Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
25/90968/B
Page 1 of 7
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 25/90968/B Applicant : Mr Bernard Cain Proposal : Erection of dormer to rear elevation Site Address : 3 Stanley Mount Peel Isle Of Man IM5 1NE
Planning Officer: Paul Visigah Photo Taken : 12.11.2025 Site Visit : 12.11.2025 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 16.01.2026 __
Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.
Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with Drawing No. 2025/55/04 (Proposed Site Plan, Floor Plans, Rear Elevation and Section), including the materials and finishes specified therein.
Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the application property, the terrace, and the Peel Conservation Area.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposal complies with Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 and is considered to preserve the character and appearance of the Peel Conservation Area. The dormer would sit within an altered rear roofscape where similar forms have become an established feature, and its scale, form and materials would integrate appropriately with the host property and wider terrace. The development would not result in harm to neighbouring amenity or give rise to any unacceptable impacts in respect of access, servicing or other technical matters. The proposal therefore accords with Strategic Policies 3, 4 and 5, Environment Policies 34, 35 and 42, and General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, together with PPS 1/01 and the Residential Design Guide (2021).
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This decision relates to the following documents and plans received 15 October 2025: Drawings:
==== PAGE 2 ====
25/90968/B
Page 2 of 7
o Dwg. 01 - Location Plan o Dwg. 02 - Existing Site Plan o Dwg. 03 - Existing Plans, Elevations, Section and Photographs o Dwg. 04 - Proposed Site Plan, Plans, Elevations and Section Documents: o Cover Letter o Drawing Register
__
Right to Appeal
None __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site comprises the residential curtilage of No. 3 Stanley Mount, a two- storey mid-terrace dwelling situated on the north side of Stanley Mount Road. The property forms part of a traditional terrace characterised by narrow frontages, vertically proportioned fenestration and sliding sash windows to the principal elevation.
1.2 Along Stanley Mount Road, the terrace presents a coherent two-storey frontage, although individual dwellings show variation in external finishes and window treatments. Within the terrace, Nos. 7 and 9 contain flat-roofed dormers to their front elevations, demonstrating that roof-level alterations form part of the established character of the street scene. Despite these variations, the overall scale, proportions and building line remain consistent, and the frontage retains a recognisable and unified appearance.
1.3 To the rear, the terrace exhibits a more varied and altered character. Several properties, including Nos. 1, 7 and 9, are already fitted with flat-roofed dormers on their rear elevations, alongside a mixture of rear extensions, outrigger forms, stepped rooflines and differing boundary treatments. These changes have produced an irregular rear roofscape within which the mid-terrace roof slopes, including that of No. 3, appear visually recessive.
1.4 The rear of the site backs onto a narrow service lane that serves a mixture of yards, outbuildings and ancillary structures associated with properties along Stanley Mount, Bridge Street, Stanley Road and Shore Road. This area is functional in character and is enclosed by a combination of boundary walls, land-level changes and surrounding built form. As a result, the rear elevations of the terrace are not prominent from the wider public realm and make only a limited contribution to the character of adjoining streets.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Planning approval is sought for erection of dormer to rear elevation. The proposed dormer, which is a flat roofed dormer, would sit about 70mm below the main roof ridge, and would be set back about 330mm from the eaves on the rear roof plane.
2.2 This dormer, which would measure about 1.9m from where it rises above the roof plane to the top of the flat roof, would be 4.5m wide, be flush with the existing dormer at No. 1 to the south (by extending to the party wall), but offset about 100mm from the party wall of No. 5 to the north.
2.3 The dormer would be finished with a fibreglass flat roof, with external walls finished in smooth render with a painted finish to match the existing rear elevation, and it would include white uPVC double-glazed windows consistent with the existing window finish on the property.
==== PAGE 3 ====
25/90968/B
Page 3 of 7
The front face of the dormer is shown to line through with the dormers at Nos. 5 and 7 Stanley Mount, and its construction would be formed either off the party wall or tied into the adjoining neighbour's dormer as indicated on the submitted section drawing.
2.4 It is detailed on the application form that the proposal would not require any changes to existing access arrangements or to drainage, levels, or services. The development would create approximately 5sqm of additional floor area and would retain the existing Class 3.3 residential use, with no amendments to the site's current service infrastructure. There is no allocated parking for the property.
2.5 The Cover Letter details the following: o It notes that planning approval has recently been granted for a flat roofed dormer at the adjoining property, 5 Stanley Mount (ref. 25/90446/B), and that other properties within the terrace, specifically Nos. 1, 7 and 9, already contain flat roofed dormers on their rear elevations. o The letter states that the applicant wishes to undertake similar works so that the appearance of the terrace remains consistent should the adjoining dormer at No. 5 be constructed.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 Site Specific: 3.1.1 The site lies within an area zoned as "Mixed Use" on the Peel Local Plan 1989 Map, and the site is within the Peel Conservation Area. The site is not situated within a Flood Risk Zone.
3.2 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1999 3.2.1 S18 Designation of conservation areas (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.
