9 November 2020 · Head of Development Management (Stephen Butler)
Proposed Apartments And Offices At, Arragon House, 321 Arragon Road, Arragon, Santon, Isle Of Man, IM4 1hh
The site is an undeveloped, grassed plot sloping upwards, surrounded on three sides by road, car park, and barns, within an area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance near Arragon House.
Click a button above to find applications similar to this one.
See how this application compares to similar ones — policies, conditions, and outcomes side by side.
The officer determined the site lies in countryside within an Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance under the 1982 Development Plan, not designated for development and unchan…
Environment Policy 1
Protects countryside for its own sake; prevents development adversely affecting countryside unless overriding national need with no alternative. Officer assessed proposal as new housing in undeveloped grassland within High Landscape Value area adjacent to open fields, making positive landscape contribution now lost, with public footpath adding weight to protection; no overriding need proven.
Environment Policy 2
Prevents development harming landscape character, especially in Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance. Site in 1982 Plan AHLV (replaced by draft Landscape Character Appraisal 'Incised Inland Slopes'); proposal harms character via new built form and suburban design despite tree screening, not integrating per Landscape Proposal 7 on siting/scale/materials.
General Policy 3
Permits countryside development only in specified exceptions (e.g. agricultural housing, rural building conversion, overriding national need). Proposal fits none; staff housing not policy-supported even if 'essential' for estate/medical needs, alternatives exist in applicant's buildings.
Housing Policy 4
Locates new housing primarily in towns/villages or sustainable extensions; countryside housing only for agriculture/conversion/replacement. Three new dwellings purely residential, contrary to policy despite ancillary staff claim.
Strategic Policy 1
Optimises previously developed land, efficient site use, utilises infrastructure. Grassed site not previously developed; remote rural location poor infrastructure access.
Strategic Policy 2 - Priority for new development to identified towns and villages
Directs development to towns/villages; countryside only per GP3 exceptions. Site outside settlements in countryside.
Spatial Policy 5
New development to positively contribute to environment via good design. Terrace appears suburban/modern housing estate, not reflecting rural context or 21st-century vernacular per para 4.3.8.
All new retail development (excepting neighbourhood shops and those instances identified in Business Policy 5) sited within the town and village centr
Part of sustainable development policies; proposal unsustainable due to location/transport.
Strategic Policy 19
Supports sustainable development; conflicts with countryside protection.
Transport Policy 1
Locate development near public transport; minimise car journeys. Remote site accessed only by car via narrow lane/public footpath, increasing movements adversely impacting footpath users.
Acceptable in highway terms; adequate parking space (suggest 5x2.5m markings); low vehicle movements unlikely to cause hazard; no significant highway safety or network issues; no opposition subject to conditions for bicycle storage and car parking
Multiple consultees and neighbouring residents object to the application primarily due to its location in a protected countryside Area of High Landscape Value, non-compliance with Strategic Plan policies against new builds outside development zones, and impacts on rural character…
Key concern: Non-compliance with Strategic Plan prohibiting new builds in countryside/Area of High Landscape Value
Department of Infrastructure Highways
Conditional No ObjectionThe proposal is acceptable in highway terms reducing the scale and form of development to three dwellings without the addition of the office use as previously.; There is adequate space to accommodate six parking spaces to accord with the Strategic Plan parking standards at two per unit.; Recommendation: DNOC.
Conditions requested: Spaces, if marked should be dimensioned at 5 x 2.5m to meet current highway requirements; Separate covered storage should be provided for bicycles and other items; Electric vehicle charging points considered
Manx National Heritage
ObjectionThis application does not include any form of ecological assessment.; Environmental Policy 4, (a)(i), of the Strategic Plan states that development will not be permitted which would adversely affect species and habitats of both international and national importance. This policy cannot be satisfied in the absence of any ecological assessment.
Conditions requested: EIA be undertaken by a suitably qualified and experienced ecologist
Santon Parish Commissioners
ObjectionSanton Parish Commissioners agreed to object to the following application as it appears to clearly contradict the presumption against development in the Countryside.
Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society
ObjectionIsle of Man Natural History & Antiquarian Society OBJECTS to this application.; Continued attempts to obtain permission for new build in the countryside contrary to Isle of Man Strategic Plan housing in the countryside policies.
The original application (20/01050/B) for erection of a building providing three units of staff accommodation with parking and landscaping was refused by delegated officer decision for reasons including countryside harm, inappropriate design, and unsustainable transport impacts. Appellants argued the site is infill in a hamlet not countryside, no highway issues per Highway Authority, essential need due to health/COVID, procedural flaws, and inconsistency with precedents. Council defended refusal citing countryside location per Environment Policy 1, no policy exceptions met, rural character harm, and sustainability concerns. Inspector primarily concluded the application invalid due to discrepancies in submitted plans failing legal requirements for full approval, making refusal and appeal null; alternatively, if valid, recommended dismissal on countryside principle, rural character, traffic/sustainability, and personal circumstances not justifying policy breach.
Precedent Value
Emphasises strict plan-led approach to countryside development with no exceptions for estate staff housing; critical need for accurate, consistent full application plans to avoid invalidity; personal needs insufficient without policy compliance.
Inspector: Michael Hurley BA DipTP
