Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
25/90413/B
Page 1 of 10
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 25/90413/B Applicant : Mr Lee Jason Copeland Proposal : Alteration of bus shelter into outhouse and removal of bus shelter from community facility into residential curtilage Site Address : 1 Snaefell View Jurby Isle Of Man IM7 3BF
Planning Officer: Vanessa Porter Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 12.01.2026 __
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. No development of the existing bus shelter shall commence until full details of the replacement bus shelter, together with a timescale for its installation, have been submitted to and approved in writing by Planning. The approved shelter shall be installed in accordance with the agreed timescale to ensure that no alteration of the existing bus stop shall take place until the replacement facility has been provided and is available for public use.
REASON: To comply with Community Policy 3
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. It is considered that the proposed development is located on land directly associated with the existing dwelling, and its siting does not give rise to any form of encroachment or land-use conflict. Subject to the implementation of the replacement condition requiring the provision of a new bus stop-secured to ensure continuity of public transport infrastructure-there is no evidence of any demonstrable harm in planning terms.
The replacement bus stop condition ensures that an appropriately designed, safely accessible, and suitably positioned facility is delivered prior to the alteration of the existing stop, thereby maintaining uninterrupted service provision for the local community. With this safeguard in place, the proposal is considered to comply with General Policy 2 and Community Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and is therefore deemed acceptable.
==== PAGE 2 ====
25/90413/B
Page 2 of 10
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This decision relates to the following plans and drawings, date stamped received on 22nd April 2025; o Location Plan o Site Plan o Drawing No.1 o Drawing No.2 o Drawing No.3 o Drawing No.4 o Drawing No.5 o Drawing No.7 o Drawing No.8 o Drawing No.9 o Drawing No.10 o Drawing No.11 o Drawing No.12 o Photo 1 o Photo 2
__
Right to Appeal
It is recommended that the following organisations should be given the Right to Appeal on the basis that they have submitted a relevant objection: Jurby Parish Commissioners - Objection Highway Services - Objection
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should NOT be given the Right to Appeal because they do not comply with part b) of the specified criteria (more than 20m away from the boundary of the land identified): No.3 St Patricks View, Jurby No.24 The Bretney, Jurby No.8 The Threshold No.10 The Threshold, Jurby No.12 The Threshold, Jurby No.13 The Threshold, Jurby No.19 The Threshold, Jurby No.13 Snaefell View, Jurby No.17 Snaefell View, Jurby No.25 The Bretney, Jurby Flat 3, Haywards, 39 Parliament Street, Ramsey No.14 Osborne Grove, Douglas The Beeches, Lezayre Road No.7 Beechwood Drive, Ardattin, Tullow, Co Carlow, Ireland No.40 Lakeside Road, Douglas Albany House, No.21 Albany Road, Douglas No.445 West Dyke Road, Redcar, North Yorkshire No.32 Ard Reayrt, Ramsey Road, Laxey Crowcreen, Ballaglass Glen Road, Cornaa, Ramsey __
Officer’s Report
==== PAGE 3 ====
25/90413/B
Page 3 of 10
THE APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO MORE THAN 4 OBJECTIONS AND THE LOCAL AUTHORITY HAVE OBJECTED TO THE PROPOSAL WHICH IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.
THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is within the ownership of No. 1 Snaefell View, Jurby and is specifically an existing bus shelter situated to the East of Jurby Road.
1.2 The existing bus shelter is the only one available directly outside of The Threshold/ Snaefell View housing estate, with the next closest being to the West of the estate opposite the Motor Museum approximately 455.59m away. The bus shelter is accessible from the estate by footpath up to approximately 358.41m where the footpath ends and the bus stop is only accessible via walking on the main road.
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The current planning application seeks approval for the blocking up of the existing opening and window to the South elevation (front), reduction in window length to the Western elevation and removal of an existing window to the North elevation with a door.
2.2 The proposal will also remove the existing bus shelter from the public domain and into the use as a private outbuilding and into the garden associated with the dwelling.
PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The following applications are situated upon the property in question; PA18/00068/B - Erection of detached garage (retrospective) - Permitted PA13/00190/B - Erection of a detached garage and driveway extension - Permitted PA13/00020/C - Change of use from existing community resource centre to residential - Permitted PA12/01434/B - Erection of a detached garage and driveway extension - Refused PA95/01591/C - Change of use from residential accommodation to community resource centre
PLANNING POLICY 4.1 The site lies within an area zoned as "Predominantly Residential" on the 1982 Development Plan, North Map. This is followed through on the Draft Area Plan for the North and West. Whilst a Village Study and not a Development Plan, the Jurby Village Study puts the site down as an "Existing Cluster."
