Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
25/90801/B
Page 1 of 14
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 25/90801/B Applicant : Hartford Homes Proposal : Erection of three detached dwellinghouses with integral garages Site Address : Bayqueen Townhouse 1 To 3 The Promenade Port St Mary Isle Of Man IM9 5AA
Principal Planner: Chris Balmer Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 03.11.2025 __
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 dwelling hereby approved shall be occupied until the parking, garaging and turning areas associated with that dwelling have been provided in accordance with the approved plans Nrs 62 REV B, 66, 67 & 68. Such areas shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking and turning of vehicles associated with the development and shall remain free of obstruction for such use at all times.
Reason: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for off-street parking and turning of vehicles in the interests of highway safety.
C 3. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping Drawing Nr 62 REV B shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the completion of that dwelling and/or bin store/plant area. Any trees or plants which die or become seriously damaged or diseased must be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species
Reason: To ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development and for biodiversity net gain.
C 4. Prior to the occupation of the dwelling on Plot 1 the first floor obscure glazing (northwest) and the first and second floors 1.8m high obscure glazed screens to side of external balconies all shown on Drawing 66 shall be completed and shall be maintained as such thereafter
==== PAGE 2 ====
25/90801/B
Page 2 of 14
Reason: In the interests of neighbouring residential amenities.
C 5. The communal landscaped area and six "Visitor Parking" spaces as shown on drawing 62 REV B shall be completed prior to the occupation of the dwelling on Plot 1 and retained thereafter.
Reason: To ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development and to provide additional off road parking for visitors of the site and adjacent apartment building.
C 6. No dwelling hereby approved shall be occupied until a swift box is appropriately installed to the north eastern gable elevation of each dwelling and retained thereafter.
Reason: In the interests of biodiversity.
C 7. Prior to the installation of any external glazed balustrades details to prevent bird strikes on the clear glass balustrades shall be submitted in writing to the Department and these approved measures shall be installed prior to the occupation of that dwelling.
Reason: in the interests of biodiversity.
C 8. All existing trees shall be retained, unless shown on the approved Drawing 62 REV B as being removed. All trees on and immediately adjoining the site shall be protected from damage as a result of works on the site as shown on Drawing 62 REV B, to the satisfaction of the Department in accordance with British Standard BS5837:2012 (Trees in relation to Design, Demolition and Construction -Recommendations) for the duration of the works on site and the development is completed.
In the event that trees become damaged or otherwise defective during such period, the Department shall be notified as soon as reasonably practicable and remedial action agreed and implemented. In the event that a tree dies or is wilfully removed without prior consent it shall be replaced as is reasonably practicable and, in any case, by not later than the end of the first available planting season, with trees of such size, species and in such number and positions as may be agreed with the Department.
Reason: to ensure the continuity of amenity afforded by existing trees.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. It is considered the proposal would be developing a site which is designated for residential development currently and one which has gain previously planning approvals for greater levels of development on this site. The proposal would provide an additional supply of housing within a sustainable location, given its closeness and good pedestrian to Port St Mary and would meeting the overarching aims of the IOM Strategic Plan i.e. "Towards a Sustainable Island" and identified near the top of the settlement hierarchy.
In relation to highway safety there are no concerns raised and it is considered the level of parking provision is appropriate for the level of development and its location within Port St Mary to shops, services and public transport links.
Finally, there are no adverse impacts to protect species on this site and appropriate conditions in place to ensure biodiversity on the site is provided and would result in an energy efficient development. There are no impacts upon any Registered Trees, and tree protection is shown for the four trees on the site proposed to be retained, as well as 23 new trees being proposed to be planted.
In conclusion, the proposal would comply with; Strategic Policy 1, 2, 3, 4 5, 10 & 11, Spatial Policy 2 & 5, General Policy 2, Environment Policy 4, 7, 42 & 43, Housing Policy 1, & 4,
==== PAGE 3 ====
25/90801/B
Page 3 of 14
Transport Policy 1, 4, 6, 7 & 8 and Energy Policy 5 of the IOM Strategic Plan 2016, Area Plan for the South and the Residential Design Guide 2021. It is recommended that the planning application be approved for the reasons given and subject to the conditions listed.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawings reference numbers all received;
17.09.2025 60 61 63 64 65 66 67 68
15.10.2025 62 REV B __
Right to Appeal
It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal:
DOI Highway Services - No Objection Local Authority - No Objection
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:
The owner/occupier of 32 Rhenwyllan Close, Port St Mary - Objection __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The site is a piece of land which lies on the northern side of Port St. Mary Promenade to the west of Awin Mooar, a semi-detached two storey house and to the east of Nrs 32, 33 and 34 Rhenwyllan Close. To the south of the site is the former Bayqueen Hotel site which is currently under development for a detached six storey building which accommodates residential apartments (total of 23), Cafe/spa/wellness/gym with associated car parking, landscaping and additional use of ground floor apartments as tourist accommodation. This site is within the applicant's ownership.
