Officer Report

Application No.: 25/90488/B Applicant: Varley Estates Limited Proposal: Erection of first floor balcony with new window opening to rear elevation Site Address: Thumper Cottage Strang Hill Strang Douglas Isle Of Man IM4 4NX Principal Planning Officer: Belinda Fettis Photo Taken: 18.07.2025 Site Visit: 18.07.2025 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 16.07.2025 _________________________________________________________________ Reasons for Refusal R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons R 1. The proposed first floor balcony would result in unacceptable levels of actual and perceived harm to the residential amenity of neighbouring residences. Therefore the proposal does not accord with the Residential Design Guide (2021) and is contrary to Strategic Policy 4 and 5, Environment Policy 42 and General Policy 2 (g) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016). ________________________________________________________________ Right to Appeal It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal: Braddan Parish Commissioners - No Objection It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should NOT be given the Right to Appeal because the application has been refused.: The Old Chapel House Land View

_________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report

- 1. THE SITE

• 1.1. The application site is within the residential curtilage of a detached dwellinghouse known as Thumper Cottage. Located in the settlement of Strang, north-east of the village of Union Mills. The property is double fronted with the side gable elevation adjacent the public

• footway and highway. The opposite gable on the rear has a conservatory protruding into the garden. Private off-road parking is to the front of the property along with a detached double garage that was recently converted to a habitable room, 'summer house' (24/90979/B).
• 1.2. The north-east boundary of the site abuts the residential curtilage of the neighbouring detached dwelling 'The Old Chapel House' that is on land higher than the application site and orientated the same, side elevation adjacent the road. The north-west boundary abuts the residential curtilage of the neighbouring detached dwelling 'Land View'. The private driveway access to Land View abuts the length of the south-west boundary of the site. As a result, the site abuts neighbouring residential curtilage on all sides except the south-east boundary that abuts the Strang Road as it rises to towards the roundabout junction with the A23.

- 2. THE PROPOSAL

• 2.1. Planning approval is sought for the insertion of a new window in the form of a patio door and erection of a first floor balcony on the rear side elevation; the finer details of which are as follows:
• 2.2. Balcony dimensions approximately, height 2m, width 0.5m, depth 1.5m surround of glass and steel balustrade approximately 1m high.
• 2.3. Sliding patio doors height 1.7m width 1.1m.
• 2.4. The new opening would be made below the chimney breast, right of an existing first floor window and the existing conservatory roof.

- 3. PLANNING POLICY

• 3.1. Site Specific

• 3.1.1. On the Area Plan for the East, Proposals Map 8, 'Union Mills / Strang' the site is within an area identified as 'Predominantly Residential'.
• 3.1.2. No other constraints are observed.

• 3.2. Strategic Plan

• 3.2.1. Taking account of the above, within the adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, the following are considered relevant in the determination of this application:
• 3.3. General Policy 2: 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 accords with the criteria of the Policy. In this case the following criteria are considered relevant (a), (b), (c), (g);

• (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief;
• (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;

- 4. OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

• 4.1. Residential Design Guide (2021) provides guidance on a variety of design features including the erection of balconies and the impact upon residential amenity.

• 4.2. Section 4.0 'Roof Terraces, Balconies, Decking and Patios'.

• 4.2.1. Paragraph 4.11.3 states that 'For detached properties they can be acceptable where they are carefully designed to avoid unreasonable overlooking of neighbouring properties

(including gardens). Large separation distances to neighbouring boundaries and habitable room windows will help to avoid such issues.'

• 4.2.2. Paragraph 4.11.4 considers the use of obscure glazed privacy screens to reduce the impact of overlooking but highlights that these features can also result in a dominant feature for the outlook of neighbouring properties.
• 4.2.3. Paragraph 4.11.5 states that 'Balconies should not result in views into the rear windows of neighbouring properties at a distance of less than 20 metres.'

• 4.3. Paragraph 4.11.6 to Paragraph 4.11.8 highlight the need to consider the scale and materials of a balcony that in turn require consideration of the visual impact upon the individual dwellinghouse. It is necessary to ensure that the proposal compliments the existing proportions and character of the dwellinghouse in line with windows on the original house and ensure that the balcony does not introduce an alien top heavy feature at first floor level.
• 4.4. Section 7.0 'Impact on Neighbouring Properties'; this section examines the impacts of loss of light and overshadowing, the 25 degree check, overbearing and overlooking resulting in loss of privacy.
• 4.5. Specific to this application is Paragraph 7.5.2 that lists some of the factors causing harm such as the use of, and duration of use, of the spot being overlooked.
• 4.6. Paragraphs 7.5.3 to 7.5.9 outlines consideration of existing factors, such as distance, 20m guide' and orientation and density such as within urban areas where a level of overlooking already exits.

- 5. PLANNING HISTORY

• 5.1. There is previous planning history within the red line however none that are considered materially relevant to determine this application.
• 6. REPRESENTATIONS

• 6.1. Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.

• 6.2. Local Authority:

• 6.2.1. Braddan Commissioners - No objection (29.05.2025).
• 6.3. Statutory Bodies
• 6.4. DOI Highway Services - although consulted (16.05.2025) at the time of compiling this report (16.07.2025) no response has been received.
• 6.5. Neighbour comments: Material planning points raised are recorded below.

