AP250018 2491049B DEFA Planning Officer Appeal Statement

Dear Lorna, Your Reference : CONW/AP25/0018 I write with reference to the following appeal: Appeal Ref: AP25/0018 Planning Ref: 24/90149/B Appellant: Mr Trevor McCullough Proposal: Appeal against the refusal for erection of a new dwelling with associated parking

and landscaping Planning Ref 25/90149/B Address: Land Abutting Palace Road, Rear Of 25 Falcon Cliff Court Douglas, Isle of Man, IM2 4AH

Please find attached copies of my statement which comprises six parts:

• 1. A copy of the Officer’s report, (which is our planning statement) including assessment of the proposal and recommendation that the application be Refused, which was considered and accepted by the Principle Planning Officer for The North on 13th May, 2025, and the application was Refused.
• 2. A copy of the Decision Notice for this planning application;
• 3. An aerial photograph of the site;
• 4. A list of suggested conditions in the event that the appointed Planning Inspector is minded to recommend that the application be approved.

Please let me know if there is anything else that you may require. Yours sincerely,

Hamish Laird MRTPI Principal Planning Officer Planning and Building Control Directorate Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture (DEFA), Isle of Man Government, Murray House, Mount Havelock, Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 2SF

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 25/90149/B Applicant : Mr Trevor McCullough Proposal : Erection of a new dwelling with associated parking and

landscaping

Site Address : Land Abutting Palace Road, Rear Of 25 Falcon Cliff Court Douglas Isle Of Man

Planning Officer: Hamish Laird Photo Taken : 26.03.2025 Site Visit : 26.03.2025 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation

Recommendation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 12.05.2025 _________________________________________________________________

Reasons for Refusal

R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons

• R 1. The dwelling proposed is of an inappropriate scale and form relative to the handsome and attractive streetscene in which it is proposed to be sited. It would be actively harmful in an area that benefits from, and is characterised by, attractive Victoriana and a Registered Building at The Falcon Cliff Hotel. The proposal is therefore unacceptable and contrary to the provisions of parts (b), (c) and (g) of General Policy 2; and, also Environment Policy 42 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
• R 2. The proposed dwelling would sit no more than 8.5m from No. 25 Falcon Cliff Court to the rear. No. 25 Falcon Cliff Court lies at the end of a terrace of dwellings and is served by an outdoor side terrace which lies opposite the site. The level and scale of the proposal twinned with there being a limited height to its upper built form of approx. 2.4m high above proposed finished ground level, and approx. 13.0m wide, is considered to adversely affect the neighbours living conditions for the enjoyment of their dwellinghouse, outdoor terrace and rear garden. Overall, the proposed dwelling would reduce the enjoyment of the rear gardens of dwellings in Falcon Cliff Court to the extent that the relationship between the proposed and existing dwellings would be unduly harmful. The proposal therefore represents inappropriate development contrary to part (g) of General Policy 2 and also Environment Policy 42 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

_________________________________________________________________ Right to Appeal

It is recommended that the following persons should be given the right of appeal because they live within 20.0m of the site boundary (attached neighbouring dwelling) and whilst not objecting, have raised planning related issues:

Occupants of 23 Falcon Cliff Court, Douglas, IoM Occupants of 25 Falcon Cliff Court, Douglas, IM2 4AH

It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal: Department of Infrastructure Highways Services - No objection. Department of Infrastructure Highways Drainage - No objection. Douglas Corporation - No objection.

_________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report THE APPLICATION SITE

• 1.1 The application site is the curtilage of 25 Falcon Cliff Court, Douglas and is specifically the garden area to the south east of the dwellinghouse. The dwellinghouse is an end of terrace of six properties, three stories in height with garaging and the entrance on the ground floor off Falcon Cliff Court.
• 1.2 To the rear of the terraces are long gardens (approx. 24m) that extend out, generally level onto Palace Road to the south. The ground level here sits approx. 3.5m above the level of the pavement on Palace Road. It is to be noted Palace Road is a one way road with parallel parking on either side of the road.
• 1.3 The boundary with the highway is formed of a low stone wall with vegetation above, particularly prominently at the southern corner of the site. The highway is roughly 4m lower than the finished floor level of 25 Falcon Cliff Court at the southern corner of the site and, with the vegetation along the boundary, the terrace is very well-screened from the road when viewed from the south. Conversely, it is actually quite prominent when viewed from the north; the difference in height reduces to roughly 3m the further northeast one travels, while there is far more limited vegetation in the gardens associated with the remainder of the terrace.
• 1.4 From the southwest, the south-eastern side of the highway is open and allows views over Douglas Bay while north-western side has four- and five-storey traditional Victorian buildings along with the occasional modern interpretation of this vernacular. From this point on, the highway benefits from trees lining both sides and acting to provide something of a 'green corridor'; lower level buildings on the north-western side are then visible through these trees. PROPOSAL

