13 April 2010 · Planning Committee - Mrs C Dudley, Deputy Secretary
Waterfall Hotel, Shore Road, Glen Maye, Isle Of Man, IM5 3bg
Jim Limited applied for permission to install illuminated signage consisting of stainless steel lettering (circa 350mm height) with concealed backlighting on an aluminium fascia to the front elevation of a proposed glazed enclosure at the Waterfall Hotel, a bar and restaurant with flat above on a corner plot in the vil…
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 judged the proposed signage to be 'of a high quality that would not detract from the surrounding area and would compliment the proposed glazed enclosure.' It was assessed against General P…
General Policy 6
General Policy 6 permits external advertisements in towns and villages if they are high standard of design and materials relating well to the building/site, in keeping with and not detracting from the surrounding area, and not causing highway safety hazards. The officer tested the stainless steel lettering with concealed backlighting against these criteria, finding it high quality, complementary to the proposed glazed enclosure and site, acceptable in the residential village setting, and safe for highways.
Time limit
The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
Approved plans
This approval relates to the erection of illuminated signage, Waterfall Hotel, Shore Road, Glen Maye, Patrick as shown by (09) 24 EX 01 and (09) 24 PE 20 received 23rd December 2009.
Do not oppose has no traffic management, parking or road safety implications
The original application for erection of illuminated signage was permitted by the Planning Committee on 8 April 2010 despite objections from Patrick Parish Commissioners. The Commissioners appealed the approval, arguing the signage was out of keeping with the traditional Manx cottage-style building and village setting, contrary to General Policy 6(a) and (b). The inspector, after a public inquiry and site visit, found the signage would not relate well to the building or surroundings due to its illumination and modern materials, rejecting applicant arguments on commercial need and visual recession. The planning extension was deemed acceptable on balance, but signage was not. The Deputy Minister accepted the inspector's recommendation on 17 August 2010, refusing advertisement consent.
Precedent Value
Demonstrates third parties (parishes) can successfully appeal approvals where signage illumination harms village character contrary to GP6, even if building works permitted; applicants must provide robust lighting details and avoid over-reliance on economic arguments in low-traffic locations.
Inspector: Graham Self MA MSc FRTPI
