28 October 2013 · Deputy Minister for Infrastructure, the Hon T M Crookall, MHK (appeal decision confirming Planning Authority refusal)
Field 410891, Surby Road, Surby, Port Erin, Isle Of Man, IM9 6ta
The proposal involved erecting a substantial 2-storey dwelling with roofspace accommodation, semi-circular footprint, extensive glazing, balconies, external chimney, and associated double and single garages on an elevated field site adjacent to Surby Mount, Victoria Lodge, and West View in the village of Surby.
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 inspector assessed that the proposed dwelling's large size, substantial height, semi-circular footprint, excessive glass (including ground-to-roof glazing and rooflights), balconies, and external …
General Policy 2
GP2(a) requires development to respect site-specific briefs like the Southern Area Plan Development Brief at para 4.54 mandating traditional features (pitched slated roof, render/stone) reflecting vernacular properties; the proposal's semi-circular footprint, massing, balconies, chimney and glazing failed this. GP2(b)/(c) requires respecting surroundings' character and appearance; the dwelling's scale, elevated site, glass glinting and tree risks caused harm. GP2(g) protects residential amenity; overlooking from balcony to Victoria Lodge sun terrace, outlook domination at Surby Mount (25m) and overshadowing failed this.
The original application for a large 2-storey dwelling with semi-circular footprint, extensive glazing, balconies, chimney stack, and garages was refused by the Department of Infrastructure due to its incompatibility with the site's Development Brief in the Southern Area Plan and breaches of General Policy 2(a), (b), (c), and (g) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, including impacts on character, appearance, trees, and neighbour amenities. The appellant argued the design suited the site, used traditional materials, matched heights of nearby properties, and offered amended plans addressable by conditions. The inspector, following a public inquiry and site visit, found the design failed to reflect traditional vernacular character, would be unduly prominent due to size, massing, footprint, and glazing, harm boundary trees, and adversely affect neighbours' living conditions through overlooking, dominance, and overshadowing. All refusal reasons were upheld, leading to the inspector's recommendation to dismiss the appeal, which was accepted by the Hon T M Crookall, MHK, acting as Deputy Minister.
Precedent Value
Reinforces strict adherence to site-specific Development Briefs and GP2 traditional design requirements in sensitive village edges; conditions cannot fix fundamental scale/massing/footprint issues; prominence from glazing and elevated sites heavily weighs against non-traditional proposals.
Inspector: Ruth V MacKenzie BA(Hons) MRTPI
