26 October 2022 · Delegated - Principal Planner (Jason Singleton)
Co Op, Retail Unit Crosby Meadow Estate, Peel Road, Crosby, Isle Of Man, IM4 2ee
The proposal sought approval for a new first-floor balcony (39.95sqm) added to an existing coffee house (Costa) within a retail unit at Crosby Meadows, along with 4-5 additional car parking spaces, cycle racks, and motorbike parking; it was retrospective as works had already occurred.
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 determined the proposal failed Business Policy 9 as the added internal first floor (93.23sqm) and balcony pushed total retail floor area to 616.18sqm, exceeding the 500sqm threshold requir…
new retail provision at a scale appropriate. Major retail development proposals to be supported by Retail Impact Assessment
Requires Retail Impact Assessment (RIA) for major retail developments over 500sqm to assess impact on town centre vitality/viability. Officer calculated proposal at 616.18sqm with no RIA submitted, constituting major retail outside designated centres; this failed the policy test directly, also breaching prior conditions tied to the threshold.
All new retail development (excepting neighbourhood shops and those instances identified in Business Policy 5) sited within the town and village centr
Directs major retail (except neighbourhood shops) to town/village centres and designated land. Lack of RIA challenged this by failing to demonstrate no adverse impact, conflicting with spatial objectives for Crosby village.
Strategic Policy 4
Requires development in villages like Crosby to maintain settlement character and appropriate scale. Balcony's elevated activity in semi-rural context harmed neighbour amenity, exceeding good neighbourliness standards.
General Policy 2
Sets general standards for acceptable development including amenity. Visual impacts acceptable but amenity/privacy failed due to balcony overlooking/noise.
Environment Policy 23
Covers environmental changes impacting neighbours. Balcony intensified activity harming living conditions despite distances.
Do Not oppose - no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and/or parking. Advised protection of pedestrian path.
Highway Services and DEFA Fisheries raised no objections to the application, while Marown Parish Commissioners objected due to overlooking and privacy concerns for adjacent dwellings. Individual residents also opposed the proposal on similar grounds.
Key concern: Overlooking/loss of privacy into adjacent dwellings
Highway Services Division
No ObjectionAfter reviewing this Application, Highway Services HDC finds it to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and /or parking. The delivery bay is safeguarded.
Conditions requested: Applicant is advised to protect the pedestrian path adjacent the proposed single bay against obstruction of line of sight and vehicle parking, such as by a barrier and marking with yellow hatching.
DEFA Inland Fisheries
No ObjectionI can confirm that DEFA Fisheries have no concerns in relation to this development from a fisheries perspective.
Marown Parish Commissioners
ObjectionThe Commissioners resolved to OPPOSE the Application; This is clearly unacceptable to the occupiers of these dwellings.; The Commissioners entreat the Planning Committee to refuse the Application.
The original application for a retrospective balcony to the Costa Coffee unit and additional parking was refused for two reasons: exceeding 500sqm retail floorspace without Retail Impact Assessment (Business Policy 9), and unacceptable noise, overlooking and privacy impacts on neighbours at 22 Cherry Tree Drive and The Laurels. Appellant argued no RIA needed as coffee shop is not retail (citing prior approval 20/01302/B) and distances exceed 20m with no significant overlooking. Council conceded the first refusal reason pre-inquiry but maintained the second. Inspector found first reason invalid but balcony would cause unacceptable overlooking and noise to The Laurels despite distances over 20m and existing screening, recommending dismissal contrary to GP2 and EP23.
Precedent Value
Even where distances exceed RDG 20m guideline, elevated balconies with anticipated high activity can cause unacceptable overlooking/noise harm if introducing new disturbance level. Prior use approvals can override floorspace thresholds if uses differentiated; conditions alone may not overcome amenity conflicts without visual harm.
Inspector: Richard Perrins