3.3 National policy: THE ISLE OF MAN STRATEGIC PLAN 2016 1. General Policy 2 - General Development Considerations. 2. Strategic Policies 3 and 5 - promote good design and use of local materials and character. 3. Strategic Policy 4 - Seeks to protect or enhance the fabric and setting of Conservation Areas (etc.). 4. Environment Policy 34 - Preference for the use of traditional materials in the maintenance, alteration or extension of pre-1920 buildings. 5. Environment Policy 35 - Seeks to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of Conservation Areas. 6. Environment Policy 42 - Character and need to adhere to local distinctiveness.
3.4 Planning Policy Statements: 1/01 Policy and Guidance Notes for the Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man
3.4.1 Policy CA/2 - Special planning considerations 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. Where a development is proposed for land which, although not within the boundaries of the conservation area, would affect its context or setting, or views into or out of the area, such issues should be given special consideration where the character or appearance of a conservation area may be affected.
4.0 OTHER MATERIAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 Residential Design Guide (2021)
==== PAGE 4 ====
25/90968/B
Page 4 of 7
4.1.1 This document provides advice in Section 5 for architectural details, Section 2 deals with sustainable methods of construction, while Section 7.0 deals with impact on neighbouring properties.
5.0 PLANNING HISTORY 5.1 The site has not been the subject of any recent planning application that is considered relevant in the consideration and determination of the current application. However, there are three previous applications within the immediate terrace which are relevant to the assessment of this application.
Planning approval was granted under PA 84/00850/B for construction of dormer roof, 9 Stanley Mount, Peel. This was approved by the Planning Committee on 17.08.1984.
An application for conversion of roof space to additional living accommodation and installation of dormers to front and rear elevations under PA 03/01352/B at 7 Stanley Mount was refused by the Planning Committee on 30.01.2004 and also refused on Review. The application was refused for the following reason: "The proposed dormers would detract from the character and appearance of Number 7 Stanley Mount to the detriment of the terrace and the Peel Conservation Area as a whole. Whilst it is recognised that the adjoining property has flat roofed dormers to the front and rear elevations, planning approval was granted prior to the designation of the Peel Conservation Area."
Recently, approval was granted under PA 25/90446/B for construction of rear dormer at No. 5 Stanley Mount, which is situated directly north of the application property. This scheme, which proposed a similar styled dormer to that currently proposed, was approved for the following reason: "In the context of existing development in the locality, the proposed development would cause no harm to the character and appearance of the host building or terrace and would preserve the character and appearance of the Peel Conservation Area. Thus, it would comply with the Development Plan and relevant legislation." See relevant extract from Officer Report: "Character and Appearance and the Conservation Area 7.2 There is no Character Appraisal for the Peel Conservation Area, but the Peel Local Plan explains that it comprises a unique street pattern related to the harbour and includes a high proportion of largely original buildings and structures. To preserve and enhance its character, the Local Plan states that particular attention should be paid to the design of replacement windows, doors and roofing materials.
7.3 The part of the Conservation Area in which the application site is located is characterised by two and three storey residential terraces on narrow streets. The houses in the terrace of which the application site forms a part originally had timber windows with attractive brick detailing around them on the front elevation and a pitched slate roof with chimney stacks between each property.
7.4 Today, however, the houses all have different windows at the front and one has lost the surrounding brickwork. Four have flat roofed, single storey rear extensions and, most significantly for the current proposal, two have large flat roofed dormers at the front and three have them at the back. These dormers are now prominent features of the roofscape and, taken together with the other alterations described, they have altered the appearance of the terrace considerably.
7.5 The proposed development at the application site is another flat roofed dormer at the back which would occupy the whole roof slope from the ridge to the eaves and between the chimneys. Whilst it would look large and bulky, it would be in keeping with the surrounding development already described. In this context, the proposed dormer would cause no additional harm to the character and appearance of the host building or terrace. Consequently,
==== PAGE 5 ====
25/90968/B
Page 5 of 7
the character and appearance of this particular part of the Peel Conservation Area would be preserved.
7.6 Therefore the proposed development would comply with Strategic Policies 3(b), 4a and 5; Environment Policy 36; and General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan. It would also comply with Policy CA/2 of Planning Policy Statement 1/01 and with relevant legislation.
6.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.
6.1 The following consultees have not made any comments, although they were consulted on 04.11.2025: o Peel Town Commissioners o DOI Highways o Manx National Heritage o DEFA Registered Building's Officer o Manx Utilities Authority - Electricity
6.2 No comments have been received from neighbouring properties.
7.0 ASSESSMENT 7.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are: 1. Whether the proposal would result in any adverse impact on the character or appearance of the existing property, the wider terrace, and the Peel Conservation Area (GP2, STP 3, 4 and 5, EP 34, 35, PPS 1/01, Section 18 of the Act, and the RDG 2021); 2. Whether the proposal would give rise to any adverse impacts on neighbouring residential amenity (GP2 and RDG 2021); and 3. Other Matters.
7.2 Statutory Test - Section 18 (4) 7.2.1 In accordance with Section 18(4) of the Act, it is considered that the proposal does not conflict with the objectives set out therein. The application has therefore been assessed in the context of the relevant policies identified below and within Section 3 of this report.
7.3 Impact on Character and Appearance 7.3.1 The application site lies within a traditional terrace where the front elevations retain a coherent two-storey appearance, but the rear elevations have undergone a long period of incremental alteration. Flat-roofed dormers at Nos. 1, 7 and 9 already form established rooftop features, and approval has recently been granted for an additional flat-roofed dormer at No. 5 to the immediate north. As a result, the rear roofscape no longer reflects a uniform historic form and instead presents a varied and visually fragmented composition, within which the individual mid-terrace roof slopes are recessive.
7.3.2 A flat-roofed dormer is not, in strict conservation-area design terms, the most suitable or traditional roof form for a building of this period. Ordinarily, conservation principles would favour more modest forms of roof alteration that preserve the original roof profile. However, in this case the proposal must be assessed in the context of the existing situation. Flat-roofed dormers have become an integral and characteristic element of this terrace, with historic approvals establishing a pattern of development that has materially altered its rear character for more than a decade. This includes the recently permitted dormer at No. 5, which the Department concluded would cause no additional harm to the conservation area.
7.3.3 The proposed dormer would align with the siting, proportions and plane of adjoining dormers, sitting approximately 70mm below the ridge and set back from the eaves. This relationship ensures continuity within the existing roofscape and avoids creating a visually
==== PAGE 6 ====
25/90968/B
Page 6 of 7
dominant or isolated element. Its position on the rear elevation, where there are no clear views from key vantage points in the public realm, further limits its noticeable impact. The service lane to the rear is enclosed and does not offer meaningful long-distance views, meaning the dormer would not affect the established public appreciation of the Peel Conservation Area.
7.3.4 The proposed materials, comprising a smooth rendered finish to match the existing rear elevation, a fibreglass flat roof, and white uPVC windows consistent with the host property, are appropriate for a secondary elevation and sympathetic to the altered character of the terrace. Although a more traditional material palette may be desirable in principle (EP 34), the use of matching modern finishes is acceptable given the contemporary context and complies with Environment Policies 35 and 42, Strategic Policies 3, 4 and 5, and General Policy 2(b, c).
7.3.5 On balance, when the proposal is assessed within the actual character of the terrace as it exists today, the non-prominence of the rear elevation, and the established pattern of comparable dormer extensions, including those historically permitted on the terrace, the development would preserve the character and appearance of the host property, the terrace and this part of the Peel Conservation Area. The proposal therefore accords with Section 18(4) of the Act, PPS 1/01 (CA/2), the Residential Design Guide (2021) and relevant Strategic Plan policies.
7.4 Impact on Neighbouring Amenity 7.4.1 The terrace is characterised by modest rear yards and close mutual relationships between neighbouring properties. Existing first-floor rear windows already result in a degree of mutual overlooking typical of this urban pattern, and this is further reinforced by existing dormer windows on several adjoining dwellings.
7.4.2 The proposed dormer would introduce additional glazing at second-floor level, but views from the new window would principally be directed downwards into the applicant's own rear curtilage. The orientation and close-grained layout of the terrace mean that any additional perceived overlooking would not materially exceed the level already experienced from existing windows and dormers along the terrace. This approach is consistent with the officer assessment at No. 5, which concluded that a rear dormer of comparable scale and position would have no significant impact on neighbouring living conditions.
7.4.3 There would be no increase in overbearing impact or loss of light to adjoining properties, as the dormer structure remains within the envelope of the existing roof slope and does not project beyond the established party-wall boundaries. The development does not alter site levels, boundary treatments or the spatial relationship between dwellings.
7.4.4 Accordingly, the proposal would not result in unacceptable harm to neighbouring residential amenity and complies with General Policy 2(g) and the relevant principles of the Residential Design Guide (2021).
7.5 Other Matters 7.5.1 The terrace fronts directly onto the highway with no forecourt, driveway or off-street parking provision, as evidenced during the site visit. Vehicles customarily park immediately in front of the dwellings, and there is no alternative arrangement available within this part of Stanley Mount. The proposal relates solely to a rear roof alteration and would not result in any changes to access, parking arrangements, drainage, site levels or existing services. These matters therefore raise no material planning concerns in the context of General Policy 2(h).
8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 The proposed rear dormer, while not of traditional roof form within a conservation area, would sit on a secondary elevation and integrate acceptably within the established character of the terrace, where similar dormers already form a consistent part of the altered rear roofscape. Its scale, siting and materials would not detract from the host property or the wider
==== PAGE 7 ====
25/90968/B
Page 7 of 7
Conservation Area, and the relationship with neighbouring dwellings would not give rise to any unacceptable amenity impacts beyond those typical of this tight urban terrace. The scheme would not affect access, parking, drainage or site levels, with these remaining unaltered. The development therefore preserves the character and appearance of this part of the Peel Conservation Area and accords with Section 18(4) of the Act, PPS 1/01 (CA/2), Strategic Policies 3, 4 and 5, Environment Policies 34, 35 and 42, General Policy 2, and the Residential 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.
__
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 : Permitted
Date: 20.01.2026
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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal