16 February 2006 · Minister for Local Government and the Environment
Level Garage, The Level, Colby, Isle Of Man, IM9 4al
The proposal sought approval for three large two-storey detached dwellings, each with integral garage and two additional parking spaces, on a 0.1167ha vacant site previously used as a garage, located on the corner of A7 and B33 roads in Colby.
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 independent inspector judged the total bulk of the three large two-storey dwellings unacceptable on this prominent corner site on the A7 Principal Traffic Route, appearing cramped and overdevelope…
Policy ENC/P/1
Arbory and East Rushen Local Plan designates entire area as High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance; objectors argued proposal fails to protect southerly open views beyond A7 to coastline on raised prominent site.
Environment and Nature Conservation Policy 3
No further development on south side of A7 between Ballabeg and Ballafesson; inspector noted conflict with protecting coastal views, though officer viewed residential redevelopment acceptable post-outline approval.
No adverse traffic impacts subject to condition on intermittent carriageway markings for road safety; access onto B33 acceptable with visibility splays and improvements
No objection subject to recommendations on foul/surface water, adoption agreement, construction drawings and Land Drainage Act consent
No objection subject to standard note on water connections
Multiple neighbouring residents and Rushen Parish Commissioners object to the proposed three detached dwellings citing over-development, poor layout, privacy loss, visual impact, and highway arrangements, while Department of Transport Highways supports the access proposals and Dr…
Key concern: over-development of small triangular site
Rushen Parish Commissioners
ObjectionAlthough this would seem more like an acceptable number of houses on the plot the Commissioners feel that they are too large, thus leading to over-development.; The Commissioners would not approve these plans.
Department of Transport Drainage Division
Conditional No ObjectionNO OBJECTION In principle subject to:; Full details of the information required by the Division are listed within Part 1 of Manx Sewers for Adoption
Conditions requested: Connect to public foul sewer via new manhole conforming to Manx Sewers for Adoption with CCTV surveys at developer expense; No discharge of surface water to foul drainage systems; Enter adoption agreement prior to work commencing per Sewerage Act 1999 section 8; Submit full construction drawings including manhole details and longitudinal sections prior to work; Obtain written permission under Land Drainage Act 1934 section 35 for culvert replacement with full method statement
Department of Transport Highways Division
No ObjectionThe Department of Transport Highway Division have assessed this application in the same way as PA 05/01209/REM and believe all comments are applicable; In conclusion the development proposals offer the safest access and egress arrangements
IoM Water Authority
No Objectionrequest that a condition of planning be that the applicant must contact the Authority to ensure that a connection is obtained for water supply purposes
Conditions requested: Applicant must contact Authority to ensure water supply connection or amendment per Water Supply Byelaws
The original reserved matters application (05/92137/REM) for three detached dwellings followed an approval in principle (PA 04/0146/A) and was approved by the Planning Committee on 2 February 2006 despite prior refusals of schemes for 7 and 6 dwellings on overdevelopment grounds. Third-party appellants (Mr and Mrs Leece), supported by locals and Rushen Parish Commissioners, argued the proposal constituted overdevelopment with unacceptable bulk, backs facing the A7 road, highway issues, drainage/flooding risks, and wildlife corridor harm, contrary to the Arbory and East Rushen Local Plan. The applicant (Modena Developments Ltd) and Planning Committee defended it as a negotiated compromise with reduced density, traditional design, adequate parking, and no objections from Highways/Drainage subject to conditions. The Inspector found the bulk, rear-facing orientation to A7, cramped courtyard style, privacy issues, wildlife impacts, and unnecessary road improvements unacceptable on this prominent rural site, recommending the appeal succeed to reverse the approval.
Precedent Value
This appeal sets precedent that even committee-approved schemes can be overturned on third-party appeal if bulk, orientation and visual impact fail in rural prominent locations, emphasising total development mass over unit numbers. Future applicants should prioritise frontage-facing designs, low bulk matching locality, and avoid courtyard styles at junctions, ensuring proposals fully address prior refusal reasons.
Inspector: John S Turner