1.2 The site is accessed via a roadway which runs along the eastern boundary of the site and accesses directly onto Port St. Mary Promenade.
1.3 There is an existing public footpath which ruins along the western boundary of the site. This is not affected by the development.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL
==== PAGE 4 ====
25/90801/B
Page 4 of 14
2.1 The application seeks full planning approval for erection of three detached dwellings with integral garages.
2.2 The proposal would essentially replace the original four storey detached apartment building (total of apartments was 11). They would also potentially replace PA 24/00653/B which was approved on the 24.07.2024 for three dwellings. The proposed three dwellings currently under consideration would be generally contained within the footprint of the original approved apartment building and very similar to the approved three dwellings. The approved apartment had an approximate width of 40m, a depth of 20m and a height of 15.7m. The new dwellings would have an approximate width of 10m, depth of 18.8m (plot 3 16m) and a height of 14.1m. These measurements are similar to what was approved previously under PA 24/00653/B.
2.3 The works also involves the repositioning of the approved bin store away from the northern boundary (adjacent to existing footpath) and relocated to the south elevation of the substation. A closed boarded fence (1.5m high) would run around the bin store and an external plant area which is to the east of the substation. This external plant area, accommodates the emergency back-up generator for fire safety systems (to ensure sprinkler system can function for up to 1 hour) within an acoustic casing. Visitor parking is also included fronting the substation onto the estate road.
2.4 The applicants outline the reason for the application:
"These amendments have come about due to the technical design process, to address suggestions made by prospective buyers and to improve the separation distance between the house on plot 1 and the Apartment drawing.
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
The western of the three houses (Plot 1) has been slid backwards (north east) so that the rear face of house is in line with the middle house (Plot 2). This maintains the same separation displace between the house on Plot 1 and the rear elevation of no. 34 Rhenwyllan Close, as previously approved by PA24/00653/B.
The technical detailing of the houses has resulted in the ridge height of each house being reduced by 500mm.
The roof space to each house, is proposed to be fitted out, to add two additional bedrooms. This will add approximately 64m2 to the floor area of each house.
Minor amendments to the windows and balconies of No.1, 2 & 3, as illustrated on the proposal drawings. As suggested by the planning department, previously proposed timber screens to the sides of balconies have been changed to opaque glass which will maintain privacy whilst reducing visual impact.
The proposed changes do not impact on car parking provisions and the relationship of each property to the site access road."
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The application site has been the subject of a number of previous planning applications; however, the following are considered the most relevant;
3.2 Erection of three detached dwellings with integral garages to replace proposals for an apartment building previously approved by PA21/00083/MCH - 24/00653/B - APPROVED
==== PAGE 5 ====
25/90801/B
Page 5 of 14
3.3 Minor Change application to PA 18/00637/GB involving the reduction of apartment numbers from 17 to 11 and amendments to elevations and finishes to approved rear apartment block building - 21/00083/MCH - APPROVED
3.4 Demolition of registered building and substation and construction of building to provide 23 apartments and cafe/spa/wellness/gym with associated car parking, landscaping and substation (amendments to previously approved PA18/00637/GB and in association with approved 18/00638/CON) and additional use of ground floor apartments as tourist accommodation - 21/00085/GB - APPROVED
4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 LOCAL PLAN 4.1.1 The site is designated on the Area Plan for the South as Proposed Residential. Whilst there is a proposed Conservation Area in Port St. Mary, this excludes the application site and the proposed area continues past the front of the Bay Queen building (follows Promenade) and in front of the semi-detached properties to the south east and includes those on the other side of the road and the brooghs leading down to the shore. The site is not within an area at risk of flooding on the national flood risk mapping although the area to the rear of the site (agricultural fields) is at risk of varying levels of surface water flooding.
