**Document:** Planning Statement
**Application:** 25/91089/B — Replacement of existing lean to with double storey extension to northeast elevation, alteration to vehicular access
**Decision:** Permitted
**Decision Date:** 2026-02-06
**Parish:** Rushen
**Document Type:** report / planning_statement
**Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/95739-rushen-kimmeragh-ballafesson-road-replacement-extension/documents/1145630

---

# Planning Statement

## Planning Statement In Support Of Alterations And Extensions At Kimmeragh, Ballafesson Road, Port Erin Im9 6Tx

![map or plan from page 1](https://images.planningportal.im/2025/12/7127742.png)

- 1.0 INTRODUCTION
- 1.1 Kimmeragh is a detached dwelling which is situated in a group of buildings which stretch across both sides of the road, close to Ballafesson which centres on the junction of the Honna Road (A32) with the A7. This group of buildings comprises a mix of house types, sizes, ages and finishes with the properties on the eastern side of the A7 including Kimmeragh (the application property), Mizpah (very recently having been rebuilt), The Gables and The Glebe which is on the corner of the A7 and Barracks Road (B46).

![Street-level photograph of a detached bungalow with a dark tiled roof and dormer windows. A white single-story lean-to extension is visible on the left side, fronted by a stone wall and driveway.](https://images.planningportal.im/2025/12/7127745.png)

![A street-level photograph showing a road with a stone wall and hedge on the left, and white houses in the background under an overcast sky.](https://images.planningportal.im/2025/12/7127746.png)

- 1.2 These four properties and particularly Kimmeragh, Mizpah and The Gables are visible as a group as one travels on the A7 towards and around Ballafesson corner. This view is across an open field when viewed at the field gate (below) and over a stone wall to the north east.
- 1.3 The upright stones on the wall prevent a clear view of the group for most people on the southern side of the road where the footway starts after the field entrance (from which the above photograph was taken), alongside the bus shelter.
- 1.4 The view of the group becomes more screened by existing boundary vegetation as one proceeds around the corner and approaches Kimmeragh on the left.

![A rural roadside view featuring a stone wall, overgrown vegetation, and houses in the distance under an overcast sky.](https://images.planningportal.im/2025/12/7127750.png)

- 1.5 At all times, Kimmeragh has a backdrop either of Mizpah and The Glebe or the trees to the south and south east with, in places, the rear of the property also screened by the existing young trees within the application site.
- 1.6 The front elevation of Kimmeragh features a striking double Roman brown tiled roof with two small pitched roofed dormers and a roof light in the main pitch with a second, lower section of building with the same roofing set to the left and a small projection to the north which features a shallow mono pitched roof. The finish is mainly render with feature strips of red brickwork all set behind a low stone wall with low entrance pillars either side of the vehicular entrance.
- 1.7 The curtilage of Kimmeragh was extended (see Planning History) and planning approval was granted on appeal for an extension of the dwelling. This has not yet been implemented but the applicants intend to commence work on this in the near future.

![photograph from page 4](https://images.planningportal.im/2025/12/7127753.png)

- 2.0 PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT
- 2.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South, which was adopted in 2013, as Predominantly Residential and along with the two properties to the south, are within the settlement boundary of Ballafesson.
- 2.2 The garden of Kimmeragh is not included within either the residential curtilage or the settlement boundary despite originally and as extended, being a lawful part of the property’s residential curtilage.
- 2.3 There is a presumption in favour of residential development within the residential area and regard should be had to General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan which provides general standards with which most if not all development should comply:

Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:

- (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief;
- (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them;

![A site plan showing a property boundary outlined in purple and a road or railway line running diagonally through the site.](https://images.planningportal.im/2025/12/7127756.png)

- (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape;
- (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses;
- (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea;
- (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks;
- (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality;
- (h) provides 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) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways;
- (j) can be provided with all necessary services;
- (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan;
- (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding;
- (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and
- (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption.

- 2.4 Regard should also be had to the Residential Design Guide (RDG) which provides advice on the design of new residential development including extensions and alterations.

- 2.5 The RDG states that it is guidance and “The document is not intended to stifle creativity or to promote planning by numbers and off the peg designs, but rather to create a supportive context for good quality designs, be they traditional or modern” and “It is hoped that this document will encourage creative, innovative and locally distinctive designs that respond to the changing needs of our communities.” (Paragraph 1.1.1).
- 2.6 It advises that normal considerations for extensions include “Potential visual impact upon the street scene” and “For extensions – the potential visual impact upon the existing property”. The Officer accepts that the views and impact of the proposed extension will be limited due to the distance between it and a viewer, the materials proposed to be used and the backdrop and context. The visual impact consideration in the RDG is noted as being “upon the streetscene” implying what is important is what is publicly visible rather than works which would not be publicly viewed.
- 2.7 The Guide also explains that “1.2.2 This document provides general advice but cannot cover every eventuality. Wherever possible, it sets out generally acceptable approaches. If a proposal does not meet these, the planning application should explain why. All planning applications will be judged on their merits, taking account of the likely effect on neighbouring properties and the character of the building or street.”
- 2.8 The Guide recommends that “2.2.4 If the context to a development has been compromised by earlier development, this should not be seen as a reason to perpetuate what has been done before. Opportunities should be sought to deliver high quality sustainable development that reflects up-to-date technologies and aesthetics and creates a strong “sense of place”. The existing flat/part hipped roofed extension was considered acceptable when it was proposed and what is now proposed extends this upward but removes the part hip arrangement and replaces the material with natural slate all of which is considered to be an improvement over the existing.
- 2.9 The Guide also advises “3.1.4 All extensions and alterations, particularly those incorporating modern design approaches, should be considered holistically with the original/main building and its setting in the landscape/townscape to avoid an

- awkward jarring of materials and forms”. We believe that the whole scheme results in an overall improvement of the existing property.
- 2.10 Paragraph 3.2.2 states that “generally” extensions should have the same roof pitch as the existing and again “generally” pitched roofs are preferable to flat roofs which are “generally” inappropriate forms of development “especially if publicly viewable”.
- 2.11 The RDG states the following about flat roofed dormers:

- 4.10.4 Flat roofed dormers can appear as clumsy additions to a roof pitch if they are overly long or tall, or if they are as tall as the ridge. Therefore they are only generally appropriate on more modern properties (1960/70’s bungalows) and/or properties where the area is characterised by houses with flat roofed dormers. Finishing the front and cheeks of the dormers in a tile or tile like material can reduce this impact.
- 4.10.5 The position within the roof plane, size, and proportion are also important aspects to consider. The size of any dormer should be secondary to the size of the roof in which it will be positioned.

- 3.0 PLANNING HISTORY
- 3.1 Planning approval has been granted for various alterations and extensions to this property.
- 3.2 Most recently planning approval was granted on appeal for a first floor extension to the rear together with alterations to the front elevation including reroofing in slate, erection of a pitched roof porch (22/01538/B).

![The image presents four proposed architectural elevations of a house, showing the front, rear, and side views with material notes.](https://images.planningportal.im/2025/12/7127765.png)

![Architectural drawing showing the proposed ground floor plan layout with room labels and dimensions.](https://images.planningportal.im/2025/12/7127766.png)

### 3.3 The existingfloor plans were asfollows:

![This image displays a proposed first-floor architectural plan showing the layout of three bedrooms, bathrooms, and storage areas with dimensions.](https://images.planningportal.im/2025/12/7127769.png)

![This is a black and white architectural floor plan labeled 'Ground floor plan (Existing)', showing the layout of a house including a granny flat, study, and utility areas. It includes annotations regarding existing fo...](https://images.planningportal.im/2025/12/7127770.png)

- 3.4 Prior to this permission was granted for the demolition of the existing and erection of a rear extension which was implemented (15/00622/B) with a spiral staircase added under 16/00396/B.
- 3.5 permission was earned for the relocation of the vehicular access under 16/00607/B which was not implemented.
- 3.6 A dormer extension was permitted under 12/00264/B:

![This image shows an existing first-floor architectural plan detailing bedroom layouts, a patio area, and stair access.](https://images.planningportal.im/2025/12/7127773.png)

![Architectural line drawing showing the proposed rear elevation of a two-storey building with a balcony and a lower single-storey section on the right.](https://images.planningportal.im/2025/12/7127774.png)

### 3.7 At that time, the ground floor plan provided a distinct unit of living accommodation to thenorth of the main living space with separate entrance but interconnecting bedroom door atfirst floor level:

![Architectural drawing showing the existing ground floor layout of a house, including room labels and boundary walls.](https://images.planningportal.im/2025/12/7127777.png)

- 3.8 An extension with integral garage was permitted under 99/01873/B and 98/01318/B. This garage was subsequently converted to additional living accommodation with the enlargement of the vehicular access, under 01/01369/B.
- 3.9 Internal and external alterations were approved under 95/00618/B.
- 3.10 The extension to the residential curtilage was permitted on appeal under 14/00885/C. There were two conditions attached, one requiring the planting of indigenous trees and shrubs along the new boundary and also that no built permitted development was to be undertaken within the extended curtilage.

![This image displays a black and white architectural floor plan labeled 'First floor plan (Existing)' showing bedroom layouts, staircases, and room dimensions.](https://images.planningportal.im/2025/12/7127780.png)

- 4.0 THE PROPOSAL
- 4.1 Proposed is an extension to the north of the existing dwelling to provide additional living accommodation. The extension will follow the form of the existing dwelling by incorporating a slight step down in ridge level but maintaining the same eaves level and continuing the existing rear dormer across almost all of the new rear plane, stopping slightly short of the northern gable.
- 4.2 The extension will replace the existing lean to wrap around section at the northern end of the dwelling, and add a further 1.6m length to this part of the property and taking it slightly further back to run in line with the existing rear elevation of the main part of the house.
- 4.3 Internally, the proposal will add additional space within the existing kitchen in the granny flat area and add a utility room. Upstairs there will be a dressing room which has interconnecting doors to the bedrooms on each side, one of which is within the main dwelling area. On the ground floor within the existing main dwelling a playroom is to be converted to a downstairs bedroom.
- 4.4 The property will retain three bedrooms on the first floor with a further bedroom capable of being constructed in the permitted rear extension (22/01538/B). For completeness we have prepared two sets of proposed drawings, one including the approved extensions and one without. Whether the approved extension is constructed or not, the roof is to be refinished in slate as previously permitted although it is the applicants’ intention to complete the permitted extensions in due course.
- 4.5 The dwelling will remain a single planning unit with the granny flat occupied in association with the main dwelling. Internally the proposed scheme will introduce more interconnectivity within the house than exists at present.
- 4.6 Also proposed is the relocation of the existing vehicular access as was previously approved under 16/00607/B. The existing access will be blocked off in stone walling to match that on each side. Visibility splays of at least 2.4m by 43m will be available in both directions as shown on the proposed access visibility splay drawing 1565-58.
- 4.7 Finally, the existing shed to the north of the dwelling is to be removed and replaced with a new shed which is slightly smaller and would comply with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2025. Neither the existing or

### proposed sheds are within the area of extended residential curtilage permitted under 14/00885/C.

- 5.0 Conclusion
- 5.1 The application proposes the extension and alteration of the existing dwelling. No changes to its use are proposed and the proposals are to better accommodate the applicants’ family members including their parents and their children who are growing older and require more space.
- 5.2 The proposal will add relatively little to the existing floor area and none of the proposed new fabric will be sited on the extended curtilage which was permitted under 14/00855/C.
- 5.3 The works will create a consistent and attractive front elevation with more visually pleasing roof materials. The form of the extension complies with the advice in the Residential Design Guide which recommends “Whether the side extension is single or two storey, the height and width of these side extensions should be proportionate to the size of the main dwelling. The width should be significantly less than the width of the main dwelling. The ridge height of single storey side extensions should normally be below the eaves level of a two-storey house to give clear definition between singlestorey and two-storey elements” and follows its guidance of stepping the extension both down and back from the fabric to which it will be attached.
- 5.4 The proposals for the relocation of the access replicate what has already had planning approval but was not implemented. There will be the same level of visibility as there is presently and more space for vehicles to access, egress and manoeuvre.
- 5.5 We would submit that the proposal accords with all of the relevant planning policies, will make better use of an existing property within a settlement boundary and in a form that will enhance the appearance of the property for those who will see it.

Sarah Corlett 17.11.25

---

*Data sourced from the Isle of Man public planning register under the [Isle of Man Open Government Licence](https://www.gov.im/about-this-site/open-government-licence/).*
*Canonical page: https://planningportal.im/a/95739-rushen-kimmeragh-ballafesson-road-replacement-extension/documents/1145630*