29 March 2010 · Planning Committee
Clare Court, 14, Marathon Road, Douglas, Isle Of Man, IM2 4hl
The site is the curtilage of a detached dwelling on Marathon Road with existing access and parking. The proposal involved forming a new 3m wide entrance in the existing 2m high boundary wall onto the busy Victoria Road, secured by 1.6m high timber gates, flush with the boundary.
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 assessed the proposal against General Policy 2 (c, h, i) requiring no adverse impact on townscape character, satisfactory amenity standards including safe access and parking, and no unacce…
General Policy 2
Requires developments to not adversely affect townscape character (c), provide safe access, parking and amenity standards (h), and avoid unacceptable road safety or traffic impacts (i). Officer found proposal fails these due to poor visibility from high wall, vehicles overhanging footway/carriageway, and disruption on busy road, despite adequate internal parking.
Transport Policy 4
Requires highways to safely accommodate vehicle and pedestrian journeys generated by development. Assessed as failed because existing highway cannot safely handle due to visibility issues forcing vehicles into pedestrian areas and carriageway.
Transport Policy 6 - Equal weight for vehicles and pedestrians
Requires equal weight to pedestrian needs in development design. Failed as proposal forces pedestrians into carriageway and compromises their safety.
do not oppose has no traffic management, parking or road safety implications
No objection
The original application for a new vehicular access and hard standing from a busy road to the rear of a residential property was refused by the Planning Committee on 19 March 2010 due to highway and pedestrian safety concerns contrary to General Policy 2, Transport Policy 4 and 6 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007. The appellant argued that Highways Division had no objection, adequate visibility splays could be provided, and the principle was acceptable subject to detailed conditions. The Planning Authority and Highway Authority maintained that the submitted scheme compromised pedestrian safety and traffic flow on a busy route, and modifications would harm the streetscene. The inspector, following a site visit and public inquiry, agreed that the as-submitted scheme failed highway safety tests and could not be approved conditionally, recommending dismissal. The Minister accepted this recommendation on 7 July 2010, upholding the refusal.
Precedent Value
This appeal demonstrates that inspectors will strictly assess the submitted scheme and refuse conditional approvals requiring substantial amendments that impact streetscene. Future applicants must submit fully compliant designs or risk dismissal even if principle is arguable.
Inspector: Neil A C Holt TD BArch(Hons) DipTP DipCons RIBA MRTPI