4.1.2 The Written Statement of the Area Plan for the South in relation to Port St Mary states;
"Description of Port St. Mary
"3.12.1 The Bay Queen Hotel site clearly needs investment, and would provide a welcome opportunity for new residential development in Port St Mary."
"3.14 Summary of the Landscape Character Assessment: ... Part retention of and conversion of the Bay Queen Hotel and the development of the immediate site around it is clearly desirable, and constitutes the principal opportunity for new housing, or other properly assessed uses, in the Village (Site 25). Renovation and re-use of some of the older buildings may provide other opportunities."
3.3.2 There is specific reference to the site including a development brief as follows:
4.66.1 The former Bay Queen Hotel is located at the north eastern end of the Port St Mary Promenade overlooking the bay. All but the west wing of the redundant Hotel has been demolished and the rest of the site cleared. The building dates back to the 1930's and makes a significant statement as a landmark building on the Promenade. This is recognised by its status as a Registered Building (RB 183).
4.66.2 There are residential properties to the north west as well as to the east where Back Lane wraps around the south eastern boundary of the site. To the north east there is a large open field known as Rhenwyllan.
4.66.3 Planning approval was granted on the Bay Queen site (PA 02/0343) for the erection of two buildings housing 56 apartments. This was the Reserved Matters application which included the refurbishment of the Registered Building on the site and followed on from the original approval granted at Appeal under PA 99/2149. As some works were undertaken on the site, the approval was judged to have been taken up.
4.66.4 There have been calls to allow the comprehensive redevelopment of the Bay Queen site by allowing the demolition of the Registered Building element of the site. The building was judged worthy of entry onto the Protected Building's Register due to its historic context, its landmark quality and rarity and aesthetic quality. Given this assessment and for the reason that the presence of the hotel provides a tangible link with the town's historical and sociological
==== PAGE 6 ====
25/90801/B
Page 6 of 14
development, the Department supports the Registered Building status of the Bay Queen and any further redevelopment schemes should respect this.
4.67 Development Brief 25
In terms of any development proposals for the Bay Queen site, favourable consideration may be given (subject to a full assessment of the overall design) to a scheme which retains only the 'twin towers' element of the Registered Building. The final design scheme must be prepared in consultation with the Conservation Officer (DoI).
The provision of affordable housing (in accordance with Housing Policy 5 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, 2007, or its replacement) shall be applied on any additional units over and above the 56 residential units already approved under PA 02/00343/B which has been taken up.
Development proposals must retain the pedestrian link (which passes the north western boundary of the site) from Rhenwyllan to the Promenade."
4.2 STRATEGIC PLAN 4.2.1 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application.
Strategic Policy 1 Efficient use of land and resources 2 Priority for new development to identified towns and villages 3 To respect the character of our towns and villages 4 Protection of built heritage and landscape conservation 5 Design and visual impact 10 Sustainable transport 11 Housing Needs
Spatial Policy 2 Identified Port St Mary as a Service Centre 5 Building in defined settlements or GP3
General Policy 2 General Development Considerations
Environment Policy 4 Wildlife and Nature Conservation 7 Where development is proposed outside but close to the boundary of a Conservation Area 42 New development in existing settlements must be designed to take account of the particular character and identity 43 The Department will generally support proposals which seek to regenerate run-down urban areas
Housing Policy 1 General need for additional housing from 2011 -2026 2 Supply of designated housing land available 3 Defined housing provision per area 4 Location of new housing and exceptions 6 Development Briefs
Recreational Policy 3 Requirement for Landscaped amenity areas 4 Requirement for Public open space
==== PAGE 7 ====
25/90801/B
Page 7 of 14
Transport Policy 1 Be located close to existing public transport facilities 2 Provision for new links 4 Highway Safety 5 Design of Highway Network Improvements 6 Equal weight for vehicles and pedestrians 7 Parking Provisions
Energy Policy 5 Energy Efficiency
4.3 RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDE 2021 - Section 3.0 New Houses 4.3.1 This document 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 properties and sustainable methods of construction.
