2 November 2017 · Planning Committee
Classy Canine, End House, The Promenade, Laxey, Isle Of Man, IM4 7dd
The site is at the south-western end of Laxey Promenade, currently occupied by a derelict two-storey cafe building with peeling render and boarded windows, backed by a steep cliff. The proposal sought to replace it with two buildings: one single unit and one with three units, all three-storey with stonework and roughca…
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 Planning Committee refused the application despite the officer's recommendation, primarily due to the absence of current information on the rear slope's condition or any recent destabilising event…
General Policy 2
Requires development to respect site/surroundings in siting, scale, form, design; not adversely affect character, public views of sea, amenity, highway safety, or be on land subject to erosion/flooding risk. Officer found proposal compliant as it improved derelict site without adverse impacts; Committee disagreed on scale/density in prominent spot and unresolved slope/flood risks.
Environment Policy 35
Permits only development preserving/enhancing Conservation Area character. Officer assessed replacement of poor building as enhancement; Committee found three-storey height/density inappropriate despite prior approval.
Environment Policy 28
Prohibits development at risk from or increasing ground instability unless precautions taken. No current slope assessment provided; Committee refused as nothing demonstrated implementability or remediation method/impacts, unlike conditioned prior approval.
Environment Policy 13
Prohibits development causing unacceptable flood risk. Manx Utilities satisfied with measures post-submissions; officer noted elevated living spaces improve over existing; objectors raised unresolved tidal inundation.
Environment Policy 11
Permits coastal development not increasing flood/erosion risk or needing extra coast protection. Site seafront exposure noted; officer accepted with barriers/flaps; Committee concerned over unresolved slope tying into coastal stability.
no objection, recommend flood risk assessment and condition on parking
no objection after additional information on flood resilient measures, recommend finished floor level note
no objection to amended plans subject to condition reserving garages for parking
Highways initially objected due to insufficient parking but later issued no objection subject to a condition retaining garage parking; Manx Utilities requested a Flood Risk Statement and drainage compliance; Garff Commissioners consistently had no objections and supported the flood risk request.
Key concern: proposed development being within a tidal flood area
Department of Infrastructure (DOI) - Highways Division
Conditional No ObjectionHighway Services does not oppose this application subject to the condition suggested; in order to retain the level of car parking provision a condition is requested to retain the garages for the parking of vehicles in association with the dwellings
Conditions requested: Prior to the occupation of any dwelling the garage, car parking and manoeuvring areas shall be provided in accordance with Kinrade Associates drawing no SM07/123/3 dated July 2017 and remain free from obstruction thereafter
Manx Utilities Authority
Conditional No ObjectionManx Utilities Authority has assessed the above planning application requests that you submit a Flood Risk Statement due to the proposed development being within a tidal flood area
Conditions requested: submit a Flood Risk Statement detailing precautionary measures to limit damage within the properties in the event of flooding; proposed dwellings must be connected to the public sewer(s) in a manner acceptable to Manx Utilities; All drainage works must conform to the requirements of "Manx Sewers for Adoption"; any necessary CCTV surveys are to be carried out at the developer's expense
Garff Commissioners
No ObjectionThe Commissioners request that a similar condition in line with Condition number 5 from application 07/01201/B is applied to any approval of this application; In addition they support the request from the MUA for a Flood Risk Management Statement to be submitted by the applicant
Conditions requested: a similar condition in line with Condition number 5 from application 07/01201/B
Garff Commissioners
No ObjectionNo objections raised
Garff Commissioners
No ObjectionThe Commission has no objection to these proposals
The original application (17/00006/B) for demolition and erection of four dwellings was refused by the Planning Committee due to lack of information on cliff stability measures and inappropriate density, height, and amenity in the Conservation Area. The appellant argued prior 2008 approval, no changed circumstances, adequate engineering history, and compliance with policies. The Inspector assessed character/appearance (positive), landslip (inadequate details, decisive against), storm damage (concern but not refusal-worthy), and traffic (acceptable), recommending dismissal on landslip grounds. The Minister disagreed on landslip, attaching weight to 2008 precedent and pre-commencement condition viability, allowing the appeal subject to conditions including landslip scheme submission.
Precedent Value
Demonstrates Ministers can override Inspectors on planning judgement, especially where prior identical approvals exist and pre-commencement conditions mirror precedents. Future applicants should submit indicative mitigation details (e.g. retaining wall drawings) to enable visual/impact assessment, even if full scheme conditioned.
Inspector: Michael Hurley BA DipTP