4.2 The site is not situated within a Flood Risk Area nor a Conservation Area. There are also no Environmental constraints upon the site.
4.3 JURBY VILLAGE STUDY 4.3.1 Recommendation 2.38 of the Jurby Village Study is relevant and states, "No development will be permitted outside the designated areas, except that development which accords with the requirements of Planning Circulars 1/88, 3/88 and 3/89 as attached."
4.3.2 Whilst not fully relevant it should be noted that the overall site is adjacent to a landscaped area as recommended on Figure 7 - Opportunities for landscaping and as such the following are relevant;
Recommendations - Rural Landscaping "7.18 All new developments in the study area shall be accompanied by landscaping proposals both to contribute to the appearance of the village and to afford protections from the otherwise exposed nature of the area."
==== PAGE 4 ====
25/90413/B
Page 4 of 10
"7.20 Every effort will be made to protect and enhance the existing hedgerows adjacent to highways surrounding the village. Intrusion therein should be minimised and where access is required this shall be provided from existing openings, where practical"
4.4 ISLE OF MAN STRATEGIC PLAN 2016 4.4.1 The main overarching Strategic Aim of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 is, "To plan for the efficient and effective provision of services and infrastructure and to direct the control development and the use of land to meet the community needs, having particular regard to the principles of sustainability whilst at the same time preserving, protecting, and improving the quality of the environment, having particular regard to our uniquely Manx natural, wildlife, cultural and built heritage."
4.4.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies considered materially relevant to the assessment; o General Policy 2 - general standards towards acceptable development o Community Policy 3 - Development will only be permitted for the loss of a local community facility if it can be demonstrated that it is no longer practical or desirable. o Environment Policy 42 - promotes development take into account the particular character and identity of the environment.
4.5 MANUAL FOR MANX ROADS 4.5.1 Paragraphs 5.1.51 to 5.1.55 of the Manual for Manx Roads are relevant to the assessment of this application.
4.6 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS 4.6.1 The Isle of Man Transport Strategy 2025 - 2031 is also relevant to the assessment of this application and aims to make, "A safe, sustainable, accessible and equitable transport system which supports economic and population growth," with accessible being defined as "Accessible transport is transport which is suitable for and easy to use by everyone, including older and disabled people with mobility difficulties."
4.6.2 Our Island Plan 2024/2025 Update is also relevant to the assessment of this application, specifically part 16. Building great communities, part 9, which states, "Develop an integrated and socially inclusive Public Transport Strategy with recommendations and delivery plan which meets the needs of communities, keeps people connected in work, leisure and access to services and supports transition to Net Zero."
4.6.3 The Isle of Man Climate Change Plan 2022 is also relevant to the assessment of this application, specifically part 3. Transport, which states, "Transport is the Islands third largest source of emissions. To reduce emissions from this sector, we need to create an environment which reduces the need to travel and enables people to use more sustainable modes of transport, such as walking and cycling, public transport and electric vehicles.
4.6.4 The above plan is also connected to the Transport Decarbonisation Scenarios Technical Report 2024, of which part Car 08: Missing Links, Frequency Improvements and Other Improvements to the IoM Bus Network is relevant to the assessment of this application which seeks, "To identify and deliver a cost-effective set of enhancements to the IoM bus network which reduce the number of trips which currently do not have a 'realistic' alternative to private car use."
4.7 DEFINITION OF CURTILAGE 4.7.1 Definition of curtilage is found within Appendix 1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and states, "The area of land attached to and around a building, used with the building and within which the building is set (e.g. the garden and driveways of a house, the storage yard of a factory). Land used with a building but severed from it by, say, a highway or service land is not part of the curtilage of that building.
==== PAGE 5 ====
25/90413/B
Page 5 of 10
REPRESENTATIONS - STATUTORY 5.1 The following representations can be found online in full, below is a short summary;
5.2 Jurby Parish Commissioners have considered the proposal and object for the following reasoning, "1) We understand there is a potential dispute as to ownership/usage of the building, 2) The building has been used by the residents of Jurby on a daily basis as a bus shelter since long before the house was sold into private ownership. Jurby Parish residents require a bus shelter in or around this location." (13.05.25)
5.3 Highway Services have considered the proposal and object for the following reasoning, "The proposed alterations to the out building would remove the use of the bus shelter and the area where passengers have been dwelling while waiting for a bus for some years," and "The Applicant should discuss any access arrangements or alterations to the bus shelter with the Bus operator (Bus Vannin) but a bus shelter and dwelling area it sits within should remain in its current position, and due to its long time present on the land, members of the public are likely to have rights to access this dwelling area."
5.4 Manx Utilities Authority - Electric were consulted on the 23rd April 2025 of which no response has been received at the time of writing this report.
REPRESENTATIONS - OBJECTIONS 6.1 The following representations are objections from residents, the representations can be found in full online, below is a short summary;
6.2 No.3 St Patricks View, Jurby object to the proposal on the 12.05.25 on the basis that the bus shelter had been long standing and that the shelter should never have been included in the land registry deeds when purchased. They have also stated that the removal will cause a direct detriment to the parishioners of the area and other users in the area, especially in the colder and darker months of the year.
6.3 No.24 The Bretney, Jurby object to the proposal on the 13.05.25 for the following reasoning, "I would like to object to Jurby community losing this bus shelter as many children and elderly people use this as a bus shelter. Would be an idea for the government to build a new bus shelter if the land owner wants to alter these premises to suit their own needs."
6.4 No.8 The Threshold objected to the proposal on the 1.05.25 & 14.05.25 on the basis that the shelter has never been used as an outbuilding, the bus shelter has served the community for over 40 years, it's not included in the deeds, the negative impact to the elderly and children and that the site is the correct location for a bus stop.
6.5 No.10 The Threshold, Jurby object to the proposal on the 9.05.25 and 14.05.25 on the basis that, "I just genuinely believe this bus shelter belongs to the residents of Jurby, and there has been a mistake in his deeds. The bus shelter has been used by residents for over 40 years and is a staple part of the community. I believe that most of the people who have objected don't even live in Jurby and are friends of the resident seeking permission. I believe the problems being described by the resident and his friends and being exaggerated to suit his application. I believe there could be better solution to problems being described, than taking a part of the community away as a punishment (this is what's happening in my opinion)."
6.6 No.12 The Threshold, Jurby object to the proposal on the 13.05.25 for the following reasoning, "I have read the planning permission for the bus shelter to be blocked off and I am opposed to this as my child would have to stand in the rain next to the road and I don't feel that is safe."
==== PAGE 6 ====
25/90413/B
Page 6 of 10
6.7 No.13 The Threshold, Jurby object to the proposal on the 13.05.25 & 14.05.25 for the following reasoning, "I object to the planning application to turn the bus shelter into a private storage area. The bus shelter needs to be there for the use of Jurby's elderly community and or people with a disabilities who cannot stand for long periods of time and need to sit down somewhere dry and safe while they wait for the bus. It was built in it's present position in the first place as that was the best position for it at the top of the estate without any main roads needing to be crossed. Moving it onto the other side of the road could create an unnecessary hazard for young children, elderly and any disabled people who would then have to cross the road daily."
6.8 No.19 The Threshold, Jurby object to the proposal on the 14.05.25 for the following reasons, the bus shelter was gifted to the community, impact on the elderly and kids, shelter put wrongly on deeds, owner has a personal gripe with the community.
6.9 No.13 Snaefell View, Jurby object on the 18.11.25 on the basis that the site has been used historically by local people, whilst on the deeds not within the planning curtilage, must benefit the area and bus users, needs a public consultation, no evidence regarding safety, visibility, accessibility or suitability for bus users and that there have been several claims regarding antisocial behaviour but no evidence provided.
6.10 No.17 Snaefell View, Jurby objected to the proposal on the 27.04.25 & 13.05.25 on the basis that the building in question has been a public bus shelter since 1994 and used by a variety of members of the public. That there has been an error in the boundary which has included the deeds.
6.11 No.25 The Bretney, Jurby object to the proposal on the 12.05.25 on the basis that the shelter has been used prior to the existing occupants of the site and has always been a part of the community, and that the site should stay as a shelter
6.12 Flat 3, Haywards, 39 Parliament Street, Ramsey objected to the proposal on the 14.05.24 for the following reason, the bus shelter was built for the community, sold by mistake, DOI should purchase the land back, waste of a resource.