4.4 Climate Change Act 2021; 4.4.1 "Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 amended After paragraph 2 of Schedule 1 to the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, insert - «2A All applications except those for approval for change of use, reserved matters, replacement windows and doors in conservation areas and minor changes (1) This paragraph applies to applications for planning approval except those referred to in sub-paragraph (2). (2) This paragraph does not apply to - (a) an application for change of use only; (b) an application for approval of reserved matters; (c) an application to replace a window or a door of a building in a conservation area; and (d) a minor changes application. (3) Every application to which this paragraph applies must - (a) demonstrate that the application has been made having regard to the following climate change policies - (i) the maximisation of carbon sequestration; (ii) the minimising of greenhouse gas emissions; (iii) the maintenance and restoration of ecosystems; (iv) biodiversity net gain; (v) the need for sustainable drainage systems; and (vi) the provision of active travel infrastructure; or (b) explain why consideration of one or more of those polices is not practicable in relation to the proposed development."
4.5 Unoccupied Urban Sites: South - Port Erin (December 2022) 4.5.1 The site is one of seven sites within Port Erin designated as an "Unoccupied Urban Sites" which aims to identify and promote the development of brownfield sites ahead of Greenfield development. The site has also received approval in principle for the Government's Island Infrastructure Scheme (see below) for up to 10% of eligible costs.
4.6 Net Zero Emissions by 2050 - In July 2020, the Isle of Man Government published their Action Plan for Achieving Net Zero Emissions by 2050.
4.7 IoM Government's Active Travel Strategy (2018 - 2021) -The Isle of Man Government's Active Travel Strategy was published in May 2018 and sets out the strategy to increase the number of people using more active modes of travel on a regular basis, i.e. walking and cycling. The aim of the strategy is to put in place a series of mechanisms which will help facilitate more active travel, achieving a modal shift away from motorised transport. Although
==== PAGE 8 ====
25/90801/B
Page 8 of 14
the document focusses on the Douglas area, the principles of the document are considered to be applicable to the rest of the Island.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS It should be noted that full comments made by all representations are available on the Online Services. Below are the final comments received from the various parties;
5.1 Port St Mary Commissioners have no objection (25.09.2025).
5.2 Ecosystem Policy Officer (DEFA) comments (03.10.2025): "...As per the previous approval for this site we recommend that conditions are secured for: o The landscaping to be carried out in accordance with details contained in the Proposed Site Plan o Details of the measures to be implemented to prevent bird strikes on the clear glass balustrades to be provided to Planning and approved. Please note - details were previously provided with PA 25/10080/AIR showing BirdShades protection window film to be used for this purpose and we would still be content with this as a preventative measure."
5.3 Forestry, Amenity and Lands (DEFA) made the following comments (06.10.2025); "Thank you for consulting with us on this current application. We have now had an opportunity to undertake a cursory desktop review and have the following comments.
There are no registered trees impacted but it does appear there are boundary trees to the north and east. We do not appear to have received information on these not does it appear they are dealt with under 24/00653/B.
On landscape grounds we note there is very little in the way of usable amenity space. There are a number of green icons indicated which we believe are the proposed tree planting sites but no indication of any landscaping details are provided.
Additionally there are no details of the drainage system and how the additional storm water load will be dealt with on site following the conversion of a permeable site to an impermeable site.
Therefore on the grounds of sustainability we cannot support this proposal in its current form and request that before this proposal moves forward that at the very least a TPP is provided."
5.4 The owner/occupier of 32 Rhenwyllan Close, Port St Mary object to the application (comments received related to initial proposal, no further comments received to amended plans) which can be summarised as (22.09.2025); "The New Bayqueen development already overwhelmingly occupies the space behind our property, and we have come to terms with the scale and presence of the structure, despite its overbearing height and the resulting loss of light, privacy, and overlooking.
Our objection is not to the existence of the 3 detached dwellings, but to a specific proposal that would further erode our residential amenity.
We are writing to formally object to planning application 25/90801/B, specifically in relation to Drawing 44, which proposes relocating a large bin store directly adjacent to our garden at 32 Rhenwyllan Close.
Our property is already significantly impacted by its close proximity to the New Bayqueen. The proposed relocation of a large bin store, situated within the already constrained footprint and immediately adjacent to our garden, would further intensify these disturbances and is wholly unacceptable.
==== PAGE 9 ====
25/90801/B
Page 9 of 14
This proposal would introduce daily noise and disruption from the movement of bins. Additionally, potential unpleasant odours, risk of vermin and general nuisance would severely compromise our ability to enjoy our outdoor space. The proposed location lies within approximately 3 metres of our garden boundary and directly opposite our patio seating area, which has historically been a place of quiet enjoyment.
Given that the commercial elements of the development-namely the café and spa-are no longer proceeding, it is all the more puzzling why a large bin store of such scale is proposed directly behind our house.
This raises concerns that the bin store may be used not only by residents but potentially by others, without clear justification for its size or placement.
We also question why a large bin store cannot be housed elsewhere on the site or integrated underground alongside the other refuse facilities. Restoring the original plans, which included proposed tree planting-similar to what has been offered to other affected properties-would be far more balanced and considerate."
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 APPROACH TO ASSESSMENT 6.1.1 Given the land-use designation and the type of development the following elements are relevant to consideration in the determination of this application: (a) Principle of development; (b) The potential impact upon the visual amenities of the area/street scenes; (c) Potential impact upon neighbouring amenities; (d) Potential impact upon highway safety / Parking provision; (e) Potential impacts upon ecology; (f) Potential impacts on trees/landscaping; and (g) Energy Efficiency / Climate Change.
6.2 PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT (Strategic Policy 1 & 2, Spatial Policy 2 & 5 General Policy 2, Environment Policy 43, Housing Policy 1, 2, 3, 4 & 6 and Area Plan for the South) 6.2.1 The first issues relating to this application is the principle of residential development on this site. As outlined within the planning policy section of this report the site is proposed for residential development under the Area Plan for the South which has been adopted by Tynwald since 20th February 2013. The proposed residential use complies with this land uses designation and the area plan.
6.2.2 Furthermore, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan has been adopted firstly in June 2007 & again on 1st April 2016 (housing numbers updated only). Within this document Strategic Policies 1 & 2 require that new dwellings be located within existing sustainable settlements. Spatial Policy 2 also indicated that outside Douglas development will be concentrated on a total of five Service Centres to provide regeneration and choice of location for housing, employment and services, one of these service centres is Port St Mary.
6.2.3 In terms of housing need, more recently the update to the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 has been undertaken and adopted, which identified that a total of 1,120 new dwellings is required to be provided between the years of 2011 to 2026 in the south of the Island alone. Given Port St Mary is regarded as one of the two Services centres in the south (total of five Services Centres throughout IOM), it is reasonable to consider a majority of these dwellings are likely to be provided in Port St Mary.
6.2.4 It is also noted that PA 21/00085/GB was approved on this site for residential development, which has been commenced and could be implemented today. Additionally, the more recently approved application 24/00653/B for three dwellings could also be implemented.
==== PAGE 10 ====
25/90801/B Page 10 of 14
6.2.5 Accordingly; given the above reasons, it is consider the principle of developing the site for residential purposes is acceptable. This is not an automatic reason to allow development as further material planning matters as indicated previously need to be considered, to determine if 3 dwellings on the site are appropriate.
6.3 THE POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON THE VISUAL AMENITIES OF THE AREA (Strategic Policy 3, General Policy 2, Environment Policy 42 & 43) 6.3.1 In terms of the potential impacts upon the visual amenities of the area, it is considered the development will not be especially publicly apparent from The Promenade, given the dwellings position being behind the Bay Queen Building which is larger and taller. There may be glimpses of the dwellings from either side of the Bay Queen building; albeit the dwellings would not be prominent features in the Promenade setting. The situation is similar when viewing the site from Rhenwyllan Close, again existing built development and landscaping will screen large parts of the development, albeit parts, especially the upper sections may be apparent. However, again it is not considered the impact would be so adverse to warrant a refusal; especially given a large building (apartment block) has been granted previously and the proposals now under consideration would likely have a reduced impact given the built form is reduced.
6.3.2 The design, scale, form and finishes of the dwellings again are appropriate and well designed and would continue the general design approach of the Bay Queen building currently under consideration. The changes proposed are rather minor alterations which have little impact over what was previously approved in relation to PA 24/00653/B.
6.3.3 Overall, the proposals would reduce built development over what was previously approved (apartment building) and would be in keeping to the visual amenities of the street scene. Accordingly, it is considered the proposal would not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape townscape and would respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting complying with General Policy 2.
6.4 POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON NEIGHBOURING AMENITIES - (General Policy 2 and Residential Design Guide 2021) 6.4.1 The residential properties potentially most impacted by the development would be those immediately to the west of the site (Nrs 32, 33 and 34 Rhenwyllan Close). Generally, the main issues relating to the impacts upon residential amenities are; overbearing impacts upon outlooks, loss of light, and or loss or privacy. In relation to these aspects, it is considered given the distance the new properties would be from any of these neighbouring properties, landscaping (new/existing) between and layout, design and siting the impacts would not be so significant to warrant a refusal. It is also noted the previously approved apartment building was taller and had a greater depth and therefore would likely have a greater impact upon neighbouring amenities (albeit considered to be acceptable) compared to the proposed new dwellings. It is noted the dwelling closest (Plot 1) to the neighbouring properties is sited closer to them; however, given the reduced scale it is not considered this would have an unacceptable impact. The setting back of this dwelling compared to the recently approved dwelling on this same plot (same distance to neighbouring dwelling Nr34) raise no concerns and will have no significant impacts to neighbouring properties. It is noted there is a reduction of gable windows within Plot 1 compared to the previously approved scheme (3 to 2 windows) and the first floor window of the proposal would be obscure glazed (landing window). The proposal would introduce rooflights to Plot 1, although they are set 1.8m above the floor level and therefore overlooking would be very limited, if at all. Furthermore, the first and second floor rear terraces includes a high level screens to their side elevations. These would ensure appropriate measures to prevent overlooking towards the neighbouring properties, namely Nr 34 Rhenwyllan Close. It is noted that the second floor rear balcony of Plot 1 is closer to Nr 34 than the previously approved second floor balcony. However, given the further setback position of the dwelling and the obscure screen, it is not considered this would introduce any significant overlooking to warrant a refusal.
==== PAGE 11 ====
25/90801/B Page 11 of 14
6.4.2 The dwelling on Plot 3 is proposed to change the position for the first and second floor balconies to its side elevation (east), from the previously approved rear elevation. This has increased the potential for overlooking towards Awin Mooar to the south of the site. However, the balcony would be approximately 36m from the rear elevation of the neighbouring dwelling. Further, there is a existing detached garage to the rear of Awin Mooar, as well as the existing trees (run along the east boundary of application site) which would all reduce the likelihood of overlooking occurring form the proposed side balcony.
6.4.3 Concerns was noted in relation to the location of the bin store along the northern boundary of the site, opposite Nrs 32/33 Rhenwyllan Close. Accordingly, the Department sought the applicants to make changes, which was agreed and the new position chosen. The bin store would accommodate 2No 1100mm bins for the commercial unit within the Bay Queen Apartment building only. It would not serve any apartments or dwellings. It is considered the bin area given its position, distance to neighbouring properties (both existing and proposed) and give the size and likely use of the bins being perhaps once a day, would not give raise to significant adverse impact to warrant a refusal. The plant area which would accommodate the emergency back-up generator for fire safety systems within an acoustic casing. The applicants have advised that with the exception of emergency situations the plant would only be operated for a 10minute period per month during working hours, to check it is working correctly. Accordingly, it is not considered this emergency plant equipment would cause any significant impacts; namely noise, to the neighbouring amenities to warrant a refusal.
6.4.4 Overall, whilst the proposed development will have an impacts upon existing neighbouring properties, it is considered for the reasons given the proposed development would not having an significant impacts upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties and therefore comply with General Policy 2 of the IOMSP and the Residential Design Guide 2021.
6.5 POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON HIGHWAY SAFETY / PARKING PROVISION (Strategic Policy 10, General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8) 6.5.1 Highway Services have previously considered the application for three dwellings and have raise no objection. The proposal will reduce the level of traffic over the previously approved apartment building (11 units).
6.5.2 On this matter the applicants previous Planning Statement for PA 24/00653/B stated; "Access to the 3no. houses will be via the previously approved access from the Promenade onto the Bay Queen development site. The site road is 5.5m wide, and will be a shared surface, with a 2m wide pavement to the southern side, linking the entrances to the front apartment building.
Each house will have a double garage measuring at least 6m x 6m, and there will be a 6m x 5.4m (minimum) driveway in front of the garages, so there will be ample parking for property owners
The proposals, with regards to parking provisions, provides many benefits over the extant approved scheme. By reducing the number of homes from 11 down to 3, this will reduce the number of potential visitors to the site. The provision of 6no. visitor parking spaces within the courtyard, shared between the 26no. front apartment and the 3no. proposed houses, should be more than adequate, as there is also on street parking on the Promenade."
6.5.3 There current statement indicates that; "The proposed changes do not impact on car parking provisions and the relationship of each property to the site access road."
6.5.4 In terms of parking provision, the parking standards as provided in the Strategic Plan require two parking space for a dwelling and therefore complies with this.
==== PAGE 12 ====
25/90801/B Page 12 of 14
6.5.5 Overall, for theses reasons it is considered the proposal would provide safe and convenient access for all highway users (vehicle and pedestrian), together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space and does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways complying with Strategic Policy 10, General Policy 2, Transport Policy 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8 of the IOM Strategic Plan.
6.6 POTENTIAL ECOLOGY IMPACTS - (Environment Policy 4) 6.6.1 The Ecosystem Policy Team have considered the application and raised no objection subject to conditions, namely; o measures that are to be put in place to prevent bird strikes on the clear glass balustrades; and o swift boxes are recommend that they are re-positioned to the western elevation of each plot in order so that the boxes are not above the proposed clear glass balustrades and therefore to avoid bird collision.
6.6.2 The above matters should be conditional of any approval.
6.7 Potential impact upon trees/landscaping 6.7.1 The proposal (as per the recently approved scheme) includes the planting of 23 trees (2.5m to 3m taller Maples) throughout the site. Tree protection (again as previously approved) are also showed. Additional hedge planting is proposed (mix) throughout the site. Accordingly, while the comments of Forestry, Amenity and Lands are noted, it is considered the matter of tree protection and landscaping are shown on the submitted plans and are considered appropriate for this development in terms of landscaping. No objection has been received from the relevant drainage authorities. Again it should be noted that approval for a very similar scheme has already been granted.
6.8 Energy Efficiency/Climate Change - (Climate Change Act) 6.8.1 The applicant's have previously commented; "The proposed houses will be energy efficient and highly sustainable, to help mitigate climate change. The site is close to the centre of Port St Mary, so all the town's existing facilities are within easy walking or cycling distance, which will promote Active Travel. All homes will have an integral double garage which can be used for cycle storage and the homes will be wired for electric vehicle chargers to be installed, to allow future owners to fit their specific requirements.
The houses will be highly insulated and will achieve high levels of airtightness. Air source heat pumps and roof mounted solar PV panels will be fitted to all properties. Gas powered appliances will not be used on this development, to reduce dependency on fossil fuels.
Internally, energy efficient LED light fittings will be used throughout, together with water efficient sanitary ware."
6.8.2 The Department is comfortable that the scheme complies with Energy Policy 5 and the Climate Change Act, albeit the latter is not yet in force.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 Overall, it is considered the proposal would be developing a site which is designated for residential development currently and one which has gain previously planning approvals for greater levels of development on this site. The proposal would provide an additional supply of housing within a sustainable location, given its closeness and good pedestrian to Port St Mary and would meeting the overarching aims of the IOM Strategic Plan i.e. "Towards a Sustainable Island" and identified near the top of the settlement hierarchy.
==== PAGE 13 ====
25/90801/B Page 13 of 14
7.2 In relation to highway safety there are no concerns raised and it is considered the level of parking provision is appropriate for the level of development and its location within Port St Mary to shops, services and public transport links.
7.3 Finally, there are no adverse impacts to protect species on this site and appropriate conditions in place to ensure biodiversity on the site is provided and would result in an energy efficient development. There are no impacts upon any Registered Trees, and tree protection is shown for the four trees on the site proposed to be retained, as well as 23 new trees being proposed to be planted.
7.4 In conclusion, the proposal would comply with; Strategic Policy 1, 2, 3, 4 5, 10 & 11, Spatial Policy 2 & 5, General Policy 2, Environment Policy 4, 7, 42 & 43, Housing Policy 1, & 4, Transport Policy 1, 4, 6, 7 & 8 and Energy Policy 5 of the IOM Strategic Plan 2016, Area Plan for the South and the Residential Design Guide 2021. It is recommended that the planning application be approved for the reasons given and subject to the conditions listed.
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.
8.5 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 the Head of Development Management 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 : 13.11.2025
Determining Officer Signed : S BUTLER
Stephen Butler
Head of Development Management
==== PAGE 14 ====
25/90801/B Page 14 of 14
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