• 2.1 Proposed is the Erection of a new dwelling with associated parking and landscaping The flat-roofed dwelling proposed would be double storey and would be cut into the site such that the side (north-east) and rear (north-west) elevations at the ground floor would be entirely windowless. The front elevation would offer three sets of single and double-panelled fullheight windows, with parking for four vehicles (2 in the proposed integral double garage) and two spaces in front on an area of hardstanding. The dwelling would measure approx. 13.0m wide x 7.1m deep x 5.15m high to its flat roof. It would be dug into the existing ground level by approx. 3.0m. Proposed finishes are White render and 100mm wide slats of Timber Vertical Cladding for the front door and first floor section directly above, interspersed with Random Stone panels at ground floor level only for the walls, under a Dark grey GRP flat roof with dark grey trims, with Dark grey window and door frames.
• 2.2 It would provide the following accommodation:

Ground Floor: Integral Double Integral; Entrance Porch/Hallway and Bathroom; Bedroom Nos. 2 and 3;

First floor: Master Bedroom/Dressing Room and En-suite Bathroom; combined Kitchen/Dining/Lounge Area; and, a Utility Room accessed directly from the Kitchen;

• 2.3 A retaining wall side top the south-west and south-east sides of the plot would contain the parking area, and immediate low level garden. A further area at existing ground levels would be retained to the south-west side of the plot and would abut the roadside boundary with Palace Road.
• 2.4 A section drawing has been provided identifying that the roof of the proposed dwelling would be 1.9m above finished floor level within 25 Falcon Cliff Court, and at a distance of 10.7m away.

PLANNING HISTORY

• 3.1 The following previous planning applications are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application;

• 3.2 17/01311/B - Creation of a parking area for four vehicles for hotel use on Land Abutting Palace Road, Rear of 25 Falcon Cliff Court, Douglas - Refused 8/3/18. No appeal received.
• 3.3 16/00034/B - Erection of a dwelling Land Abutting Palace Road, Rear of 25 Falcon Cliff Court. Douglas- Refused & Refused at appeal. Reasons for Refusal "1. The dwelling proposed is of an inappropriate scale and form relative to the handsome and attractive streetscene in which it is proposed to sit. It would be actively harmful in an area that benefits from, and is characterised by, attractive Victoriana and a Registered Building. The proposal is therefore contrary to parts (b), (c) and (g) of General Policy 2 and also Environment Policy 42 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007.

• 2. The proposed dwelling would sit no more than 8.5m from number 25 Falcon Cliff Court to the rear. 25 Falcon Cliff Court lies at the end of a terrace of dwellings, and the proposed dwelling would harmfully reduce the enjoyment of the rear gardens of Falcon Cliff Court such that the relationship between the proposed and existing dwellings would be unduly harmful. The proposal therefore represents inappropriate backland development contrary to part (g) of General Policy 2 and also Environment Policy 42 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007."
• 3.4 00/01255/A - Approval in principle for 3 self-contained apartments and associated parking - Refused on Review - 02.02.2001. PLANNING STATUS
• 4.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is within an area zoned as "Predominantly Residential" identified on the Douglas Local Plan 1998. In the Area Plan for the East (2020), the site is shown on Proposals Map 4 - DOUGLAS - as being in an area zoned as 'Mixed Use'.

• 4.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this application;

• 4.3 General Policy 2 (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;
• (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;

• 4.4 Environment Policy 42: New development in existing settlements must be designed to take account of the particular character and identity, in terms of buildings and landscape features of the immediate locality. Inappropriate backland development, and the removal of open or green spaces which contribute to the visual amenity and sense of place of a particular area will not be permitted. Those open or green spaces which are to be preserved will be identified in Area Plans.
• 4.5 Transport Policy 4: The new and existing highways which serve any new development must be designed so as to be capable of accommodating the vehicle and pedestrian journeys generated by that development in a safe and appropriate manner, and in accordance with the environmental objectives of this plan.
• 4.6 Transport Policy 7: The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards.

