Officer Report

Application No.: 25/91018/B Applicant: Mrs Caroline Duncan Proposal: Enclosure of existing first floor level balcony to north east elevation of dwellinghouse Site Address: Dreem-Ny-Geay Grove Mount Ramsey Isle Of Man IM8 3HE Principal Planner: Chris Balmer Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 11.12.2025 _________________________________________________________________

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. The window frames hereby approved and as shown on drawing 06 shall be coloured anthracite grey, powder coated aluminium framed & double glazed units, to match the existing frames within the property and retained thereafter. Reason: In the interests of the visual amenities of the existing property and area.
• C 3. Prior to the commencement of any works hereby approved details shall be submitted in writing to the Department for approval providing detailed measures (for example etchings, ultraviolet coatings or decals) to prevent bird strikes to the windows hereby approved and these details shall be fully adhered to and retained thereafter. Reason: To prevent bird strikes.

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

In summary, the proposal would have no significant adverse impacts upon public or private amenities. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to comply with GP2 of the IOM Strategic Plan 2016 and the Residential Design Guide 2021.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawing all received on 11.11.2025.

_________________________________________________________________ Right to Appeal It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal: DOI Highway Services - No Objection Local Authority - No Objection/no comments received It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given the Right to Appeal as they have submitted an objection that meets the specified criteria: 29 Royal Park, Ramsey

_________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report

1.0 SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 'Dreen-Ny-Gaye'at the far north east end of Grove Mount in Ramsey. The site is at the end of the Grove Mount road, across the road from a footpath leading to an area of Public Open Space and overlooking Mooragh Park and lake. The street scene is characterised by larger detached two storey dwellings on this side of the street, and woodland on the other. There is varying design seen in the dwellings ranging from traditionally styled to modern. To the rear (north) is a modern residential estate.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The application seeks approval for the enclosure of existing first floor level balcony to north east elevation of dwelling house.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 Erection of a replacement detached dwelling and alterations to existing vehicular access

- 19/00359/B - APPROVED

3.2 Installation of domestic gas tank in West corner of site - 20/01259/B - APPROVED

- 4.0 PLANNING POLICY

4.1 The site is shown on the Ramsey Local Plan Order 1998 as being within an Area of Predominantly Residential Use. The site is not within a Conservation Area. - 4.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains one policy that is considered specifically relevant to the assessment of this current planning application: - 4.3 General Policy 2 states: "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 Residential Design Guide 2021

- 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Ramsey Commissioners comment (12.11.2025); "I am directed by the Ramsey Town Commissioners to request that you defer any decision on the above application until such time as the Commissioners have had the opportunity to fully consider the plans.

The Board meet on Wednesday 17th December, 2025, following which I will contact you again."

5.2 Ecosystem Policy Team (28.11.2025); "General Stance No objection subject to condition Detailed comments

• o Though noting that the current arrangement is a balcony with clear glass balustrades, the proposal is to enclose this with further clear glass, which poses an additional collision risk to birds, as they often cannot perceive the glass and try and fly through to reach other habitat, and can result in bird injury or death. This risk is heightened in this location due to the presence of the woodland around the property. We therefore recommend that measures are put in place to prevent bird collisions. Potential conditions
• o No works to commence unless a plan detailing the measures that are to be put in place to prevent bird strikes on the clear glass balustrades, is submitted to Planning and approved in writing. Measures could include use of etching, ultraviolet coatings or decals."

5.3 The owner/occupiers of 29 Royal Park, Ramsey object to the application on the following grounds (06.12.2025); "We are writing to provide comments regarding Planning Application 25/91018/B - Enclosure of existing first floor level balcony to the north east elevation of the dwelling house at Dreem-NyGeay, Grove Mount, Ramsey, Isle of Man, IM8 3HE.

Our property, located at 29 Royal Park, Ramsey, Isle of Man, IM8 3UF, directly faces the north elevation of Dreem-Ny-Geay. We appreciate the opportunity to submit our comments and understand the importance of property improvements and the need to balance development with the interests of neighbouring residents.

Summary of Concerns

• -Privacy Impact: The original design of Dreem-Ny-Geay includes only one window (1,532 x 2,100) in the main living area with a direct view into the rear of our property. While the existing balcony allows some view into our property, it is not currently part of the main living area of the property and has a limited effect on our privacy.
• - Increase in Overlooking Windows: The planning proposal would introduce an additional large window to the north side of the balcony (1,950 x 2,100). Presumably, enclosing the balcony would convert it into an extension of the main living area, increasing internal lighting and activity. This would more than double the area of living space windows that directly overlook our home, substantially intruding on our privacy.
• - Elevation Difference: The north side of the enclosed balcony faces directly into our three upstairs bedrooms, our main downstairs living area, and our entire garden. The elevation of Dreem-Ny-Geay is significantly higher than ours, making it very difficult to grow trees or other screening vegetation to mitigate the impact of our loss of privacy.

Impact on Privacy

We are concerned that the proposed changes would result in a significant increase in direct overlooking, affecting the privacy and enjoyment of our home. In summary, our key objection is that the enclosure of the balcony would create an unacceptable loss of privacy for our property due to the additional window space and elevation difference.

We appreciate your attention to this matter and thank you in advance for considering our concerns. If you require any further information or clarification, please let us know."

- 6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 It is considered the main issues with the application is the impact upon the visual amenities of the property/street scene and the potential impact upon neighbouring amenities, namely overlooking. IMPACT UPON THE VISUAL AMENITIES OF THE PROPERTY/STREET SCENE - 6.2 The proposed enclosure of the existing first floor balcony, are minor in nature and would have no adverse impact upon neighbouring properties, nor have an impact to the visual amenities of the street scene given its size and position. Overall, it is considered the proposal would be acceptable in terms of the character and appearance of the area and upon neighbouring amenities and the existing property, which currently has large glazed windows throughout. POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON NEIGHBOURING AMENITIES - 6.3 The property most likely to be affected by the development is Nr 29 Royal Park which is to the northwest of the proposal. As outlined by the objection received from the owners of this property, this relates to the northern (side) window of the proposal. - 6.4 The proposed window in question has a depth of 2.1m, which would be approximately between 30.8m and 38m from the rear elevation of the main dwelling house. A rear single storey extension is being built (PA 20/00493/B) which includes glazing to its rear and side elevations. This is approximately (not shown on submitted plans) 29m from its closest southern corner. The proposal would be approximately 16.5m from the shared boundary of the two sites. There is also a ground level differences between the two sites, with the application site being set above that of Nr 29 Royal Park, with the ground level of the application site being almost a half/full storey in level difference. The proposal does have views towards the rear garden and rear elevation of Nr 29, albeit the views of the rear elevation, namely the windows, are at a slight angle. Such views are existing views, give the balcony of the application site exists today. Theses views will not be altered by the current proposal, albeit a concern of the owners of Nr 29 is that the proposal will create a more useable space. - 6.5 The Residential Design Guide 2021 indicates that the "20 metre guide" can be useful when considering of overlooking, namely from two windows serving habitable rooms. The window in question (northwest) would be serving a primary habitable room, albeit it would not be the primary window (rather a "Secondary" window), that being the much larger window within the northeast elevation which has views towards Mooragh Promenade and the sea. It is reasonable to consider this would be the main source of outlook for occupants of the dwelling. The northwest window of the proposal would have views towards the three first floor windows (bedrooms) and the living room windows at ground floor level. It is noted the ground level differences of the site and the fact the proposal is at first floor level does result in an element of looking downwards towards Nr 29 and the Residential Design Guide indicates that in such situations the 20m guide can be increase. - 6.6 The proposal would create an additional internal living space. It is understood (email form agent 11.12.25) the existing sliding doors which are used to access the existing balcony

would be retained, rather than the space being incorporated into the existing living room. It should be noted that should the works be approved and completed the internal sliding doors could be removed within the need for planning approval. Either way, the proposal is creating a new habitable living space. The existing living room already has a window facing in this direction towards Nr 29 at a similar distance. While the new internal space created is arguable more useable (namely given the weather on the Island - presumably reason for application), it is not considered it is significant introducing overlooking over and above what current already exists. Furthermore, the proposal is greater than 20+ metres away which is generally regarded as a sufficient distance to protect amenities of neighbours in this case, even taking account of the ground level differences of the two sites. Furthermore, the level difference and the distance the proposal is to the boundary of the site, it is again considered sufficient to ensure there would be not significant overlooking to the rear garden to warrant a refusal.

- 7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 In summary, the proposal would have no significant adverse impacts upon public or private amenities. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to comply with GP2 of the IOMSP and the Residential Design Guide and therefore recommended for an 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:

• 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: 11.12.2025 Determining Officer Signed : J SINGLETON Jason Singleton 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.