• 6.5.1. The Old Chapel House: Do not object to a window but do object to an opening window / door onto a balcony that would impact significantly on our privacy. Because of the elevated position, when people are stood or sat on the balcony they will have a view of our living areas view, resulting in overlooking and a sense of being overlooked restricting our ability to use our own property without feeling observed.
• 6.5.2. Land View: (abutting and North-West of the application site) Object on grounds of loss of privacy due to the proximity and orientation of the proposed balcony and the objectors rear elevation bedroom windows and outdoor amenity space, the proposal would result in overlooking and a feeling of being overlooked.

- 7. ASSESSMENT

• 7.1. Given the above observations there are two key considerations in determining this application, the impact upon the character of the original dwellinghouse and the impact upon the residential amenity of the neighbouring properties, 'The Old Chapel House' and 'Land View'.

• 7.2. Character

• 7.3. The character of Thumper Cottage is within its double fronted front elevation with first floor windows that are considerably smaller than the ground floor windows but are symmetrical. From the front elevation the property appears to have bookend chimney stacks on what appears to be gable ends of a dual pitch roof of equal measure. However when viewed from the side, the roof slope on the rear of the property is slight, possibly 25% suggesting it is a later addition to the dwellinghouse; The roof slope feature is out of character with the other detached dwellinghouses in the vicinity. The detached double garage, now sun lounge, appears modern as does the rear conservatory. In respect of public views, and that of the streetscene, it is the front elevation that provides the character.

• 7.4. The footprint of the balcony is considered to be proportionate to the scale of the building. The platform balcony and glazed panels are not respective of the character of the front elevation however when seen with the glass conservatory on the rear elevation, the balcony would not be so out of place on the rear elevation as to warrant refusal.
• 7.5. Turning to the streetscene, the pitch of the detached sun room would partially obscure the balcony and because the footprint is minimal it is unlikely that the balcony would have any permanent features such as table chairs and umbrella.
• 7.6. The proposal is residential related and so accords with General Policy (GP) 2 (a). It is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of scale and design, and it would not adversely affect the character of the surrounding landscape or streetscene. Therefore the proposal accords with GP2 (c) and partly accords with GP2 (b). However in assessing GP2(b), respecting the site and surroundings, it is relevant to assess the amenity impact.
• 7.7. Residential amenity
• 7.8. In respect of The Old Chapel House, the front elevation of this dwellinghouse faces the rear amenity space of the application site. The distance between the proposed balcony and front elevation is less than 20m, around 11m. Between the front of The Old Chapel House and the proposed balcony there is mature vegetation and off-road driveway and parking for The Old Chapel House.
• 7.9. In respect of the proposed new opening as a patio door window, this would not introduce any direct window to window relationships and as a window would not introduce overlooking. The introduction of the balcony would introduce an element of overlooking because it would be possible for someone to stand or sit outside and look over the conservatory towards the front habitable rooms of The Old Chapel House. Therefore the balcony would introduce a feeling of loss of privacy, and would be a loss of privacy when the balcony was in use. Therefore in respect of The Old Chapel House the proposal does not take account of the space around it (GP2(b) and would adversely affect residential amenity contrary to GP2 (g).
• 7.10. Turing to the residential amenity of Land View, there exists some overlooking between the site and Land View because of existing windows, particularly from first floor level. The proposed opening and balcony would be positioned so to extend beyond the rear elevation of Thumper Cottage, above the conservatory. The opening, patio door, on its own does not introduce window to window relationships but it would increase the feeling of overlooking to bedroom windows on the first floor at neighbouring Land View. By virtue of the ability to stand out on the balcony, or sit on the balcony, the balcony would introduce unacceptable levels of overlooking, and certainly perceived overlooking to first floor bedroom windows in Land View.

• 7.11. Due to the position, proximity between elevations and the height of the protruding platform, it is considered that the balcony would introduce overlooking into the habitable rooms at ground and first floor level, and into the whole garden amenity space. The separation distance is around 10m that would be reduced to 9.5m from the balcony. Therefore at the very least it would introduce the perception of overlooking and cause loss of privacy and enjoyment of the habitable rooms and the garden area of Land View.
• 7.12. Therefore in respect of Land View the proposal does not take account of the space around it (GP2(b) and would adversely affect residential amenity contrary to GP2 (g).

- 8. CONCLUSION

• 8.1. The balcony would be out of character with the built form of the property and so cause harm to the character of the Thumper Cottage. However to position, adjacent the modern conservatory, the scale and design of the balcony would not adversely affect the character of the dwellinghouse to such a level that would warrant refusal for this reason alone.
• 8.2. However due to the position, proximity and orientation of the proposal with neighbouring residences, the proposal would cause harm to the residential amenity of The Old Chapel House and unacceptable harm to the indoor and outdoor amenity for occupants of Land View.

• 8.3. Therefore the application is recommended for refusal because it is contrary to General Policy 2 (b) and (g) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and the guidance within Sections 4 and 7 of the Design Guide (2021).
• 9.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE

9.1 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). - 9.2 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.

9.3 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.

9.4 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.

9.5 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 : Refused Date: 16.07.2025 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.