18 December 2007 · Minister for Local Government and the Environment (appeal decision confirming initial delegated refusal by Director of Planning and Building Control)
Plot 6a, Middle River Industrial Estate, Douglas, Isle Of Man, IM2 1al
The proposal involved infilling a low-lying rough grassed area and steep bank adjacent to the river and railway, from the railway archway towards an existing wetland/pond, using inert material from the industrial estate.
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 Department refused due to 'insufficient information has been submitted in order to assess the application in relation to the culverting of the water course', preventing Drainage Division assessmen…
General Policy 3
GP3 restricts development to areas zoned for it, permitting only essential infrastructure in unzoned areas. Site zoned Private Woodland (Douglas Local Plan 1998); infilling not essential for IRIS pipe, which could follow alternative route. Officer assessed as non-compliant due to unzoned location and lack of necessity; inspector reinforced as contrary to maintaining natural river valley/wetland.
no objection
no objection provided adequate protection to the wetland habitat is assured
Wildlife and Conservation Division objects to the infilling of a small wetland due to biodiversity loss and recommends pipe route realignment; Department of Transport defers response pending engineering calculations for culverting; Douglas Corporation and Andrew Jessopp have no objection.
Key concern: further restriction and loss of small wetland with biodiversity value
Wildlife and Conservation Division
Objectionsuch small, wild wetlands add substantially to the biodiversity of a site. It would be a pity to lose this; My view is that infilling wetlands is not in the spirit of the "wise use of wetlands" under the Ramsar Convention; We do, of course, make a standard recommendation to avoid developments within approximately 10m of a watercourse
Conditions requested: minor realignment of IRIS pipe route to retain upper end of open water and as much marsh as feasible; spoil pulled away from wetland, pipe installed, spoil replaced to shallower slope to protect watercourse; avoid developments within approximately 10m of a watercourse
Department of Transport
No Commentengineers calcs would be needed for the culverting of the water course this was not included
Douglas Corporation
No ObjectionDouglas Corporation have no objection to the proposals
Andrew Jessopp
Conditional No ObjectionNo objection provided adequate protection to the wetland habitat is assured
Conditions requested: adequate protection to the wetland habitat is assured
The original application to infill low-lying land adjacent to the river for laying an IRIS pipe was refused by DOLGE Planning Committee due to insufficient drainage information and contravention of General Policy 3. The appellant argued that calculations showed adequate pond capacity, inert fill from site, minimal water flow, and benefits like preventing fly-tipping. The council's Drainage Division emphasised lack of required engineering details for culverting under the Land Drainage Act. The inspector, after site visit, found drainage details untimely but noted no further objection; crucially, ruled the infill contrary to Private Woodland zoning in Douglas Local Plan and GP3, preserving natural river valley features near Steam Railway. Appeal dismissed, confirming refusal.
Precedent Value
Demonstrates strict enforcement of zoning boundaries (GP3); applicants must provide full technical details to statutory consultees like Drainage Division before committee stage, and zoning compliance trumps functional arguments in non-development zones.
Inspector: John S Turner
