Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
25/90454/B
Page 1 of 12
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 25/90454/B Applicant : Mr Dean Ayres Proposal : Erection of a replacement detached dwelling and associated detached garage, greenhouse and workshop Site Address : Abbey Mill Lodge Bridge Road Ballasalla Isle Of Man IM9 3DA
Senior Planning Officer: Mrs Louise Phillips Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 12.11.2025 __
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. By virtue of the extensive use of black metal, particularly on the proposed dwelling but throughout the application site, the proposed development would not be in keeping with the surrounding buildings which give the Silverdale Conservation Area its special character. The new development would change the character of this part of the Conservation Area in a harmful way, and its character and appearance would neither be preserved nor enhanced. The proposed development would therefore fail the statutory test set out in Section 18(4) of the Act; and it would also conflict with Strategic Policy 4(a) and Environment Policy 35 of the Strategic Plan.
R 2. By virtue of the extensive use of black metal, the proposed development would not respect the design of the existing buildings around it or the materials used in the local area. It would therefore fail to take account of the character and identity of the immediate locality and so conflict with Strategic Policy 3(b), Strategic Policy 5, General Policy 2 (b & c) and Environment Policy 42 of the Strategic Plan.
R 3. The proposed new dwelling would be in close proximity to existing mature trees on the eastern and western boundaries of the site. It would be within falling distance of the largest trees on both boundaries and the trees to the west would shade the garden close to the house and some internal living space in the afternoon. The trees might also give rise to nuisance caused by seasonal debris, such as fallen leaves in gutters. All these issues give rise to a significant risk of pressure for unreasonable and disproportionate pruning, which would threaten the health and longevity of the trees. The proposal would therefore be contrary to General Policy 2(f) of the Strategic Plan.
==== PAGE 2 ====
25/90454/B
Page 2 of 12
R 4. The new dwelling would present its tallest, black metal clad elevation to the much smaller Mill Cottages to the north. On account of its relatively large scale, its domineering appearance and close proximity, the new building would be overbearing and give rise to at least the perception of overlooking and, potentially, real overlooking. Thus it would be an unneighbourly form of development which would harm the living conditions of the occupiers of Mill Cottages in respect of outlook and overlooking. This would be contrary to General Policy 2(g) of the Strategic Plan.
__
Right to Appeal
It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal:
o Highways Drainage, DOI (no objection) o Manx Utilities Authority, Water (no objection) o Malew Parish Commissioners (no objection) o Flood Management Division, DOI (no objection subject to conditions and the application is refused)
__
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT
0.0 PREAMBLE
0.1 This report was included in the agenda for Planning Committee on the 24th November and was deferred for a site visit, which has now taken place. The report is unchanged.
1.0 THE SITE
1.1 The site frontage is with Bridge Road, but it is a deep site which also has access (presently unused) onto Mill Road to the north. It has irregularly shaped boundaries with semi- detached Mill Cottages, Abbey Church and Anne's Cottage to the north and east; and with the Silverburn watercourse, "That'll Do" and a former Methodist Chapel to the west. There is significant mature landscaping in the form of trees and other vegetation along the main eastern and western boundaries. The boundary with Mill Cottages is presently open.
1.2 The site is occupied by a detached dormer bungalow with a flat-roofed garage near to the Bridge Road frontage. This building can be removed in compliance with Registered Building Consent already granted (24/00530/CON). To the north of the bungalow is a large, open "paddock" area and a wooden stable block near to the boundary with Abbey Church.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL
2.1 The proposed development is a detached house to the north of the existing bungalow on the open land; a detached garage to the south of the new house; a workshop close to the Bridge Road boundary, adjacent to the former Methodist Chapel; and a greenhouse to the north of the new house, close to the boundary with Mill Cottages. The existing stable would be removed.
