6 February 2023 · Delegated - Principal Planner (Chris Balmer)
11, Poplar Road, Douglas, Isle Of Man, IM2 4as
The proposal involved adding a flat-roof conservatory protruding beyond the existing bay windows on the prominent southeast-facing front elevation of a hipped-roof detached house at the corner of Victoria Road and Poplar Road in Douglas.
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 that the flat roof conservatory would not fit with the existing hipped roofscape or the feature arrangements of the bay windows on the southeast elevation, which is the most pro…
General Policy 2
General Policy 2 (b)(c)(g)(m)(n) requires development to respect the character, pattern and form of the surrounding area, including roofscape and features. The flat roof and protrusion beyond bay windows failed this by disrupting the house's design and streetscene. The officer applied it strictly to front extensions in residential areas.
Paragraph 8.12.1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan
This paragraph emphasises design quality and integration with existing roofscape and features in residential contexts. The proposal's flat roof was deemed incompatible with the hipped roof and bay window arrangement, leading to non-compliance.
no highway interest in this application
Highway Services Division stated no highways interest (NHI) in application 22/01354/B and later confirmed no objection to the related appeal with no highway matters to address.
Highway Services Division
No ObjectionFrom the Planning List 4 November 2022, there is no Highways HDC interest (NHI) in: ... 22/01354/B
Highways Development Control
No ObjectionHighways Development Control has no objection to this appeal being considered by written submissions.; There are no highway matters to address.
The original application for a flat-roofed conservatory projecting from the southeast elevation facing Victoria Road was refused under delegated powers for failing to fit with the existing roofscape and feature arrangements, conflicting with General Policy 2, Strategic Plan paragraph 8.12.1, and Residential Design Guide. Appellants argued it was on the rear elevation functionally, visibility was limited by vegetation and levels, existing nearby conservatories existed, flat roof was less obtrusive, and it provided energy benefits. The Council defended refusal on grounds of harm to house symmetry, massing, roofscape, and streetscene on a prominent corner plot facing a main road. Inspector agreed on harm from flat roof and boxy form contrasting pitched roofs, recommending dismissal despite accepting location and size in principle. The Minister disagreed, finding no undue harm to streetscene due to shielding vegetation and boundary walls, noting similar neighbour conservatory, and allowed the appeal with time limit and landscaping conditions.
Precedent Value
Demonstrates Minister can overturn Inspector's design harm recommendation where visibility mitigated by screening and precedents exist; flat roofs may be acceptable if not introducing competing pitches; energy arguments alone insufficient but cumulative context can tip finely balanced cases.
Inspector: Mrs Jennifer Vyse DipTP, MRTPI, DipPBM