REPRESENTATIONS

• 5.1 Douglas Corporation Comment Date: Wed 26 Feb 2025 Although no objection is being raised against the proposed development this is subject to suitable space being provided within the curtilage of the property for the storage of bins and recycling boxes. We would kindly ask that the applicant makes suitable provision for the storage of all waste receptacles.

Comment Date: Tue 18 Feb 2025 We would kindly ask that the applicant for PA 25/90149/B provides some further information to the Council's waste services team ([email protected]) in relation to their proposed bin storage arrangements.

• 5.2 Highways Services (5/3/2025) comments: "The development would create a new access along Palace Road to serve the dwelling. The layout plan has provided a visibility splay of 2.4m x 60m to support this access. The 2.4m setback is taken from the edge of hatched lining along Palace Road, as this area should be free from vehicular movement. The visibility distance is sufficient for the passing speeds along Palace Road. Parked vehicles can obstruct visibility on exit from the access, but this is a common occurrence in town/city centre locations, parked vehicles are not a permanent feature and the road is characterised by accesses where vehicles entering the highway would be expected by road users. Place Road at this location is one-way, with no traffic expected from the north. In the unlikely event a vehicle does dismiss this, there is still clear visibly to the left on exit. The access will be located within an existing double yellow and hatching marked area, so the access will have no impact on on-street parking. The alteration to the highway, in the form of creating a new access, will require a Section 109(A) Highway Agreement post planning consent.

Internally, the access if formed of a hardstanding surface which will prevent loose material tracking onto the highway. There is sufficient space for turning vehicles to ensure forward entry to the highway. Parking for the Strategic Plan minimum standard of two spaces is provided, and space in a covered area is given to the storage of bicycles. With no doors, these will have to be secured individually.

The proposal raises no significant road safety or highway network efficiency issues. Accordingly, Highway Services Development Control raises no objection to the proposal subject

to access arrangements to accord to drawing No. 313/020. The Applicant is advised that a S109(A) Highway Agreement is needed after the grant of planning consent. Recommendation: DNOC DNOC - Do not oppose subject to condition"

• 5.3 Highways Drainage Comments (25/2/25): "Allowing surface water runoff onto a public highway would contravene Section 58 of the Highway Act 1986 and guidance contained in section 11.3.11 of the Manual for Manx Roads."
• 5.4 Third Party (neighbour) representations 25 Falcon Cliff Court, Douglas (7/3/25) "I would like to submit an objection to the planning application mentioned above.

We are the owners of 25 Falcon Cliff Court, in which the application has been submitted on the land attached to our property.

We are in the midst of dealing with subsidence of our house with severe structural damage affecting all three floors. The subsidence has also severely affected our neighbour at number 23 Falcon Cliff however as he is rarely home he will likely not be aware of the planning permission in order to comment if he wishes to do so. Removing the ground within meters of our sinking houses is bound to have an adverse effect on both of our properties.

I am also aware of the water and sewerage running close to where they are proposing to dig and the impact it will have on our estate if the lines are affected or damaged.

We have a uniform estate, our property has been the only one that unfortunately has had the garden separated from the house and we were caught off guard when the boundary adjustment was completed after we had put an offer on the property. I would imagine that building a double story 3 bedroom property in our back yard would be considered a breach in the uniformity of the estate."

The occupant of 23 Falcon Cliff Court, Douglas (2/5/25) "I object to the proposal on the following grounds:

• 1. The proposal would have an adverse effect on the appearance of Palace Road.
• 2. The proposal would have an adverse effect on the existing houses 25-15 Falcon Cliff Court, particularly obscuring visibility.
• 3. It would be an example for similar proposals in adjacent properties to the proposed.
• 4. It would have a cramping effect von the adjacent scenic house, sometimes lit at night."
• 5.5 Representations on behalf of the applicant (21/5/25): For and on behalf of Wilson Consulting Limited (Agent)

"We have seen the comments submitted by the owners of 25 Falcon Cliff Court dated 7th March 2025, and discussed the same with our Client, the Applicant, REDACTED.