==== PAGE 3 ====
25/90454/B
Page 3 of 12
2.2 The proposed house would be a mix of one and two storeys in height, with two gable- ended sections linked together. The single storey elements would include accommodation in the roof space. The house would have several entrance points, but the main "front door" would be on the east elevation facing the church, and the rear west elevation would include large feature windows facing the Silverburn.
2.3 The two-storey section would be at the northern end of the site facing Mill Cottages and would measure approximately 13.0m wide x 9.2m high to the ridge. It would have four windows/doors on the ground floor and four windows on the first floor serving bedrooms, a gym and a games room as well as bathrooms. The single storey section facing Bridge Road would measure approximately 14.5m wide x 6.6m high to the ridge.
2.4 The walls of the gable elevations facing east and west would be finished in white render, while those of the north and south facing elevations and the central linking section would be clad in black metal standing seam panels. The roof would also be finished in metal standing seam panels, including integrated solar panels on south, east and west facing slopes.
2.5 The proposed garage would measure 7m x 7m x approximately 6m high at the ridge. It would have white rendered walls, a black aluminium door and a black metal standing seam pitched roof with solar panels on the south facing slope. The workshop would measure 8m x 10m x approximately 3m high and have white rendered walls, black aluminium doors and a black metal standing seam flat roof. It is proposed to be used in connection with the dwellinghouse and not for any commercial purpose. The greenhouse would measure approximately 3.4m x 6.3m x 3m high to the ridge. It would be constructed with a black aluminium frame and toughened glass and have a pitched roof.
2.6 The proposal would result in the loss of two individual trees and two small groups of trees - all of Category C quality; and it is proposed to plant 13 new trees in various positions across the site.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY
Site Specific 3.1 The site is within the Silverdale Conservation Area, designated for its special character, and the site is covered by Registered Tree Area RA2078. There are no Registered Buildings which would be affected by the proposal. The site is at medium to high risk of fluvial flooding and at high risk of surface water flooding.
Area Plan for the South 2013 3.2 The site is within the settlement boundary, in a predominantly residential area.
Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 3.3 Strategic Policy 3(b) requires regard to be had to the use of local materials and character in the design of new development.
3.4 Strategic Policy 4(a) requires development to protect or enhance the fabric and setting of Conservation Areas.
3.5 Strategic Policy 5 requires development to make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island.
3.6 General Policy 2 provides that development in accordance with land use zoning and other relevant proposals and policies of the Development Plan will normally be permitted subject to certain criteria, including those below which are relevant to this proposal. The development should:
==== PAGE 4 ====
25/90454/B
Page 4 of 12
(b) respect the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (d) not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; (f) incorporate where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (g) not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (h) provide satisfactory amenity standards in itself including, where appropriate, safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; (i) not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; (j) be provided with all necessary services; (l) not be on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding; and (n) be designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption.
3.7 Environment Policy 4 required development to have no adverse effect upon protected species or their habitats.
3.8 Environment Policy 10 requires a Flood Risk Assessment and details of proposed mitigation measures to accompany the proposal.
3.9 Environment Policy 13 states that development which would result in an unacceptable risk from flooding, either on or off-site, will not be permitted.
3.10 Environment Policy 35 requires development to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of Conservation Areas, having regard to the special features contributing to their character and quality.
3.11 Environment Policy 42 requires development to take account of the particular character and identity of the immediate locality.
3.12 Transport Policy 7 requires new development to meet current parking standards.
4.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Legislation 4.1 Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999) states, "(4) Where any area is for the time being a conservation area, special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing its character or appearance in the exercise, with respect to any buildings or other land in the area, of any powers under this Act".
4.2 Section 68 of the Flood Risk Management Act (2013) indicates that any published Flood Risk Management Plan and the extent to which the proposed development creates an additional flood risk are material considerations.
Planning Policy Statements 4.3 Planning Policy Statement 1/01, Policy CA/2 states, "When considering proposals for the possible development of any land or buildings which fall within the conservation area, the impact of such proposals upon the special character of the area, will be a material consideration when assessing the application".