REPRESENTATIONS - LETTERS OF SUPPORT 7.1 The following representations are objections from residents, the representations can be found in full online, below is a short summary;
7.2 No.14 Osborne Grove, Douglas supports the proposal on the 12.05.25 on the basis of removing antisocial behaviour.
7.3 The Beeches, Lezayre Road supports the proposal on the 12.05.25 on the basis that the applicant owns the site, "the fact that the owner of the shelter has approached bus vannin asking for the shelter to be removed or relocated, is indicative that there is a problem," and that "the local authorities should support the application. The easiest way that works for everyone is for a new shelter to be built. Locals can stay dry and the owner of the land will not have to suffer any more of this antisocial behaviour."
7.4 No.7 Beechwood Drive, Ardattin, Tullow, Co Carlow, Ireland supports the proposal on the 12.05.25, stating the following, "At the end of the pandemic, I had to return to the island for a funeral. The applicant was away at work but allowed me to stay in his home. During that time, I cleaned out the shelter for him and was disgusted to see the state some locals had left it in. Nobody should have to put up with this in their own garden. I support the application and hope that a new shelter is built soon, instead of causing this resident further misery."
7.5 No.40 Lakeside Road, Douglas supports the proposal on the 12.05.25 on the basis that they have visited the site several times and have "witnessed the owner cleaning up broken
==== PAGE 7 ====
25/90413/B
Page 7 of 10
glass, and flushing the building out after other locals have used it as a toilet. I'd also say that those who say "it's never formed part of the property" or "it's never been a problem before" neither know the owner personally, nor care that this person is suffering as a result of the misuse. Having visited and seen the state the shelter is reduced to, I support his application and understand his concerns. He's the one paying the rates on it and cleaning it out regularly. Bus Vannin need to build another shelter that is not on his land and they need to maintain it."
7.6 Albany House, No.21 Albany Road, Douglas supports the proposal on the 13.05.25 on the basis of the proposal removing antisocial behaviour.
7.7 No.445 West Dyke Road, Redcar, North Yorkshire supports the proposal on the 09.05.25 on the basis of the proposal removing antisocial behaviour.
7.8 No.32 Ard Reayrt, Ramsey Road, Laxey supports the proposal on the 09.05.25 on the basis of, "I've read about this online and checked land registry. It's on his land and if he's maintaining it, which he is, then people have no right to smoke drugs in it or use it as a toilet. I wouldn't put up with it in my garden. I support the application and hope bus vannin build a new shelter soon."
7.9 Crowcreen, Ballaglass Glen Road, Cornaa, Ramsey support the proposal on the 9.05.25 on the basis that the shelter is situated within the ownership of the land owner and the removal of antisocial behaviour.
7.10 No.6 Port Way, Ingleby Barwick, Stockton-on-tees supports the proposal on the 9.05.25 on the basis of the removal of antisocial behaviour.
ASSESSMENT 8.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are as follows;
8.2 CHARACTER AND APPEARANCE/ NEIGHBOURING AMENITY 8.2.1 The starting point for any application is the land designation, which whilst the proposal here is being used as a community facility, is "predominantly residential" on the 1982 Development Plan, North Map, with this in mind as per Paragraph 8.12.1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan there is a general presumption in favour of extensions or alterations to existing properties where such works would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent properties or surrounding streetscene in general.
8.2.2 From a character and appearance point of view and from a neighbouring point of view, the proposal within this application is acceptable and would not be altering the overall streetscene above and beyond what is in place and the proposal is not near any neighbouring properties to have an impact on loss of light/ overbearing/ overlooking beyond what is currently in place.
8.3 CURTILAGE DEFINITION AND ACCEPTABILITY OF EXTENDING THE RESIDENTIAL CURTILAGE 8.3.1 Generally in Planning terms the term "curtilage" is used to determine the extent of a residential planning unit, with the definition within the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, "The area of land attached to and around a building, used with the building and within which the building is set (e.g. the garden and driveways of a house, the storage yard of a factory). Land used with a building but severed from it by, say a highway or service lane is not part of the curtilage of that building."
==== PAGE 8 ====
25/90413/B
Page 8 of 10
8.3.2 Whilst the potential that a structure which has been in the same ownership can be situated within the "planning curtilage" when looking at the application site, it's clear that the site has been used as a community facility for a long period of time. This in itself means that the site is not part of the "planning curtilage" for No.1 Snaefell View.
