against development that would cause demonstrable harm to watercourses and normally requires an undeveloped buffer of at least 9 metres to protect aquatic and bankside habitats. While the watercourse is not a designated habitat under Environment Policy 4, it is not an ASSI, Ramsar site, or other statutory conservation area, the Strategic Plan makes clear that all watercourses warrant careful protection to prevent deterioration in water quality and ecological function.
• 7.5.2 The Engineer's Report provides reassurance on several key points: no groundwater was encountered at a depth of 2.5 metres, trial pits were stable without support, and the soil profile (Sulby Glen Formation, sand, gravel, and alluvium) is free-draining and suitable for excavation. These findings indicate a low immediate risk of subsurface leachate migration and confirm that grave excavation can be achieved without slope instability or excessive erosion. This technical evidence is reinforced by consultee responses: DEFA Environmental Health raised no objection, and DEFA EPU confirmed that, with the biodigester removed from this phase, the proposal does not present unacceptable environmental risk. Collectively, these factors reduce the likelihood of significant harm assuming the relevant safeguards are in place.
• 7.5.3 Residual risks remain, however, due to the site's gentle slope toward the stream and the high permeability of fluvial deposits, together with potential seasonal variation in soil

• saturation and water table levels, which could allow surface runoff during periods of heavy rainfall or elevated groundwater conditions. To address these risks and comply with EP7(a)-(d), a condition would be included to maintain an undeveloped buffer of at least 9 metres from the stream for all graves, paths, and structures; retain and protect the existing tree belt and associated vegetation along the southeastern boundary to preserve its filtering function; and require the submission of a surface water management plan demonstrating how runoff will be controlled to prevent deterioration in water quality. In addition, given the potential for seasonal fluctuation in groundwater levels identified in the engineering evidence, a note could be added advising pre-burial checks to confirm adequate vertical separation from the water table to prevent leachate migration toward the stream. This approach ensures flexibility in design while securing the necessary environmental safeguards.
• 7.5.4 Although Environment Policy 4 is not directly engaged given the site's current use as grazing land with limited ecological value, the proposal should incorporate measures that demonstrate good ecological practice in accordance with Environment Policy 5. The applicant has provided a detailed planting specification for the woodland burial concept, which includes native tree and shrub species, hedgerow reinforcement, and sensitive management of glades and rides to promote habitat creation and ecological connectivity. These measures will be secured by condition to ensure delivery of biodiversity enhancement and long-term ecological function.
• 7.5.5 Taking the engineering evidence, consultee responses, and the applicant's ecological proposals together, the extension can be delivered without demonstrable harm to the adjacent watercourse and with potential for net biodiversity gain over time. Subject to conditions securing the 9-metre buffer, surface water drainage controls, and implementation of the approved planting specification and phased habitat works, the scheme is considered compliant with Environment Policy 7 and consistent with the objectives of Environment Policies 4 and 5.
• 7.6 HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPACTS (Transport Policy 4, Transport Policy 7, & General Policy 2)

• 7.6.1 The proposal introduces a new access through the existing cemetery wall, linking to the main cemetery driveway. DOI Highways has confirmed no objection, stating that the existing access and proposed site layout are acceptable and that the development will have no significant negative impact on highway safety, network functionality, or parking.
• 7.6.2 The submitted plans show that internal circulation will be managed through a single access road supplemented by passing bays and pedestrian paths, reducing potential conflict between vehicles and visitors. Parking demand will be met primarily by existing facilities within the cemetery, supported by on-site turning space. Given the low frequency of peak events, this arrangement is considered proportionate and compliant with Transport Policy 7.
• 7.6.3 Overall, and subject to conditions securing the detailed access and internal layout, the scheme is judged to have no significant adverse impact on highway safety or network operation. It is therefore considered compliant with Transport Policy 4, Transport Policy 7, and consistent with General Policy 2.

- 7.7 OTHER MATTERS

• 7.7.1 The owners of Creggan Bane raised concerns that some documents submitted with the application refer to Field No. 311902, which relates to an earlier proposal from 2010 that has since lapsed. For clarity, the current application site is Field 315146, as shown on the submitted location plan and verified against the Development Plan mapping. References to Field 311902 in supporting documents are historic and should be disregarded in the determination of this application.
• 7.7.2 The Engineer's Report accompanying the current proposal is the same document originally prepared for the 2010 application. While this has been queried, it is important to note that the geology of a site does not change over time unless materially altered through

• excavation, deposition, or contamination. The Sulby Glen Formation characteristics (sand, gravel, and alluvium) remain consistent, and the trial pit data continues to provide a reliable indication of soil composition and excavation stability. Although interventions such as drainage works or significant ground disturbance could alter hydrology and groundwater flow, the site presently exists as an agricultural field with no evidence of surface works that would materially affect groundwater conditions or soil structure.
• 7.7.3 On this basis, it is not considered that conditions have changed significantly since the original report was prepared. The findings regarding soil permeability, absence of groundwater at 2.5 m depth, and excavation stability remain relevant and have informed the assessment of this application.

- 8.0 CONCLUSION

8.1 The proposed extension meets an overriding community need for additional burial space in a location that is functionally linked to the existing cemetery, satisfying the intent of General Policy 3 and supporting sustainable, integrated provision. The design is low-intensity and visually unobtrusive, incorporating woodland planting and natural landscaping that will enhance rural character over time, in accordance with Strategic Policy 4, Strategic Policy 5, and General Policy 2. - 8.2 Subject to conditions securing the 9-metre buffer, surface water management, ecological planting specification, and detailed access arrangements, the scheme avoids demonstrable harm to the adjacent watercourse and delivers net biodiversity gain, consistent with Environment Policies 4, 5, and 7. It also provides safe access and adequate parking without adverse impact on highway safety, meeting Transport Policies 4 and 7. On balance, the proposal accords with the Strategic Plan 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:

• 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.

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):

• 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.

9.5 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 confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to that body by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status and/or rights to appeal.

Decision Made: Permitted Date: 15.12.2025 Signed : Mrs Louise Phillips Presenting Officer

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.