Other 4.4 The following documents are material considerations:
==== PAGE 5 ====
25/90454/B
Page 5 of 12
o Silverdale and Ballasalla Preliminary Character Appraisal, 2010 (commissioned to investigate a potential extension to the Conservation Area). o Residential Design Guide. o Manual for Manx Roads.
5 PLANNING HISTORY
5.1 The application site has the following planning history which is relevant to the current proposal:
o 24/00528/B: Demolition of existing building and erection of a replacement detached dwelling with integral garage, associated greenhouse, summerhouse and workshop and re- establish existing access onto Mill Road - withdrawn.
o 24/00530/CON: Registered Building Consent for demolition elements to PA 24/00528/B
5.2 The following approval relates to the building adjacent to the site to the west:
o 22/01283/B: Conversion of former chapel to a dwelling - permitted, at Former Methodist Chapel, Bridge Road.
6 REPRESENTATIONS
6.1 The full text of all representations is available to view online. The key points of each are summarised below.
6.2 Registered Buildings Officer, DEFA (18/06/25): No harm to the CA as a result of the proposed dwelling itself. Some potential to harm from workshop, garage and driveway in respect of the materials proposed. Conditions suggested.
o The comments relate solely to the impact of the proposals on the character and appearance of the Silverdale Conservation Area. o The site is located towards the southern boundary of the Silverdale CA and near to the Abbey Church and Rushen Abbey heritage site. The proposals therefore have the potential to impact the character and appearance of the CA.
Appearance of the CA o The existing dwelling is significantly nearer Bridge Road than the proposed dwelling, so the impact of the proposed dwelling would be commensurately less when viewed from the public road. o There is a large amount of mature planting on the riverside boundary of the site. Even in the winter months, this masks much of the site from this direction. Given the siting and proposed form and massing of the proposed dwelling, I judge that there would be no adverse impact on the appearance of the CA from both the Bridge Road and riverside boundaries of the site in terms of the dwelling itself. o The proposed ancillary buildings, particularly the workshop and the garage, have the potential to impact the appearance of the CA. Although material finishes and their colours can be subjective, the use of black standing seam metal for the workshop walls is clearly a marked contrast to the traditional materials of painted render, natural stone and painted timber that make up the historic material palette of the CA. It may reduce any potential impact on the appearance of the CA if the workshop walls were finished in painted render. o Additional planting is proposed on the eastern and northern boundaries. Given the sloping nature of the ground along the eastern boundary, with the ground rising as it moves eastwards, the potential impact of the proposed dwelling is mitigated. Having regard to the height and form of the proposed dwelling, together with the landscaping and timber fencing, I
==== PAGE 6 ====
25/90454/B
Page 6 of 12
consider the proposals to have no significant impact on the appearance of the CA when viewed from the churchyard. o Mill Cottages mask direct public views of the site from the north and therefore I judge there to be no impact. However, given their proximity to the proposed dwelling, there would be an impact on the outlook from Mill Cottages themselves. A more traditional wall and roof finish on this elevation may mitigate any adverse impact. Solely with regard to the impact on the CA, however, I judge that there would be no adverse impact from the Mill Cottages direction.
Character of the CA o The site occupies a relatively generous domestic plot, which is currently occupied by a modern detached dwelling adjacent to Bridge Road and a field with a small stable block in the northern portion. o The replacement of the existing modern dwelling with the dwelling and ancillary buildings proposed would slightly alter the character of the northern portion of the site to that of a domestic garden. This is likely to be highlighted by the large driveway and patio areas that are proposed. Whilst the driveway is proposed to have a permeable finish, given how large an area is proposed to be paved, it may be beneficial if a grasscrete or similar material was used for all or part of the proposed driveway.
Conclusion o Given the siting, form and massing of the proposed dwelling, together with the nature of the views in to the site that are possible from elsewhere, I judge that the proposed dwelling would cause no significant harm to the character and appearance of the CA. The wall finish of the proposed workshop, together with the significant amounts of driveway and paved surfaces within the site, do have the potential to harm the appearance and character of the conservation area.
