18 May 2004 · Minister for Local Government and the Environment
38/40 Victoria Road Douglas
The proposal was for approval in principle to build four mews dwellings with associated parking in the rear gardens of properties at 38/40 Victoria Road in Douglas, an urban residential area. The site is the back garden of a large house converted into flats, accessed via a narrow 3m wide rear lane.
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 due to the proposal's adverse effect on the outlook, privacy, and general environment of nearby dwellings including 38 and 40 Victoria Road, as the mews houses would be …
Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982
Requires regard to availability and capacity of mains water services. Water Authority objected due to Glencrutchery works limitations (hydraulic and quality constraints from 1933 single-stage process), deeming proposal premature until new works or upgrades. Officer/Inspector noted condition could address but did not outweigh other harms.
no objection to the proposed development
Douglas Borough Council and Douglas Drainage have no objection to the application, but DoT Highways objects due to inadequate rear lane and parking issues, and Isle of Man Water Authority objects due to lack of water supply capacity with a conditional withdrawal offer; multiple p…
Key concern: highway access via private street in poor state of repair unsuited to additional traffic
Douglas Borough Council
No ObjectionDouglas Corporation have no objection to the proposals listed below.
DoT Highways
ObjectionDoT Highways is not satisfied that the rear lane is adequate to secure the needs of 4 mews houses.; The parking arrangements for the last proposed house are unsatisfactory, in that there is no turning space available.; The restricted parking arrangements are regarded as unsatisfactory.
DoT Highways
ObjectionHaving seen the rear lane approximate width 3.0 metres, cluttered with wheelie bins, DoT Highways' response dated 23 March was entirely correct.; DoT Highways would object on the grounds that the road is unsuited to bearing the additional traffic resulting from the proposed development.
Isle of Man Water Authority
Conditional No ObjectionThe Authority considers the application to be premature as the Authority does not at present have the capacity to supply the proposed development with potable water.; The Authority would, however, be prepared to withdraw its objection subject to suitable conditions being imposed.
Conditions requested: No construction of the proposed dwelling shall commence until such time as the Isle of Man Water Authority gives notice in writing to the Committee that the Authority will within six months of the date of such notice have the capacity to provide to the proposed dwelling a supply of wholesome water sufficient for the domestic purposes of the proposed dwelling.
Douglas Drainage
No ObjectionDouglas Corporation acting as The Agent for the Department of Transport, under the Sewerage Act 1999 would have no objection to the above application.
The original application for approval in principle for 4 mews dwellings with parking in the rear gardens of 38/40 Victoria Road was refused by the Planning Committee for reasons including adverse effects on neighbouring amenity, inadequate access and parking, water supply shortage, and precedent. On appeal, the appellant amended to 2 dwellings, arguing no statutory right to views, adequate access per Manx Roads guidance, sufficient parking/turning, and acceptance of a water supply condition. The Council defended the refusal citing loss of garden outlook, privacy loss, poor access environment, water capacity issues under Planning Scheme Order 1982 Article 11(2)(a)(v), and precedent risks. The inspector concluded the development would harm outlook from and to existing properties, access via the narrow 3m lane was unsatisfactory lacking passing places, turning space doubtful, water issue conditionable but outweighed by other harms, and permission would set precedent; recommended dismissal.
Precedent Value
Dismissal reinforces opposition to backland 'mews' development in established garden settings where access is substandard and amenity harm (mutual outlook/privacy) outweighs benefits; future applicants must demonstrate robust access (passing/turning) and negligible impacts on existing property outlooks, with water conditions insufficient to override core land use planning concerns.
Inspector: R E Wilson