8.3.3 When looking at whether there would be any impacts from adding the shelter into the residential curtilage of No.1 Snaefell View, due to its close proximity to the planning curtilage of the property and the fact the shelter is situated within a predominantly residential land zoning, the amalgamation of the shelter into the planning unit should not have an impact on either character and appearance of the overall streetscene, nor neighbouring amenity.
8.4 REMOVAL OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES 8.4.1 The crux of this assessment is the existing use of the structure and the community facility that it provides, disregarding the ownership of the site as this is not a Planning consideration.
8.4.2 As stated in part 1 of this report, this part of Jurby has two bus stops, the one in question and one further to the West of the site, which is also a shelter, but includes approximately 92.84m of non-pavement roads. This is not safe nor accessible to the majority of users especially in winter as there is minimal lighting.
8.4.3 Paragraph 10.7.2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan states, "Local community facilities are important in providing for local communities without the need for travel and should be retained unless the site or premises are no longer suitable for the current or an alternative community use. Developers will be expected to demonstrate that the potential to use the site or building for other community uses have been investigated." This ties in with Community Policy 3 which states that development which includes the loss of local community facilities, will only be permitted if it can be demonstrated that it is no longer practical or desirable to use the facility for its existing use or another use likely to benefit the local community.
8.4.4 It can be seen from the objections received that the bus shelter is used by the community, as such this would normally mean that the application would fail Community Policy 3, as the proposal is removing a community facility that is used. Whilst this is the case, it can be seen from the correspondence between the applicant and the Director of Public Transport, that it has been agreed that once remedial works have been undertaken to the shelter that Bus Vannin will erect a standardised cantilever shelter directly in front of the existing shelter for the residents of Jurby to be used.
8.4.5 With this in mind, whilst there is going to be a removal of a bus shelter, a new bus shelter is going to be constructed, as such there will be no net loss of community facility.
8.5 GRAMPIAN CONDITION 8.5.1 Generally, when it comes to such decisions a condition would be attached to make sure that the new bus shelter is constructed within a certain timescale to the removal of the existing bus shelter. When looking at adding conditions to an application there are certain tests that need to be done which are, is the condition necessary, is it relevant to planning, is it relevant to the development permitted, is it enforceable, is it precise and lastly is it reasonable in all other aspects.
8.5.2 When looking at possible conditions it should be noted that the proposed new bus shelter is situated outside of the existing red-line boundary (and as such the applicant's ownership) and due to the Permitted Development nature of a shelter isn't part of this application.
8.5.3 This means any condition added to the application would be a Grampian condition, in this instance for the proposed works, the Grampian condition would be a condition that stated prior to being occupied a specific action would need to be completed (the new bus shelter), of which this action would take place on land outside of the applicants control.
==== PAGE 9 ====
25/90413/B
Page 9 of 10
8.5.4 Grampian conditions due to the fact that they are requesting work to be carried out, outside of the applicant's control are usually unenforceable. Whilst this is the case, Grampian Regional Council v City of Aberdeen District Council (1984), confirmed that councils can grant permissions subject to off-site matters being completed first, even when those matters sit outside the applicants ownership or control, though Grampian conditions should be necessary for the development to be acceptable, there must be a realistic prospect of that action being done within a reasonable timeframe and the requirement is clear, specific and enforceable.
8.5.5 With this in mind, a condition is attached to ensure a replacement facility is provided. The condition is necessary for the application to comply with Community Policy 3, a reasonable timeframe is provided by requesting what would work with the applicant and the provider of the new bus stop owner, as stated previously correspondence has stated that a new shelter is to be built as such there is a realistic prospect of the action being done, the requirement is clear and based on the condition it should be enforceable.
CONCLUSION 9.1 Ultimately the proposal would generally be a refusal due to the requirement of a condition which is outside of the applicant's control, whilst this is the case, as discussed a Grampian condition, in good faith will be attached, which will mean that the proposal will comply with Community Policy 3, with there being no net loss of community facilities.
9.2 With the above in mind the proposal will comply with General Policy 2 and Community Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan and recommended for approval.
RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE 10.1 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).
10.2 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.
10.3 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.
10.4 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 confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to that body by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status and/or rights to appeal.
==== PAGE 10 ====
25/90413/B Page 10 of 10
Decision Made: Permitted Date: 26.01.2026
Signed : Miss Abigail Morgan Presenting Officer
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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal