**Document:** DEC Officer Report
**Application:** 20/01385/B — Construction of reinforced concrete wall with stone cladding for the purpose of providing flood protection
**Decision:** Permitted
**Decision Date:** 2021-02-17
**Parish:** Lonan
**Document Type:** report / officer_report
**Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/6897-lonan-glen-road/documents/925430

---

# DEC Officer Report

**Applicant:** Mr Aidan McCusker Proposal Construction of reinforced concrete wall with stone cladding for the purpose of providing flood protection Site Address Glen Road Laxey Isle Of Man Case Officer : Mr Jason Singleton
**Site Visit:** 22.12.2020 Expected Decision Level Planning Committee
**Recommended Decision:** Permitted Date of Recommendation 05.02.2021

## Conditions and Notes for Approval

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions

- C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

- C 2. No development shall be commenced on site until, further details and drawings showing the finished appearance of both sides of the wall to the section of walling fronting Laxey Woollen Mills, has been first submitted to and approved in writing by the Department showing details of existing and proposed walls with ground levels. All walling works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and retained as such thereafter.

Reason; To ensure the character and appearance of the wall in this section is in keeping with this part of the conservation area.

- C 3. Prior to the commencement of works on site, a 'development within 9 meters of a watercourse form' and a written method statement should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. All works in the vicinity of the river shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason; To ensure adequate protection of the River and fish within.
- C 4. Prior to the commencement of works on site, a written method statement should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department, for the eradication of Himalayan Balsalm. All works in the vicinity of the river shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason; To ensure there is no spread of Himalayan Balsalm and that adequate protection of the rivers ecosystem is maintained.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The application would not harm the use and enjoyment of neighbouring properties or considered to harm the watercourse or that of the Laxey Conservation area has been designed to comply with Strategic Policy 4, General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 7, 22 and 35 of the Strategic Plan 2016.

Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to drawings referenced; 100, 108, digitally submitted and received on 3 December 2020.

_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):

- - Occupants of Glen View, South Cape, Laxey is not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy
- - Occupants of Riverside House, Lower Rencell Hill, Laxey, as as they do not refer to the relevant issues in accordance with paragraph 2C of the Policy.

It is recommended that Manx Utilities should be given Interested Person Status as they have provided written comments which relate to material planning issues.

________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site identified in red starts at the bridge at the upper part of Glen Road opposite the Laxey Woollen Mill from the approx. the centre line of the highway through to approx. the centre line of the river bed of the Laxey River and continues south east or down stream for approx.190 m ending opposite the dwellinghouse Acacia Villa on the adjacent side of the highway. - 1.2 The boundary wall between the highway of Glen road and the Laxey River is, on Glen road side, mainly Manx stone walling, and to the river side alternates from Manx stone wall to sections generally opposite the Manx woollen Mill and a concrete render for the majority up to the new wall and gate which was recently rebuilt and 300mm higher than the existing. The current wall when measured, for its majority from road level is approx. 1.3m high with a domed top. - 1.3 To the west of Laxey River and the application is dwellinghouse Riversdale House which sits at a higher level than Glen Road and their outlook is across the river to the application site and the dwellings fronting Glen Road. To the north east part of the site is Laxey Woollen Mill a 2/3 storey building finished in Manx stone with a hipped roof, portrait timber windows. The river wall here and up to the weir where Laxey Rover meets Glenroy River, is all Manx Stone wall and the river side of the wall is prominent and visible and matches that of the Woollen Mill. On the opposite side of the river adjacent to Riversdale House is a shuttered concrete retaining wall.

1.4 There is a natural break in the roadside/riverside wall, approximately in line with the southern gable of the Woollen Mill where the wall finish on the river side becomes smooth concrete and Manx stone to the roadside which continues south to the new section of walling repaired in 2019 with pre-cast concrete retaining wall with a flood gate. This section of wall is 300mm higher than the existing in Manx stone and domed top to Glen Road and a concrete finish down to the river bed on the river side.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Proposed is the demolition of the existing wall and construction of a reinforced concrete wall with stone cladding to the face of Glen Road for the purpose of providing flood protection along sections of Glen Road. The replacement wall will be approx.300mm higher than existing. - 2.2 The applicant has submitted cross sections of the type of wall to be built and at what sections also is a planning statement which provides information the background to flooding where in 2019, 51 of the 62 properties were affected, the impact of the flooding and how this resulted in elevated river level further upstream from a blockage at the weir from debris. Emergency repair works were carried out to damaged section of the wall where it was rebuilt with reinforced concrete approx. 300mm higher to give additional flood protection. - 2.3 The applicant has helpfully provided a written description to accompany the engineering drawings describing the extent of the replacement works at each section along Glen road. This is noted in the preceding paragraphs from the written statement; - 2.4 "The section of retaining wall to be replaced initially was from Ballacowin Cottage on Glen Road up to the road bridge at Laxey Woollen Mills, an approximate length of 140 metres. Appendix A presents a location plan of the various different sections of wall under review. The first section of retaining wall already completed is depicted in magenta on the location plan and the construction details are shown in Section A-A. This completed section of works incorporates a flood gate to provide access to the river for maintenance purposes as requested by DEFA and MUA. - 2.5 The next upstream section of 25m is an existing masonry wall which it is proposed to demolish and replace down to river bed level in the same manner as shown in Section A-A. - 2.6 The next 67m of wall already has a reinforced concrete lining below road level and so it is proposed to demolish the wall to road level only and construct a new reinforced concrete boundary wall above road level. The construction details of this wall type are shown in Appendix A, Section B-B. - 2.7 The remaining section for replacement has 18m of Manx stone wall and 13m of railings up to the bend at the bridge. The wall below carriageway has no concrete face so it is proposed to provide a new reinforced concrete lining on the river side up to road level. A new reinforced concrete 4 boundary wall would then be constructed above this. Construction details for this are shown in Appendix A, Section C-C. - 2.8 There is an additional section of wall opposite the properties of Hollywood and Acacia Villa that also need strengthening. These are to be raised approximately 900mm to the same height as the rest of the wall with additional reinforced concrete up stands on top of the existing as shown in Appendix A, Section D-D".

3.0 PLANNING POLICY - 3.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is within an area designates the surrounding area as 'predominately residential' on the adjacent side of Glen Road and 'Mixed' use opposite the Woollen Mill on Map 7 Laxey Area Plan for the East, coming into operation on December 2020, replacing the Laxey and Lonan Plan 2005.

- The Area Plan for the East Written Statement
- 3.2 Within the accompanying written statement, Glen Road Laxey does not generally feature, Laxey River is noted amongst other rivers for populations of spawning salmon and seatrout. With regard to flooding and erosion in section 5.20.1 refers to the 2016 National Strategy on Sea Defences and Coastal Erosion Evidence report which identified areas at risk of fluvial, surface water and coastal flooding within this, Laxey, amongst other areas was identified "as being at high risk both now and in the future and require urgent consideration, further investigation and potential intervention to reduce the evident risk". Section 5.20.2 notes the impact of flooding, weather and the flood risk when allocating land for future development and "flood risk acting as a critical constraint in the Site Assessment Framework used to assess proposed sites". Section 5.20.3 identifies that Flood risk maps have been produced by the MUA and their data used to identify flood risk areas.
- 3.3 Natural Environment Recommendation 3 The Department supports further consideration and investigation of the impacts of coastal, fluvial and surface water flooding and coastal erosion on key economic, infrastructure, environmental and social receptors. The ongoing work of the Flooding Advisory Group is recognised as part of this, as well as the findings and recommendations set out in the Laxey Flood Independent Review Report. The following, including the areas of Douglas (comprising Douglas Bay, Douglas Harbour, Glass/Douglas/Dhoo/Middle River Confluence, River Glass and Upper Dhoo) and Laxey, are all identified as being at high risk both now and in the future.
- 3.4 With regard to the Historic Built environment, in section 6.8 talks about safeguarding the local character local character, particularly those features which fundamentally define the historic built environment in the East. Part of section 6.8.3 provides helpful guidance; "Existing and new development can exist side by side, even with some visual differences presented by old and new building styles. New development should not seek to mimic existing development but be of its own time".
- 3.5 Urban Environment Proposal 3 Development proposals must make a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. Traditional or contemporary approaches may be appropriate, depending upon the nature of the proposal and the context of the surrounding area.
- 3.6 With regard to Tourism in the east in section 10.2.1, only the Laxey wheel and the Great Laxey Mines Railway are noted. Conservation Area Designation
- 3.7 The length of the application site is also identified as being within the Laxey Conservation Area 1990. Strategic Plan 2016
- 3.8 Within the adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, the following policies are considered to be relevant in the determination of this application:
- 3.9 Strategic Policy 4 Proposals for development must: (a) Protect or enhance the fabric and setting of Ancient Monuments, Registered Buildings(1), Conservation Areas(2) , buildings and structures within National Heritage Areas and sites of archaeological interest; (b) protect or enhance the landscape quality and nature conservation value of urban as well as rural areas but especially in respect to development adjacent to Areas of Special Scientific Interest and other designations; and (c) not cause or lead to unacceptable environmental pollution or disturbance.
- 3.10 General Policy 2 (GP2) (in part)

Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:

- (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them;
- (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape;
- (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses;

- (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality;
- (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space
- (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways;

3.11 Environment Policy 7 Development which would cause demonstrable harm to a watercourse, wetland, pond or dub, and which could not be overcome by mitigation measures will not be permitted. Where development is proposed which would affect a watercourse, planning applications must comply with the following criteria:

- (a) all watercourses in the vicinity of the site must be identified on plans accompanying a planning application and include an adequate risk assessment to demonstrate that works will not cause long term deterioration in water quality;
- (b) details of pollution and alleviation measures must be submitted;
- (c) all engineering works proposed must be phased in an appropriate manner in order to avoid a reduction in water quality in any adjacent watercourse; and
- (d) development will not normally be allowed within 8 metres of any watercourse in order to protect the aquatic and bankside habitats and species.

3.12 Environment Policy 22 Development will not be permitted where it would unacceptably harm the environment and/or the amenity of nearby properties in terms of: i) pollution of sea, surface water or groundwater; ii) emissions of airborne pollutants; and iii) vibration, odour, noise or light pollution. - 3.13 Environmental Policy 35 Within Conservation Areas, the Department will permit only development which would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Area, and will ensure that the special features contributing to the character and quality are protected against inappropriate development. - 3.14 Other material Considerations;

- o Laxey Flood Alleviation Scheme Feasibility Study 2020
- o Laxey Flood of 1st October 2019 Independent Review Final Report (Arup report)
- o Laxey Floor Modelling 2017
- o National Strategy on Sea Defences, Flooding and coastal Erosion 2016
- o Isle of Man Surface water flood map 2014
- o Isle of Man Flooding and Wave Overtopping Study 2014
- o Flood Risk to Coastal Towns 2012

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 4.1 The application site has not been the subject of any previous planning applications that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS (in brief, full statements can be read online)

5.1 Garff Parish Commissioners commented (12/01/21) provided commentary highlighting the area is a conservation area and seek the concrete facing the riverside of the wall is unacceptable and should be cladded on both faces.

5.2 Highways Services have commented (24/12/20) and do not object. - 5.3 DEFA Inland Fisheries have commented (13/01/20) requesting the completion of a pro forma for "Development within 9m of a water course" before they can assess the application. - 5.4 MUA Water Authority,(15/01/21) have provided extract from the JBA report appertaining to the design of the wall heights from the weir to the woollen mills, showing level at surveyed cross sections in a table and corresponding plan. - 5.5 DEFA Fisheries commented (18/01/21) with no objection subject to conditions, the works can only be carried out between July and September to avoid spawning fish; works to be conducted according to a written method statement agreed in advance with Inland Fisheries. - 5.6 DEFA Ecosystems Policy Officer has commented (03/02/21) with no objection but there are records of Himalayan Balsam along the stretch of river and is listed on Schedule 8 Part II of the Wildlife Act 1990 and concerns are that it could spread in connection with the works. They request a condition for the submission of a plan for the eradication of Himalayan Balsam prior to the works taking place. - 5.7 DEFA's Principal Registered Buildings Officer commented (01/02/21) highlights the importance of the character and historic merit of the area and the traditional vernacular style of the buildings and the mixed pallet of traditional materials; the wall contributes to the character of this part of the Conservation area; seeks absolute justification for the loss of the wall and sufficient evidence to demonstrate the loss is necessary doe to the risk of flooding; seeks consideration is given to minimise the visual appearance of the concrete wall. If stone facing is not possible are there other options been explored been explored to tone down the impact. Uk may have some best practice guidance; the walling in the vicinity of the mill building should be a more sympathetic treatment. Registered Building Consent is required for the demolitions within a conservation area. - 5.8 Riverside House, Lower Rencell Hill, Laxey commented (08/01/21) are Located to the west of the Laxey River with a view of the inside of the wall running along Glen Road. Object to the appearance of the riverside of the wall. The proposal would remove this nice view of a weathered wall with a bleached concrete sectional wall. Glen Road side is cladded in stone. Section b/b and c/c were identified in November 2020 as structurally assessed and fit for purpose why now is it being replaced. They feel that it does not need replacing and the section should be faced in stone and not left bare concrete. - 5.9 Glen View, South Cape, Laxey commented (04/01/21; 25/01/21; 26/01/21) to objects as there is no justification for the increase in wall height; would flood the woollen mill as water would be diverted down its access road; the railing on the bridge allow for the water to flow through and run down the road, rather than destroy the bridge; the access gate further downstream did not attain planning permission; existing railing offer visibility for those using the bridge, vehicles and pedestrian; could proposed a traffic hazard with a wall 1.6m high and dangerous; the river would not been seen with a wall 1.6m high and would destroy the amenity of Laxey; would allow for poaching; riverside should be stone built; would appear like a bathtub with concrete walls; requires a Registered Building Application for the demolition of the wall; river gate has no purpose and an eyesore; new wall should match the existing; this area has not flooded in 2019 or earlier, the wall was breached due to debris in the river; loss of amenity to the area, conflicts with the Arup report; works to the river and the weir require Registered Building consent; the proposal should retain the railings or a lower height along Glen Road and stone face on both sides of the wall; the proposal is not appropriate for Laxey Conservation Area. Glen road is a popular tourist route and the heritage view would be removed; flooding has never (in their 30 years as a Laxey resident) breeching the railings; witnessed the floods in 2015 and 2019;

## - 6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are;

- (i) Justification for the works (EP7a,b;)
- (ii) Impact on the neighbouring properties (GP2g ; EP22)
- (iii) Any adverse harm to the watercourse or (EP7c,d;GP2d)
- (iv) Visual impact on the wider streetscene and Laxey Conservation Area (SP4; EP35;GP2b&c)
- (v) Impact on the Highways (GP2h&I)

6.2 Justification There is much debate arising from the consultation period regarding the proposed works or the extent of them. The applicant and their various consultants have carried out numerous reports as noted in section 3.14. The starting point is the recommendations that were derived from the Arup report which has enabled JBA consulting to carry out surface water modelling and identify flood risk reduction opportunities possible within the Laxey Area. Of the 50 options for river, tidal and surface water flood risk alleviation, one of the options and the subject of this application is a new retaining wall between the Laxey River an Glen Road, and the increase in wall height to from 1.3m to 1.6m, an increase of 300mm. This is further emphasised in the latest report (Laxey Flood Alleviation Scheme Feasibility Study 2020) at paragraph 6.1 titled; Long list of options - Fluvial and tidal referenced; (noted below in 6.3) - 6.3 F-LAX-006 "Laxey River - Linear wall (Woollen Mill to immediately downstream to MER weir) Description; ~ Replace existing river bank retaining wall along Glen Road and formalise as a flood defence with increased wall height. ~ Height to be determined by hydraulic modelling and the impact of option F-LAX-007 ~ Confirm approx. length. Shortlisted; Yes - Option provides increased SoP (standard of Protection) to nearby properties but may need to be combined with other options to mitigate any downstream impacts. This is also featured in paragraph 6.2.2 MER Weir and Glen Road Walls on page 35/36 where the table and pictogram shows the location of the works". - 6.4 On balance, there is a wider government initiative to progress mitigating measures to offset flooding under the 'Programme for Government for a Sustainable Island' where it says; " Continue to invest in sea defences and in reducing flooding and coastal erosion risks for those areas identified as high risk in our national strategy". Laxey River has been identified as being high risk and the requirement for these works has been identified within the latest report from JBA consulting and previous studies, as noted above, which has been sufficiently documented and justified. Of all the works shortlisted, and the subject of this application, are seen as one of the most fundamental aspects to implement the necessary safeguards. As such the department is satisfied there is sufficient need for the principle of the works and as no evidence or conflicting professional hyrological reports to the contrary are published, the application would be in accordance with Environment Policy 7 (a,b). - 6.5 Neighbours The proposed works would be considered to be relatively non-contentious in the respect to the visual impacts on the neighbouring properties along Glen Road, with the closest neighbouring property being Riverside House on the opposite side of the river whose curtilage fronts onto Laxey River approx. 15m away. Whilst they have objected to the works on account of outlook of a concrete wall as opposed to a Manx stone Wall is noted, the visual impact is addressed later in the report at 6.7. However the works for a replacement wall would not be considered to be detrimental to their amenity. The residents of Glen Road have not commented on the application as they are to benefit the most from the works and this would offer the added protection from flooding over the years safeguarding their properties. This aspect would be read in accordance with GP2g & EP22.

6.6 Watercourse The scope of works will see part of the river bed and banks being reformed by the use of the pre-cast concrete 'L' sections and finished with stone to Glen Road. This method of bank stabilisation has already been utilised and evidenced in the immediate area and further downstream. The comments from the inland fisheries are noted and the applicant would be required to liaise with them for the production of a method statement prior to the works commencing on site and the same for the biodiversity for the prescence of Himalayan Balsam along the stretch of river can both be conditioned to secure adequacy of works on site. On balance, the proposed scale of the works would not adversely harm the water course, and would be compliant with GP2d and EP7c,d. - 6.7 Visual Impact The walling finish to the road side of Glen Road is Manx stone and would reflect the current finish and is acceptable. The current appearance of the wall to the riverside is a mixture of Manx stone walling with some sections of concrete finished wall that has taken on an aged appearance and then the recently replaced section of walling with concrete pre-cast retaining wall (carried out in 2019 after the floods). If the scope of works were to be undertaken under Permitted Development (Schedule 2 Class 2 Highways works), those sections of concrete walling would have to be replaced with concrete for it to comply with the PDO on a material basis. The prevalence of the use of concrete as a material of retaining walling down to the river bed is clearly evident on both sides of the river and also further downstream, which has in the past been acknowledged as an accepted method of material for this use. The proposed use of concrete walling to those sections of the riverside wall is considered an acceptable method and material for a retailing wall to this section of Glen Road where any views would be read against the backdrop of residential properties of various styles and finishes. It can be seen with the existing concrete sections that takes on a weathered appearance over the years. In this instance and the prevalent use of the material it is not considered to seek any treatment of the concrete face as this will happen naturally and will be consistent with the use further downstream. In this case the proposal would not be introducing an incongruous element that would be considered detrimental to this part of the streetscene. - 6.8 The woollen mill is a not a registered building but has a positive contribution to character and appearance of the conservation area which is very apparent when approaching from either direction. It is here where the walling to the riverside is most important as this helps with the character and identity. At present the building and the current retaining wall are of the same Manx stone finishing on both sides. It is at this point where the two rivers converge and the bridge over the Laxey River offers views down most of the length of the river to the weir. The setting here is an important one where the riverside of the wall should reflect the current appearance, the heritage of the area and that of the façade of the Woollen Mill building as opposed to the proposed concrete appearance. This has been discussed with the applicant (01/02/20) and they have agreed to a condition being placed on any approval signifying that the wall to the front of the Laxey Woollen Mill is to be faced both sides with Manx stone down to the river bed which is seen as a positive outcome for the character of the streetscene and that of the conservation area. - 6.9 The proposed increase in height of the wall by 300mm is not considered to have an adverse impact on the appearance of the streetscene over and above the existing. Any visual impact is deemed to be minimal and any harm is outweighed by the benefits of flood protection to the existing dwellings and their residents and is sufficiently justified as noted above. - 6.10 The proposed replacement wall would be read in conjunction with the remaining buildings (Laxey Woollen Mill) and the wall fronting to Glen Road being finished in Manx stone would be seen to enhance the character and appearance of the streetscene and that of the conservation area with the added benefit of assisting in the bank and road stabilisation which would positively contribute to the ongoing flood mitigation works in the area. This aspect would comply with Sp4, EP35 and GP2b&c.

6.11 Highways The application does not propose any alterations to the current access arrangement to the highway of Glen Road. A section of railing opposite the woollen Mill is due to be removed and replaced with a Stone wall. Highway Services have considered the merits of the proposal, users of this part of Glen Road, and highway safety. As the transport professionals their comments are heavily relied upon and it is noted they do not object, the proposal would be aligned with the principles of GP2 (h&i).

## - 7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 The application has been considered and on balance would seek to regularise the works already undertaken to the wall and would not harm the use and enjoyment of neighbouring properties or considered to harm the watercourse or that of the Laxey Conservation area has been designed to comply with Strategic Policy 4, General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 7, 22 and 35 of the Strategic Plan 2016, and is recommended for approval. - 8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

- (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf);
- (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material;
- (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure;
- (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
- (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
- (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and
- (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material. 8.2 The decision maker must determine:

- o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and
- o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status _______________________________________________________________

I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to the it by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.

Decision Made : …Permitted……….... Committee Meeting Date:…15.02.2021 Signed :………J SINGLETON…………….. Presenting Officer Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report). Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See below

Customer note This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit

- of our online services/customers and archive records.

PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 15.02.2021 Application No. : 20/01385/B Applicant : Mr Aidan McCusker Proposal : Construction of reinforced concrete wall with stone cladding for the purpose of providing flood protection Site Address : Glen Road Laxey Isle Of Man Senior Planning Officer : Mr Jason Singleton Presenting Officer As above (correct manually if not the case officer)

Addendum to the Officer’s Report The Planning Committee sought an amendment to the following condition: C 2. No development shall be commenced on site until further details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department which show the railing details (to ensure visibility splays are retained) and finished appearance of both sides of the wall to the section of walling fronting Laxey Woollen Mills (to show both side of the wall finished in Manx Stone). All railing/walling works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and retained as such thereafter. Reason; To ensure the character and appearance of the wall in this section is in keeping with this part of the conservation area and in the interests of Highway Safety.

---

*Data sourced from the Isle of Man public planning register under the [Isle of Man Open Government Licence](https://www.gov.im/about-this-site/open-government-licence/).*
*Canonical page: https://planningportal.im/a/6897-lonan-glen-road/documents/925430*