27 January 2012 · Delegated - Senior Planning Officer
Cass Struan, Beach Road, Port St Mary, Isle Of Man, IM9 5nf
The proposal involved adding three stone pillars rising to 1.9 metres on the existing 1 metre dwarf stone front boundary wall, with timber fencing infilled between the pillars behind a retained hedge, at the end-terrace dwelling Cass Struan on Beach Road, Port St Mary.
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 officer's report concluded the proposal would introduce a 'prominent and incongruous addition to the property which will look out of place within the street scene', creating a 'harsh less natural …
General Policy 2
GP2 permits development in line with zoning provided it respects site surroundings in siting, scale, form, design; does not adversely affect townscape character or locality amenity. Officer tested boundary treatment against prevailing low stone walls/hedges along Beach Road terrace; found pillars/fencing would harm uniformity and introduce harsh feature, failing townscape and amenity tests despite residential zoning.
no objections
no adverse highway implications; recommend approval
Highways Division and Port St Mary Commissioners both recommend approval or have no objections to the proposed erection of fencing and three stone pillars.
Highways Division
SupportRecommend approval has no adverse traffic management, parking or road safety implications
Port St Mary Commissioners
No ObjectionThe Commissioners have no objections to PA11/01705/B.
Planning permission was refused by a Senior Planning Officer for the erection of fencing and three stone pillars to the existing front wall, on the grounds that it would introduce an incongruous feature detrimental to the visual amenities of the locality, contrary to General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007. The appellant argued the fence would protect the hedge from wind damage, improve pedestrian safety on a dangerous corner, and could be conditioned for a more open design. The Planning Division defended the refusal, stating the proposal would create a harsh, less natural barrier out of keeping with the street scene. The inspector concluded the timber fence would be an incongruous and prominent feature harmful to visual amenities, rejecting the hedge damage claims as unnoticeable and finding even a compromise insufficient. Port St Mary Commissioners and Transport Division raised no objections. The appeal was dismissed.
Precedent Value
This appeal demonstrates that even functional boundary treatments like windbreak fencing will be dismissed if they introduce incongruous features prominent in the street scene, per GP2. Applicants must provide verifiable evidence of need and ensure proposals preserve existing natural character.
Inspector: David G Hollis
