15 March 2012 · Minister for Infrastructure (Hon D C Cretney MHK) on appeal
Glevum, The Promenade, Laxey, Isle Of Man, IM4 7df
The proposal involved a single-storey rear extension of approximately 55sqm to provide a garage and bedroom with en-suite bathroom, plus a small front porch, to a 1930s flat-roofed detached dwelling on a corner plot in Laxey Conservation Area.
Click a button above to find applications similar to this one.
See how this application compares to similar ones — policies, conditions, and outcomes side by side.
The Minister accepted the independent inspector's recommendation following appeal against officer approval. Inspector found the extension would create a 'cramped and over-developed appearance' with on…
General Policy 2
Requires development to respect site/surroundings in siting/layout/scale/form/design, not adversely affect amenity of local residents or character of locality (g), and not have unacceptable effect on road safety/traffic flows (i). Officer found compliant post-amendments (single storey/road separation mitigates overbearing/light loss; highways satisfied). Inspector disagreed: cramped layout causes visual harm/character conflict (g); overbearing outlook harms amenity (g); no highways harm (i).
Environment Policy 35
Permits only development preserving/enhancing Conservation Area character/appearance, protecting special features. Officer/Conservation Officer found compliant (matches 1930s Moderne design/flat roof/painted render; rear location not highly visible). Inspector found non-compliant: cramped/overdeveloped harms spacious character, notwithstanding design match.
Recommend approval as it has no adverse traffic management parking or road safety implications
no objections but have commented on the application
acceptable
Laxey Village Commissioners objected to the application citing over-intensive development and road safety issues with a narrow lane; Isle of Man Water and Sewerage Authority raised no objection subject to surface water drainage conditions. Multiple private residents also objected on conservation, traffic safety, and visual impact grounds.
Key concern: The lane into which the rear entrance is proposed is too narrow to afford safe egress and access and is prejudicial to road safety
Laxey Village Commissioners
Objectionthe Board recommends refusal of the above application on the grounds that, (a). The development is over intensive and un neighbourly, (b). The lane into which the rear entrance is proposed is too narrow to afford safe egress and access and is prejudicial to road safety.; the Board do not believe that the amendments addressed or altered their original grounds for refusal
Laxey Village Commissioners
ObjectionRefused by LVC.; The Board recommends refusal of the above application on the grounds that, (a). The development is over intensive and unneighbourly, (b). The lane into which the rear entrance is proposed is too narrow to afford safe egress and access and is prejudicial to road safety.
Isle of Man Water and Sewerage Authority
Conditional No ObjectionNo Objection: - subject to the following conditions:-
Conditions requested: There must be NO discharge of surface water (including that from roofs and paved areas) from this proposed development to any foul drainage system(s) so as to comply with the requirements of the Isle of Man Water & Sewerage Authority, Drainage Division and the Sewerage Act 1999.; If this 'existing drainage' discharges (directly or indirectly) to the foul sewerage system then it should be noted that an alternative means of surface water disposal must be provided.; The applicant is required to establish where the existing surface water from the property is disposed and discuss this matter with the Authority prior to work commencing on site.; The applicant is requested to supply the Authority a copy of any Building Control Application in relation to the surface water discharge from this development.
The original application for alterations and extension to the dwelling at Glevum, The Promenade, Laxey was permitted by the planning authority. Laxey Village Commissioners, Mr A R & Mrs AC Williams, and Mr J James appealed, arguing overdevelopment, harm to Conservation Area character, highway safety risks, and neighbour amenity impacts. The inspector assessed highway safety (no harm), visual impact/character (significant harm due to cramped appearance), and living conditions (significant overbearing impact on outlook). The appeal was allowed, reversing the approval and refusing permission on grounds of visual harm, Conservation Area conflict, and neighbour amenity harm.
Precedent Value
This appeal demonstrates that even matching designs can fail in Conservation Areas if they erode spacious character through rear overdevelopment; future applicants must demonstrate adequate garden/space retention and separation distances exceeding 6-7.5m to avoid overbearing outlook harm to principal elevations.
Inspector: Stephen Amos MA(Cantab) MCD MRTPI
