Officer Report

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No.: 25/91089/B Applicant: Mr & Mrs David and Shan Fisher Proposal: Replacement of existing lean to with double storey extension to northeast elevation, alteration to vehicular access Site Address: Kimmeragh Ballafesson Road Port Erin Isle Of Man IM9 6TX Senior Planning Officer: Jason Singleton Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 05.02.2026 _________________________________________________________________

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 materials to be used in the construction and finishing of the development hereby approved shall be as described on the approved plans unless alternatives are first submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the host dwelling and wider area.
• C 3. Within 6 months of the creation of the new access, the parking and vehicle hardstanding areas shall be made from bound and consolidated materials and the existing access closed off with a Manx stone wall and landscaping behind, unless alternatives are first submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the area and highway safety.

The Applicant is reminded that a S109 Highway agreement will be required for the installation of a dropped kerb vehicular access onto the highway.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposals would comply with Strategic Policy 5, Spatial Policy 4, General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 42 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016).

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This decision relates to drawings ans supporting information received on 12 December 2026, referenced;

• 1565-51
• 1565-52

• 1565-54
• 1565-55
• 1565-56
• 1565-57
• 1565-58 and amended drawings referenced 1565-53A received on 15 January 2026.

_________________________________________________________________ Right to Appeal

It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal: DOI Highway Services - No Objection with condition Local Authority - Support proposal

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: Lhag Sumark Ballafesson Road Port Erin

_________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The site is the residential curtilage of an existing dwelling, Kimmeragh which is one of three dwellings which sit somewhat on their own on the south eastern side of the Ballafesson Road. The two dwellings which lie to the south west are "Mizpah", closest to the application property, and "The Gables" further to the south west. The land to the rear is agricultural fields. - 1.2 The existing dwelling began as a detached dormer bungalow circa 1970's that has seen various extensions added to the original built form and has an established flat roof dormer roof extension to the rear roofscape and a single storey rear extension off the existing rear elevation. As such much of the original character here in terms of the rear elevation has been altered & extended but the front elevation facing the street scene remains as is. - 1.3 Internally the property, contains a granny flat and is noted this is used by an elderly relative. The existing lean-to extension accommodates a kitchen and leads to a lounge with its own staircase to a bedroom above.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 This application proposes to demolish an existing lean to extension on the side (north) elevation and in its place the erection of a two story extension, measuring a footprint of 4.5m wide and 7.1m deep (the width of the property) and a lower ridge height than the built form it is attached to. Internally the space created would accommodate a new kitchen diner and a large bedroom with ensuite and dressing room. - 2.2 The proposed extension would have the appearance and finished to match the host property (painted rendered walls and double roman tiled roof) with the rear elevation of the

• dwelling house at first floor using the same vertically hung slates to the dormer to match the existing rear dormer walls adjacent. Windows and fascia boards proposed to be dark grey.
• 2.3 Also proposed is the blocking up of the vehicle access opposite the dwelling house with stone work to match the existing and the gate pillars removed. Then, relocating this access to the north of the existing to provide a 4.5m width vehicle access with gate pillars and concrete capping stones with a dropped kerb to the highway. The existing gravel hardstanding would also feature a storm water soak away into the ground. The existing parking area would provide three parking spaces.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY - 3.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is within an area recognised as being predominantly residential use under the Area Plan for the South and within the settlement boundary of Ballafesson on Map 7 (Port Erin / Port St Mary). The site is not within a conservation area or within an area identified as being at flood risk. - 3.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this application; Strategic Policy

• o 2 Priority for new development to identified towns and villages
• o 3 To respect the character of towns and villages and use of local materials.
• o 5 Design and visual impact. Spatial Policy
• o 4 Development in Remaining Villages General Policy
• o 2 General development considerations (b,c,g,h,i) Environment Policy
• o 42 Designed to respect the character and identity of the locality

3.3 Paragraph 8.12.1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 states: "As a general policy, in built up areas not controlled by Conservation Area or Registered Building policies, there will be a general presumption in favour of extensions to existing property where such extensions would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent property or the surrounding area in general." - 3.4 The Residential Design Guidance (2021) 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. Specific information is given in Section 4.7.2 for the design of flat roof extension where the department seeks for improved designs incorporating architectural detailing and provides examples of good and bad design. Generally, design of the flat roof extensions should utilise parapet walls including architectural detailing. It is generally encouraged that applicants explain the reasons why a flat roof design was considered and chosen.

- 4.0 PLANNING HISTORY

4.1 The application site benefits from the following approvals; 01/01369/B - Alterations and extensions to dwelling including conversion of garage to additional living accommodation and enlargement of existing vehicular access and driveway 12/00264/B - Erection of a dormer extension to dwelling

• 14/00885/C - Extension to residential curtilage of dwelling (retrospective) - Initially refused by Planning Committee but approved at appeal.
• 15/00622/B - Demolition of existing and erection of an extension to rear elevation of dwelling. -

Approved by Planning Committee.

• 16/00607/B - Relocation of existing vehicular access 16/00396/B - Erection of a spiral staircase to rear elevation of dwelling 22/01538/B - Erection of first floor extension to the rear elevation, erection of porch to the front elevation and removal of concrete tiles and replaced with slate roofing. Approved at appeal with only 1 condition; 4 years to commence.

- 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Arbory and Rushen Commissioners (03.02.2026) support the proposal.

5.2 Highways Services commented (23/01/26) No objection: "Highway Services HDC has reviewed the uploaded information for application 25/91089/B dated 15 Jan 26 online and can comment that the Applicant has addressed HDC previous comments and therefore HDC now does not oppose (DNOC) the application subject to conditions on access, parking and vehicle hardstanding to be bound and consolidated. A S109 highway agreement will be required for the closing (to full height footway) and opening (to dropped kerb vehicular access) of the accesses". - 5.3 Lhag Sumark Ballafesson Road Port Erin (23/12/25) "I wish to dispute the planning application on Kimmeragh to change the location of their driveway. We live across this road in Lhag Sumark. Where they plan to have their drive is adjacent to where we park our two cars on the public road. This is the only safe place to actually park so moving the drive entry will take this from our home. I know it is public but it is all the parking there is. We do not mind the extension, just not the moving of the driveway".

- 6.0 ASSESSMENT

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

• o Principle of development (Stp2,SP4)
• o Design & Visual Impact (Stp3 & 5, GP2)
• o Impact on Neighbours amenity (Gp2g)
• o Highway Safety and Paring (Gp2 h,i)

PRINCIPLE

6.2 The application site is located in an area zoned for residential development and is situated within a defined settlement, where the general principle would be accepted and further supported though Paragraph 8.12.1 of the SP, where there is a general presumption in favour of extensions, which; "would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent property or the surrounding area in general". As such the principle of development to this property would meet the criteria within Stp2 and Sp4. DESIGN & VISUAL IMPACT - 6.3 The demolition of the existing lean-to extension would be acceptable as this contributes no architectural merit to the property. In its place and slightly larger, the proposed extension at the side (north) in a two storey height and roof pitch to match that of the existing, would be acceptable form of development for increasing the floor area for residential use. The use would remain as a granny flat, albeit larger but still is connected internally to the main dwelling. The proposed extension would be introducing a larger built form on this side elevation and in terms of size (footprint) and height (two storey) but it would be considered proportionate to the side / front elevation that's designed to serve that specific purpose in terms of residential accommodation attached to the host dwellinghouse. Nevertheless, these proposals would be insignificant when compared to the gravitas of the first floor extension that was approved at appeal decision under 22/01538/B as shown on dwg ref; 1565-57. - 6.4 In terms of roof coverings, this proposal would incorporate the use of a pitched roof with a dormer in the rear elevation to echo that of the existing level of dormer in the rear roof scape. When putting this in context with this site, it can be seen that the design of this extension being proposed here has been designed to complement the main dwelling and has incorporated within its design other elements to enhance its appearance, in terms of use of materials and fenestration design and detailing, which can be an acceptable approach. - 6.5 When viewing the proposed extension, it would not be readily visible from a public vantage point, mainly from the public highway (Ballafesson Road) albeit from a distance. The road side boundary/ curtilage of the property is tall evergreen hedging ameliorating any visual impact from this section of the pavement when passing and the rear aspect is not be visible from the front elevation (streetscene) as the majority of the dwelling house screens the rear. - 6.6 As such, any views of the proposals from the public highway, would be read within the contact of the property and the residential curtilage and would not appear out of character. On

• balance it would not be apparent or overly dominant on the streetscape, when viewed from the internal access road.
• 6.7 This aspect is deemed to be an acceptable form of development without harming the visual character and quality of the street scene or to the property itself in accordance with STP5, GP2(b,c) and Ep42. NEIGHBOURING AMENITIES
• 6.8 The level and scale of development proposed here, is considered to be relatively modest and through its design is not judged to cause harm to the enjoyment of the main dwelling house or considered to harm the neighbouring amenity, specifically those to the sides or front through any overlooking, loss of light, an over bearing impact, loss of privacy and general visual amenity. On balance, these aspects would be considered to be compliant with those sections of General Policy 2(g). HIGHWAY SAFETY AND PARKING
• 6.9 The removal of the existing driveway and relocating its position would see the removal of some griselinia hedging and a 4.5m section of Manx stone wall. In creating the new entrance, the existing Manx stone for the wall could be re-used to block up the existing opening ensuring the finish would match the existing wall to the front of the property and would not be seen to have any detrimental visual impact upon the appearance of the property or character of the area.
• 6.10 It is further noted that the existing vehicular access and its relocation to the north as per this application, was previously approved under 16/00607/B. where the visibility splays of at least 2.4m by 43m will be available in both directions as shown on the proposed access visibility splay drawing.
• 6.11 The new entrance located to the north would be of a width that would be acceptable with the required visibility splays for safe access and egress for this section of roadway and speed limit. The comments from the neighbours opposite (adjacent to the proposed access) regarding parking on the road and highway safety are noted and is understood to focus on the potential for conflicts with where they park on the public highway and access into and out of the proposed driveway. It is further noted there are no road markings or parking restrictions on this section of the highway.
• 6.12 Highway Services have considered the merits of the proposal, and they have not raised an objection, despite the neighbouring comments. The scale of the access, to and from the property, from the highway, noting visibility splays, as well as parking and highway safety has been taken into consideration. As the transport professionals, their comments are welcomed and its clear these proposals can be used in a safe and convenient manner for all highways users accessing this site. As such the proposals do not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows to this part of the highway and would be aligned with GP2h,I

- 7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 The planning application would be an acceptable form of development within a defined residential area that has been designed to ensure that it would not harm the host dwelling in terms of visual appearance over and above the existing levels nor would the use and enjoyment of neighbouring properties amenities be affected by the proposals.

7.2 As such the proposals would comply with Strategic Policy 5, Spatial Policy 4, General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 42 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016). The application is therefore 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:

• 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 : Permitted Date: 05.02.2026 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.