Loading document...
Application No.: 25/90805/B Applicant: Mr Keith Quane Proposal: Replacement of existing car port and shed with single storey integral double garage to side elevation Site Address: Baldromma Beg Jurby Road Lezayre Ramsey Isle Of Man IM7 2EB Senior Planning Officer: Jason Singleton Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 02.10.2025 _________________________________________________________________
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
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.
The proposed levels of development to the existing dwellinghouse would accord with General Policy 2, 3; Environmental Policy 1 and Housing Policy 15 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
This decision relates to drawings referenced; KQ-001; KQ-002; KQ-003 received on 3rd September 2025. _________________________________________________________________ Right to Appeal None _________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of Balladromma Beg, Jurby Road, Ramsey. The existing property is a bungalow which is set back some 10m from the highway to the south. The property has a hipped roof and a painted render finish under a tiled roof. To the east of the property is an attached lean-to car port and a detached single car width garage and outdoor sheds. - 1.2 Across the boundary are a neighbouring pair of semi-detached residential properties named; Fairfield and Newlyn which make up the character of built form in the immediate vicinity. The surrounding area is agricultural.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Proposed is the demolition of the side lean-to car port and the detached garage and in its place the construction of a ground floor extension off the side (East) elevation to build an attached garage that would measure a footprint of 7.2m x 7.2m with a hipped tiled roof and solar panels on the south (road facing ) elevation. - 2.2 The proposed works are solely contained to the front / side elevation.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY - 3.1 In terms of land use designation the application site is zoned under the Isle of Man Development Plan Order 1982 as being "white Land" or not zoned for development.
3.2 The following policies from the 2016 Strategic Plan are considered pertinent in the assessment of this application;
Strategic Policy 5 Design and visual impact
Spatial Policy; 5 Building in defined settlements or GP3
General Policy
1 Protection of the countryside and its Ecology Housing Policy
3.3 Residential Design Guidance 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.
4.1 The previous approved planning applications are deemed relevant to this application;
5.1 No comments have been received at the time of writing despite being consulted on the 03/09/25. - 6.0 ASSESSMENT
6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are;
6.1 The site falls outside of any defined settlement boundary and sits within the parish of Lezayre. As the site is not zoned for development, it is an existing residential dwelling house and consideration shall be given to a number of policies within the Strategic Plan including Spatial Policy 5 and General Policy 3 for alteration to existing dwellings in the countryside. Environment Policy 1 seeks to protect the countryside for its own sake, however the scope of works are within the defined residential curtilage and attached to the dwelling house. - 6.2 In this specific case the most relevant will be Housing Policy 16 which in this case is for the "alteration" or material alteration to the external elevation by the construction of an attached garage to the dwellinghouse. - 6.3 As such the principle of the proposals to an existing dwelling house would be acceptable subject to any visual impact and whether there would be any adverse impact upon the neighbouring properties. Design - 6.4 The demolition of the existing lean-top carport and detached garage are more functional than aesthetical and there loss would be acceptable in this instance, they not of any architectural or historical merit. Once demolished this area would be built on for the single storey side extension. - 6.5 The proposed extension has been designed to ensure the existing proportions of the dwelling house are reflected in the design of the extension, noting the width, depth and heights of eaves and pitch of roof to match the host dwelling. The proposal would allow for attached garaging and would be acceptable. - 6.6 The use of a roof detailing to echo that of the dwelling house would help keep the overall massing low and would be in keeping and read as one built form but strikes a balance to match that of the existing dwelling. The level of finish would seek to copy that of the dwelling house elements ensuring the existing dwelling and extension are read as one
residential unit which ensures the proposed additions would be in accordance with STP5 and GP2b.
6.6 Visual Impact In terms of how visible the scope of works are to the existing, Hp16 seeks that the impact when or if viewable is respectful to the properties proportions and appearance. The visual appearance of the new extension from the highway to the south would offer glimpsing views when driving along this road, but those passing views would ensure the building would be read in the same residential context as the property and would not appear out of keeping given the level and scale of the proposal. The matching levels of finish in terms of wall finish, doors, windows and roof tiles, helps to visually link the two together. - 6.7 The proposed extension would be considered appropriate when read within the context of the area in terms of its height and design would be subservient to the scale and character of the main dwelling house. It is considered the proposal would be an acceptable form of development that would be read in accordance with Ep1, HP16, GP2, and would not have any adverse impact on that of the countryside or on the dwelling house and its rural setting. Neighbouring amenities - 6.8 The level and scale of development proposed here, especially being single story in height when measured form ground level, would create additional built form that is considered to be relatively modest and would be used in conjunction with the enjoyment of the main dwelling house. - 6.9 When considering any adverse impact upon the neighbouring dwelling houses as noted above, given the design, scale and siting of the development, the proposed single storey side extension is not considered to materially harm the neighbouring amenity to the side, through any loss of light, overbearing impact or loss of privacy as a result of the development. - 6.10 Furthermore, when viewed from any of the surrounding neighbouring properties, the extension would be read in the residential context of the property and surrounding street scene. This aspect would be considered compliant with those sections of General Policy 2(g).
7.1 For the above reasons, it is concluded that the planning application would be an acceptable form of development that would not harm the use and enjoyment of neighbouring properties or the rural setting here which would comply with aforementioned planning policies of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and is recommended for approval. - 8.0 RIGHT 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:
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):
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: 02.10.2025 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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