Firstly, REDACTED fully understands the concerns raised by the owners in relation to the works being undertaken adjacent to their home as he has undertaken a number of similar projects in the past few years. All of those projects were completed successfully and with no detriment to the neighbours, primarily because professional assistance was sought from the relevant consultants, and acted upon, and all statutory requirements were complied with.

The owners advise that their home already suffers from subsidence and this will be taken into account by the Civil Engineer employed to design the retaining wall; indeed, it is possible that

the proposed retaining wall may actually help to address the existing subsidence by stabilising the ground, subject to what is causing the same.

With regard to the appearance of the proposed house when viewed from the neighbour's property, it is designed to appear similar to a tall timber garden fence, ensuring that there is no overlooking towards the neighbours. As noted in the submitted documents, this approach was proposed on the basis that the primary habitable accommodation in the neighbouring properties starts at First Floor level, which is above the highest point of the proposed house, thus ensuring that there is no detriment to the amenity of the occupants.

As the land is zoned for residential development (as being 'predominantly residential'), the proposed house is not considered to be out of keeping with the adjacent uses, although it has intentionally not been designed to resemble the estate but, rather, to respond to its specific context.

We hope that the above helps to address the neighbours' concerns." ASSESMENT

• 6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are:

• (i) Principle of development
• (ii) Visual impact on the on the street scene.
• (iii) Impact upon the amenities (overlooking, loss of light and over bearing impact) of the neighbouring properties; and,
• (iv) highway safety for access.

• (i) Principle of development

6.2 The site likes within the settlement boundary for Douglas and in the Area Plan for the East (2020), the site lies within an area zoned for development as 'mixed use', located outside the Douglas city centre boundary. It is also noted that it is also worth noting that the site lies within an area that was zoned 'Predominantly Residential' in the Douglas Local Plan 1998, which was the immediate predecessor to the Area Plan for the East, thus indicating the longstanding nature of the area as being residential. The principle of development for residential use is therefore, considered to be established.

• (ii) Visual impact on the on the street scene.

• 6.2 The site was previously the subject of an Application in Principle (PA00/01255/A) for 3 self-contained apartments and associated parking which was Refused on Review in 2001; and, PA/16/00034/B for the erection of a dwelling on Land Abutting Palace Road, Rear of 25 Falcon Cliff Court. This was refused and subsequently refused at appeal.
• 6.3 The description of the streetscene as set out earlier in this report outlines its attractiveness in both its built and natural form. The presence of a Registered Building opposite adds a certain degree of grandeur to the area, while the number and maturity of trees lining the highway provides a leafy and green setting that in many ways underpins its attractive character. The loss of the trees at the southern corner of the site is unfortunate but even more oppressing would be the clear views of the three-storey terrace of Falcon Cliff Terrace which would become much more prominent within the street scene from the insertion into the steep banking and removal of the grassy roadside bank.

• 6.3 The planning Inspector for the PA16/00034/B application considered that: "The presence of the proposed dwelling would be made even more obvious by the proposed excavation and removal of the steep grassy bank alongside Palace Road. To my mind, the bank and the stone wall beneath it are features that make a valuable contribution to the character of this stretch of Palace Road and their loss would cause significant harm to the street scene." (paragraph 13). With this in mind I would have to agree with that statement and on visiting the

• site, the removal of 14m of walling and creation of a parking area would significantly alter the appearance of this part of the area, setting a dangerous precedent.
• 6.4 General Policy 2(b) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (IoMSP) requires new development to respect its site and surroundings in terms of, amongst other things, the design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them. Moreover, General Policy 2(c) establishes that new development should not have an adverse effect on the character of the surrounding townscape. It is considered that the uncompromisingly modern design of the proposed dwelling, its insertion into a steep slope and the destruction of part the grassy roadside bank to provide vehicular access to serve the development would fail to satisfy these requirements. The street scene in this part of Palace Road would be adversely affected to an unacceptable degree.
• 6.5 Environment Policy 42 talks about "… the removal of open or green spaces which contribute to the visual amenity and sense of place of a particular area will not be permitted." In this instance the reduction of the amenity space associated with No.25 to accommodate the proposed development would result in an unacceptably adverse visual impact on the character and appearance of this part of the Palace Road streetscene. It is, therefore, considered that the proposal fails to comply with the provisions of parts (b), and (c) of General Policy 2 and also Environment Policy 42. (ii) impact upon the neighbouring amenities

• 6.5 The proposal is concerned with the lower part of the garden and would be approx. 10m away from the rear elevation of the neighbouring dwelling at the rear of No. 25 Falcon Cliff Court. The level and scale of the proposal twinned with there being a limited height to its upper built form of approx. 2.4m high above proposed finished ground level, and approx. 13.0m wide, is considered to adversely affect the neighbours living conditions for the enjoyment of their dwellinghouse or rear garden in accordance with General Policy 2 (g). The existing dwelling at No. 25 Falcon Cliff Court, also has an outdoor terrace to the side of the dwelling, so the impact on its occupant’s amenities would be amplified in that the enjoyment of the terrace would be diminished. (iv) Impact on highway safety for access.
• 6.6 The position of Highway Services is understood, in that they do not object. The proposal would be deemed to satisfy Transport Policy 4 and 7, also General Policy 2 (h) and (i) in that the visibility when exiting the site can be provided without generating any impact on highway safety and that the parking provision on site would meet the required parking standards for such a development.

CONCLUSION

• 7.1 The application is finely balanced with the main material issues pulling in opposite directions. It is considered that more weight should be given to the unfavourable conclusion regarding the adverse visual impact on the streetscene in Palace Road as noted above, and on the adverse impact on the amenities enjoyed by the occupants of No. 25 Falcon Cliff Court. The lack of objection from Highway Services relating to the installation of the proposed new vehicular access onto Palace Road, is noted. The application is recommended for refusal on visual and neighbour amenity grounds as the proposals fails to comply with the provisions of parts (b), (c) and (g) of General Policy 2 and also Environment Policy 42.
• 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:

• 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.

---

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 : Refused Date: 13.05.2025 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.

Mr John Wilson Kempis House Orrisdale Road Ballasalla IM9 3AE

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1999 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019

In pursuance of powers granted under the above Act, and subordinate Orders and Regulations, the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture determined to REFUSE an application by Mr Trevor McCullough, Ref 25/90149/B, for the Erection of a new dwelling with associated parking and landscaping at Land Abutting Palace Road, Rear Of 25 Falcon Cliff Court Douglas Isle Of Man for the following reason(s):

• 1. The dwelling proposed is of an inappropriate scale and form relative to the handsome and attractive streetscene in which it is proposed to be sited. It would be actively harmful in an area that benefits from, and is characterised by, attractive Victoriana and a Registered Building at The Falcon Cliff Hotel. The proposal is therefore unacceptable and contrary to the provisions of parts (b), (c) and (g) of General Policy 2; and, also Environment Policy 42 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
• 2. The proposed dwelling would sit no more than 8.5m from No. 25 Falcon Cliff Court to the rear. No. 25 Falcon Cliff Court lies at the end of a terrace of dwellings and is served by an outdoor side terrace which lies opposite the site. The level and scale of the proposal twinned with there being a limited height to its upper built form of approx. 2.4m high above proposed finished ground level, and approx. 13.0m wide, is considered to adversely affect the neighbours living conditions for the enjoyment of their dwellinghouse, outdoor terrace and rear garden. Overall, the proposed dwelling would reduce the enjoyment of the rear gardens of dwellings in Falcon Cliff Court to the extent that the relationship between the proposed and existing dwellings would be unduly harmful. The proposal therefore represents inappropriate development contrary to part (g) of General Policy 2 and also Environment Policy 42 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

Date of Issue: 13th May 2025

J CHANCE

Director of Planning and Building Control

Guidance Note

This decision was made by a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority delegated to them.

This decision refers only to that applied for under the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 and its subordinate legislation.

A copy of the Officer’s report and any correspondence which informed the assessment and decision is available to view on the Government’s website (via https://pbc.gov.im/onlineapplications/)

A determination to refuse planning approval does not have effect — if an appeal is submitted until the appeal is determined or withdrawn; or if no appeal is submitted, until the time within which an appeal may be submitted has expired (21 days from the date of this notice).

Appeal Any appeal must be in writing, include the appropriate fee and be submitted to the Department within 21 days of the date of this Notice.

Guidance on how to appeal is available at gov.im/howtoappeal

Planning Appeal Ref: AP25/0018 Planning Ref: 24/91049/B Aerial Photograph of the Appeal Site Land Abutting Palace Road, Rear of 25 Falcon Cliff Court Douglas, Isle of Man, IM2 4AH.

Please reply to the signatory Our Ref: 25/90149/B Mrs. L Milestone, Planning Appeals Secretary, Cabinet Office, Government Offices, Buck’s Road, Douglas, IM1 3PN.

Tel: (01624) 685910 Fax: (01624) 686443 Email: [email protected]

Jennifer Chance MRTPI Director of Planning & Building Control

9th June 2025

Dear Mrs Milestone, Ref: 25/90149/B Applicant: Mr Trevor McCullough Proposal: Appeal against the refusal for Erection of a new dwelling with associated parking and landscaping Address: Land Abutting Palace Road, Rear of 25 Falcon Cliff Court Douglas Isle of Man, IM2 4AH.

In the event that the appointed Planning Inspector is minded to recommend that the application be approved, the following suggested conditions and reasons are considered to be appropriate in this case:

1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of fouryears 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.

2. No work shall be carried out on in relation to the construction of any of theexternal surfaces of the dwelling hereby permitted unless details of the materials,colour and finish to be used for all external walls and roofs have been first submittedto and approved in writing by DEFA Planning. The development hereby permittedshall thereafter be constructed in accordance with the approved details.

To ensure the use of materials appropriate to the development in order to safeguard the visual amenities of the area, in accordance with policy GP2 in the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016).

• 3. No work shall be carried out on in relation to the construction of any of the external surfaces of the dwelling hereby permitted until details of existing and proposed site levels and finished floor levels in relation to the surrounding area, have been first submitted to and approved in writing by DEFA Planning. The development hereby permitted shall thereafter be constructed in accordance with the approved details.

To ensure the use of materials appropriate to the development in order to safeguard the visual amenities of the area, in accordance with policy GP2 in the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016).

• 4. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, details of a landscape scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. All planting, seeding, and earth works comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and season (November - March) following the substantial completion of the development whichever is the sooner, and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species. Thereafter, all soft and hard landscape works shall be permanently retained in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development, and to safeguard the appearance of the development and the surrounding area.

• 5. The access arrangements, vehicle parking spaces and turning area shown provided for the development, hereby permitted, on Drawing No. 313/020 - stamped received and dated 12 February, 2025; shall be provided prior to the first occupation of the dwelling and shall thereafter be retained and made available for vehicles to access the site, vehicle parking and turning at all times.

Reason: To ensure that sufficient on-site parking is provided to serve the development in order to avoid unnecessary on-street parking as per the requirements of the Manual for Manx Roads and Transport Policy 7 in the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016).

• 6. Prior to the commencement of the development, hereby permitted, details of the arrangements for the secure parking of cycles at the ratio of 1 space per bedroom, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by DEFA Planning. Thereafter, the secure cycle parking arrangements shall be installed prior to the first occupation of the dwelling and shall subsequently be retained and maintained for the lifetime of the development.

Reason: To ensure that on-site secure cycle storage facilities are provided to the required standard for a new residential premises in line with Manual for Manx Roads Standards, and to help meet the Isle of Man Governments net zero objectives.

• 7. There must be NO discharge of surface water (directly or indirectly) from this proposed development onto the public highway.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 58 of the Highway Act 1986 and guidance contained in section 11.3.11 of the Manual for Manx Roads.

• 8. Details of foul and surface water drainage provision to serve the development, hereby approved, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by DEFA Planning. Such approved drainage scheme shall be installed prior to the development hereby permitted being first occupied and shall thereafter be retained and maintained at all times.

Reason: To ensure that the site is adequately drained and does not increase the risk of flooding elsewhere.

• 9. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2025 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no extension, enlargement or other alteration of the dwelling, including the installation or replacement of any windows or doors, 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.

• 10. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2025 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no garages or other free standing buildings shall be erected or enclosure, swimming or other pool, container for domestic heating purposes for storage of oil of liquid petroleum gas, or the erection of a gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure, within the curtilage of the dwelling 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. Yours sincerely, Mr Hamish Laird Planning Officer