Conditions o Samples of the proposed finishes should be conditioned. o The landscaping scheme should be implemented in full and retained thereafter.
6.3 Ecosystem Policy Team, DEFA (23/05/25): No objection subject to conditions.
o The Manx Bat Group's (MBG) Report is in order and is based upon a suitable level of assessment. MBG found no evidence of bats within Abbey Mill Lodge and that it had negligible potential for roosting bats. Therefore, demolition can proceed without mitigation. o MBG did find potential for bats in the Stable Block and recommended that bat emergence surveys are conducted in June/July in order to determine whether roosting bats are present. o MBG also found that there was potential for bats in some of the trees, but these are not proposed to be removed. o The site generally is likely well used by feeding and commuting bats and therefore sensitive lighting should be utilised. o An assessment for nesting birds should be undertaken, or the works should proceed on the basis that nesting birds are present with mitigation put in place. New artificial nest bricks/boxes should be provided and responsible working practises implemented. o At least two integrated nesting bricks suitable for starling or swift should be installed high up on the north elevation of the new dwelling, and at least one open front nest box suitable for species such as blackbirds, robins and wrens should be installed on the north elevation of a tree in the line of trees to the west of the site. The open fronted nest box should be provided prior to tree removal.
6.4 Flood Management Division, DOI (08/05/25): Conditions suggested.
o The proposed property is within a flood zone. However a comprehensive Flood Risk Assessment has been provided.
==== PAGE 7 ====
25/90454/B
Page 7 of 12
o Condition the finished floor levels as per section 6 of Doc ref JOF0106-RP-FRA-001 REV03 (24.850M above D02 datum); and that the proposed garage & workshop buildings cannot be turned into accommodation in the future.
6.5 Forestry, Amenity and Lands, DEFA: There has been a significant amount of correspondence regarding trees, beginning with an objection on grounds of impact and insufficient detail on 19/05/25. However, following the submission of amended plans (in relation to the siting of the workshop) and further details, the final representation, dated 10/10/25 states there is "No Objection" subject to conditions. The key points are summarised below.
o The development does not include the removal of any Category A or B trees, only Category C trees. o The development will result in the removal of less than 10% of existing tree canopy cover from the site. o The proposal includes sufficient mitigation for the removal of Category C trees (Planting Plan PP-260424_revB). o The application does not include sufficient information to properly judge the arboricultural impact of the proposed development. Tree Protection Plan (OTP-120224) highlights a Construction Exclusion Zone (CEZ) that protects the roots of the retained trees, but the proposed access corridors beside the CEZ Barriers and the proposed development will leave little room to transport materials to the rear of the development. However, the applicant has supplied a generic lift specification of a crane, which does show it is possible, but a more detailed plan should be requested in order to confirm the development is feasible. o The application does not show how the proposed development could be implemented without having a detrimental impact on the health and longevity of adjacent retained trees; and it does not show how any residual/expected impact will be mitigated. It is likely to lead to significant future pressure to remove or prune trees, either by an application made under the Tree Preservation Act 1993 and/or by complaints made under the Trees and High Hedges Act 2005. o The property has been situated adjacent to an existing stand of mature trees. It is likely that these trees will partially shade the property and garden. However, upon speaking to the applicant, they have assured us that the shade will not impact his enjoyment of the property. To ensure unregulated tree work is undertaken on the retained trees, the Directorate has entered the group of trees onto the tree register under the Tree Preservation Act 1993.
6.6 Highways Drainage, DOI (25/06/25): Advice given.
o Allowing surface water runoff onto a public highway would contravene Section 58 of the Highway Act 1986 and guidance contained in section 11.3.11 of the Manual for Manx Roads. The applicant should be aware of this and demonstrate compliance. No surface water is to be discharged on the highway".
6.7 Malew Parish Commissioners (12/06/25): No objections.
6.8 Manx Utilities Authority, Water (1/7/25): Advice given.
o Public foul sewerage crosses this site. Although the route has been indicated on the drawings, the applicant is advised to consult with MU prior to works commencing in order to discuss the required protection to the sewer. A drainage communication fee will be applicable for the proposed dwelling once connection had been made to the public sewer. The applicant is further advised to discuss the proposed connection with Manx Utilities.
6.9 The following organisations were consulted on 2 May 2025 but, at the time this report was drafted, no comments had been received:
==== PAGE 8 ====
25/90454/B
Page 8 of 12
o Highways Services o Manx Utilities Authority - Electricity o Manx Utilities Authority - Drainage o Manx National Heritage
7 ASSESSMENT
Background Information 7.1 With reference to Section 5 above, it can be seen that the present proposal follows an earlier application for the demolition of the existing dormer bungalow on the site and the erection of a new detached house with ancillary outbuildings (24/00528/B). This application was withdrawn, but Registered Building Consent was granted separately for the demolition of the dormer bungalow (24/00530/CON). Consequently, the present scheme, and the assessment of its merits below, concerns only the proposed new buildings and associated development.
7.2 During the assessment of the present scheme, the Forestry, Amenity and Lands Team raised concerns about the potential impact of the development upon trees (various dates); and concerns were also raised in relation to the proposed materials, the amount of hard-standing shown and the proximity of the new dwelling to Mill Cottages (01/07/25). Amended plans were submitted in response to some of the issues raised, and these are listed at the top of this Recommendation. The assessment below is based on the amended plans.
7.3 The site is in a predominantly residential area where the proposed development is acceptable in principle. There is no specific requirement for the new dwelling to be on the same or similar footprint as the existing one to be removed as there would be if the site were in the countryside. Therefore, having regard to the matters above, the main issues are as follows:
o The effect of the proposed development upon the character and appearance of the Silverdale Conservation Area and the locality more generally; o Its effect upon protected trees; and o Its effect upon the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, particularly at Mill Cottages to the north.
Character and Appearance of the Conservation Area (CA) and the Locality 7.4 The site is at the southern end of the Silverdale CA, with the northern side of Bridge Road being the boundary. The majority of the buildings in the vicinity of the site are older and of a traditional style. In particular, Anne's Cottage to the immediate east is a long, two-storey building with a slate roof and, adjacent to that is Abbey Church, made of stone with a slate roof. The former Methodist Chapel to the west of the site is also a stone building with a steep pitched slate roof; and "That'll Do" further west is a white rendered cottage.
7.5 Slightly further from the site, the buildings around the roundabout to the east, including Ballasalla Stores, are all made of stone with slate roofs; and those along Mill Road to the north generally have either a stone or rendered façade. Mill Cottages which border the site are not of such a traditional style, but they are a small pair of cottages, finished in render, with a steep tiled roof and a stone boundary wall. Thus stone, render and slate/tiles are the materials which are commonly found in this part of the CA and they contribute significantly to its distinctive and cohesive character and appearance.
7.6 Turning to the site itself, the existing dwelling to be demolished is of an unremarkable, modern style, but it is relatively small and its position nearer Bridge Road leaves a large, green open space surrounded by trees behind it. This space separates the existing dwelling from the Silverburn, the Church and Mill Cottages and it is itself an attractive feature in this part of the CA.
==== PAGE 9 ====
25/90454/B
Page 9 of 12
7.7 The proposed new dwelling would be quite large and it would be positioned right in the middle of the green space described above, close to the Church and Mill Cottages. Whilst it would have a steep pitched roof and some rendered elevations, the use of black metal cladding on several walls and the whole of the roof would give it an appearance entirely of its own, unlike anything else that could be seen in this part of the CA. More black metal would be used on the greenhouse to the north of the house and on the roofs of the garage and workshop to its south, spreading the use of atypical materials right across the site.
7.8 Mature trees on the Bridge Road and east and west boundaries of the site provide significant screening and, if these are retained (see below), the new dwelling is unlikely to be highly visible in the public domain. The Registered Buildings Officer has clearly taken account of this in reaching his conclusions. However, the site forms an integral part of the CA between the river and the Church and, whether it is screened or not, the new dwelling would become part of it and a valid reference point for future proposals. It is therefore very important to ensure that the design is appropriate for the site and its setting.
7.9 Notwithstanding that matters of design can be subjective and that well-considered contemporary approaches can be successfully integrated into the historic environment, this does not mean that any modern approach in any historic area will be acceptable. Thus the Strategic Plan (through Policies SP5, GP2, EP35 and EP42) requires full and proper consideration of design, within an established framework of principles and on a site-specific basis, to establish whether a proposal is appropriate.
7.10 In this case, by virtue of the extensive use of black metal cladding, the proposed dwelling would not be in keeping with the surrounding buildings which give the CA its special character. Rather the new dwelling would change the character of this part of the CA in a harmful way and its character and appearance would neither be preserved nor enhanced. The proposed development would therefore fail the statutory test set out in Section 18(4) of the Act; and it would also conflict with Strategic Policy 4(a) and Environment Policy 35 of the Strategic Plan.
7.11 More generally, in that the proposed development would not respect the design of the existing buildings around it, the materials used in the local area or the character and identity of the locality, it would be contrary to Strategic Policy 3(b), Strategic Policy 5, General Policy 2 (b & c) and Environment Policy 42 of the Strategic Plan.
Trees 7.12 As stated above, it would be necessary to remove a number of existing trees to accommodate the proposed development but, with the exception of one Elder and one Horse Chestnut which are not in good condition, the trees are all fruit trees which could be removed anyway without a license. The new trees proposed to be planted as shown on PP-260424 Rev C would be adequate compensation for their loss. However, the development also has the potential to impact upon certain trees and groups of trees shown to be retained, both during and after construction; and these are important not only for their own sake, but also for the screening they would provide.
7.13 The Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) finds that the known incursions into the root protection zones of several retained trees would likely cause minimal long term damage, but it also recommends a Construction Exclusion Zone (CEZ) to prevent construction activity from straying into sensitive areas. This is shown on TP-120224 Rev C, and the protective fencing would need to be erected very close to the proposed new dwelling and the hardstanding around it. The fencing would make it impossible to transport materials from the front (south) to the back of the site and so the applicant proposes to crane them over the top of the building as necessary. The specification of the crane has been provided and demonstrates that this
==== PAGE 10 ====
25/90454/B Page 10 of 12
solution should be possible but, if the constrained building area causes the fences to be moved in practice, the trees could suffer damage.
7.14 More significantly, the AIA notes that some of the mature trees along the western boundary of the site exceed 20 meters in height and could result in shading of the garden and internal living spaces during the afternoon. The extent of potential shading is shown on SP- 240625 Rev C and it can be seen that it affects much of the garden near to the house and not taken up with driveway. The AIA further notes that the proposed dwelling will be within falling distance of the largest trees to both the east and west, and that this might "lead to future pressure for tree work to be undertaken to manage the risk of damage to the property, or due to the apprehension caused by the perception of risk by future occupants. Nuisance issues caused by seasonal debris (e.g. leaves in gutters) may also add to future pressure for tree work to be undertaken".
7.15 The risk of "unreasonable and disproportionate pruning" of the trees arising from shading, potential falling and nuisance was considered sufficient for the Tree Team to register them as a group under the Tree Preservation Act during the consideration of this application. However, the Team has not ultimately objected because the applicant has given assurances that shade will not impact his enjoyment of the property. Given that planning permission runs with the land rather than with individual persons, this is no basis upon which to manage the future risk to the trees as a future occupier might feel quite differently.
7.16 Overall, while the tree planting plan would mitigate the loss of the trees actually shown to be removed, the siting of the new dwelling in close proximity to the trees on the eastern and western boundaries would threaten their health and longevity both during and after construction. This would be contrary to General Policy 2 (f) of the Strategic Plan.
Living Conditions of Neighbouring Occupiers 7.17 The proposed dwelling itself would be some distance away from Anne's Cottage fronting Bridge Road and there are screening trees in between. The new workshop would be immediately adjacent to the former Methodist Church undergoing conversion into a dwelling, but there would be no facing windows and conditions could be attached to control the impact of its use in respect of noise etc. Consequently, the proposed development would not have any significant impact upon these near neighbours.
7.18 However, the new dwelling would present its tallest, metal clad wall to the back of Mill Cottages to the north. These are small dwellings with small gardens and a presently open boundary to the application site. Eight windows/doors would face Mill Cottages and, while they would be more than 20m away as recommended by the Section 7.5 of the Residential Design Guide, due to the difference in scale the occupiers of Mill Cottages would nevertheless feel overlooked contrary to Section 7.1 of the same document. The new building, with its tall, dark and solid elevation would also be very overbearing and the provision of a low beech hedge on the boundary would do little to lessen this effect or that of perceived overlooking.
7.19 Therefore, on account of its large scale, its domineering appearance and close proximity to Mill Cottages, the proposed new dwelling would be an unneighbourly form of development which would be detrimental to neighbouring occupiers in respect of outlook and overlooking. The absence of an objection from the current owners/occupiers does not alter this effect. The development would therefore be contrary to General Policy 2(g) of the Strategic Plan.
Other Issues 7.20 The site is shown to be at risk of fluvial and surface water flooding, but a detailed Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) based on hydraulic modelling is provided and, overall, this finds it to be at relatively low risk. The Flood Management Division has reviewed the FRA and is satisfied that the development could safely go ahead from a flood risk perspective, subject to conditions regarding finished floor levels and the use of the workshop. Should planning permission be
==== PAGE 11 ====
25/90454/B Page 11 of 12
granted, the FRA also recommends that a surface water drainage strategy should be provided to manage runoff. This should include investigation of the potential for infiltration SuDS and water reuse. The FRA further concludes that the development of the site would not displace flood water onto Bridge Road or exacerbate flood risk in the wider area. Environment Policies 10 and 13 of the Strategic Plan would therefore be complied with.
7.21 In respect of ecology, the Ecosystem Policy Team recommends that emergence surveys for bats are undertaken prior to the demolition of the stable block; and that surveys are also carried out to look for the presence of nesting birds. Bat sensitive lighting should be utilised and nesting bricks/boxes should be installed on the site. These matters are capable of being addressed by conditions.
7.22 No issues have been raised by DoI Highways, and the proposal would provide more than the two parking spaces required by Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan. The development would include solar panels which would be a benefit of the scheme in terms of sustainability.
7.23 Consequently, none of these "other issues" weighs against the proposal.
8 CONCLUSION
8.1 For the reasons given above, while issues of flood risk and ecology can be addressed by conditions, the proposed development would cause harm to the character and appearance of the Silverdale Conservation Area, and to that of the locality more generally, principally on account of the use of insensitive finishing materials. By virtue of its siting, the proposed new dwelling would also present undue risk to the health and longevity of mature trees on the eastern and western boundaries of the site which are important in their own right but also for the screening they provide. Finally, on account of its scale, dark, solid appearance and close proximity, the new dwelling would have an unneighbourly relationship with Mill Cottages. It would cause significant detriment to the living conditions of the occupiers in respect of outlook and overlooking.
8.2 Consequently, the proposed development would be contrary to legislation concerning the preservation or enhancement of Conservation Areas, and to various policies of the Development Plan. It is therefore recommended for refusal.
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);
==== PAGE 12 ====
25/90454/B Page 12 of 12
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 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.
Decision Made: Refused
Date: 15.12.2025
Signed : Mrs Louise Phillips 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