AP250007 Uplift Planning Rebuttal Letter on Behalf the Appellants

Planning Appeals Administrator Department of Local Government and the Environment Cabinet Office Douglas Isle of Man IM1 3PN

Dear Mr Johnstone,

10 April 2025

Re: Further Rebuttal Submission in Respect of Appeal No. AP25/0007, Planning Application 24/91306/B – New Farmhouse and Agricultural Barn at Fields 321756, 324673 and 324674, Braaid Road, Braaid, IM4 2AN

We write further on behalf of our clients, the Appellants, in relation to the recent submissions received from the Applicant and the relevant departments. We note that many of the issues raised therein have been comprehensively covered in our full Planning Statement of Case. However, we wish to address the following additional points which merit further consideration.

1. Housing Policy 9 and the ‘Essential Need’ Test

The Applicants contend that, as the majority of their farming land is tenanted, they are unable to establish a farm building group on the Braaid site. This submission, however, fails to alter the clear statutory requirement under Housing Policy 9 that any agricultural dwelling must be sited within or immediately adjoining a main group of farm buildings, use the existing farm access and be set back from the highway. The fact that the Applicant does not own the contiguous land does not relieve the obligation to adhere to this policy. Their inability to purchase additional land, while unfortunate, does not provide planning justification for the creation of an isolated dwelling in open countryside. Our earlier submission clearly established that personal convenience or the desire for home ownership cannot override the established planning criteria.

2. Impact on Residential Amenity and Landscape Character

In respect of the objections concerning residential amenity, we reiterate that the approved proposal would fundamentally alter the character of the Braaid. The Applicant’s narrative regarding the historical evolution of the hamlet, including references to the loss of traditional farmstead features, does not mitigate the material impact a new, large-scale farmhouse and barn would have on neighbouring properties.

The close proximity of the development to existing dwellings – notably the immediate effects on privacy, daylight, disturbance and visual amenity – remains a significant concern. The overwhelming objection from local residents, coupled with our detailed analysis in the original Statement of Case, demonstrates that the development would adversely affect the living conditions in a manner inconsistent with the Strategic Plan’s objectives.

3. Precedential Implications

Approving this application, in light of the Applicant’s arguments, risks setting a dangerous precedent. Relaxing the siting and essential need requirements effectively undermines the integrity of countryside protection policies. It sends a message that deviations from established planning standards are acceptable, thereby encouraging further speculative development in rural areas. This, we submit, is contrary to both the letter and the spirit of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan.

In summary, the additional submissions fail to address the substantive flaws inherent in the approval decision. The arguments put forward by the Applicant do not alter the fact that the proposal does not meet any of the cumulative requirements of Housing Policy 9, nor does it justify the significant adverse impacts on residential amenity and the landscape character of the Braaid.

We respectfully ask that the Inspector gives due weight to these factors and, in line with our original Submission, overturns the decision to approve the development.

We trust that this further clarification will assist in the Planning Inspector’s assessment of the appeal. Should you require any further information or clarification, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Yours sincerely,

Ste

Steven Stanley (MRTPI) Founder & CEO Uplift Planning Limited