23 September 2013 · Senior Planning Officer (delegated authority), signed by M Gallagher, Director of Planning and Building Control
Clare Court, 14, Marathon Road, Douglas, Isle Of Man, IM2 4hl
The proposal involved demolishing the existing two-storey dwelling at Clarecourt and replacing it with a much larger two-storey detached house and attached garage, increasing the floor area from 280m² to 397m², width from 14.1m to 15.6m, depth from 13.1m to 21m, and height from 7.6m to 10m.
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 concluded the proposal would appear out of keeping with the streetscene of Marathon Road due to its gable-end orientation to the highway, unlike the front-facing dwellings typical in the l…
The original application (13/00762/B) for erection of a replacement dwelling and garage was refused by a Senior Planning Officer under delegated powers on 23rd September 2013 for two reasons: (1) design out of keeping with the streetscene and detrimental to visual amenity, contrary to Strategic Policy 5 and General Policy 2(c); (2) unacceptable overbearing impact on residential amenity of 16 & 16A Marathon Road, contrary to General Policy 2(g). The appellant argued the existing dwelling was unfit, the proposal addressed site issues like exposure, materials reflected local variety, no neighbour objections, and officer report errors justified approval. The Council defended the refusal, clarifying minor report errors but maintaining concerns on design, scale, layout and neighbour amenity. Inspector Stephen Amos conducted a site visit on 2 December 2013, found the proposal's height (10m ridge vs existing 7.6m), bulk, rear projection and alien resin timber-look vertical slats would harm streetscene character and cause significant overbearing impact on 16/16A (existing or proposed), conflicting with Strategic Policy 5 and GP2(b),(c),(g). The Minister accepted the Inspector's recommendation to dismiss the appeal on 29 January 2014.
Precedent Value
Dismissal emphasises context-specific design scrutiny in varied streetscenes: height/bulk/materials must positively contribute per SP5/GP2 even without CA; functional innovation (e.g. rainscreen) insufficient if visually discordant; neighbour support secondary to objective amenity assessment; applicants should provide accurate levels/dimensions and avoid PA criticism.
Inspector: Stephen Amos MA (Cantab) MCD MRTPI
