Inspector's Report

Appeal No: AP25/0037 Application No: 25/90397/B

________________________________________________________________ Report Planning Appeal – Written Representation ________________________________________________________________ Site Inspection undertaken on 24 November 2025 _____________________________________________________________

Appeal by Manx Telecom

Against the decision of the DEFA to refuse an application for planning permission for the installation of 4 telegraph poles to provide Fibre Optic Connectivity to 1-19 Corrin’s Way & 1-27 Creggan’s Avenue, Peel.

Preliminary matters

• 1. This report provides a brief description of the appeal site, its surroundings, the proposal and relevant policy. The cases for the appeal parties are then summarised, fuller details being available for reference in the appeal case documents. My assessment, conclusion and recommendation follow.
• 2. On presentation of the proposal to the Planning Committee the recommendation of the Planning Officer was one of Approval1. At the committee meeting and following discussion, the application was refused on the casting vote of the Chair. The identified sole reason for refusal centres on the proposal for the 4 telegraph poles having a negative visual impact which would adversely affect the character of the street scene to an unacceptable degree.
• 3. As set out above there was only one reason for refusal promoted by the Members of the Planning Committee and reflected in the terms of the decision notice dated 11 September 2025. The Department, in their Statement of Case, has sort to expand the reasons for refusal2 to include impact on residential amenity as well

• as lack of justification on the grounds of national need or details of pursuance of alternative options. If these additional matters had been of concern to Members
• at the time the proposal was discussed and voted upon, it is reasonable to assume more than one reason for refusal would have been included on the decision notice.

• 4. However, I have noted the terms of the objections from local residents and will be addressing their concerns in my assessment.

Site and surroundings

• 5. Corrin’s Way and Creggan’s Avenue is located within the southern approaches into Peel, from Glenfaba Road, part of a larger estate of dense urban development. In the main, the estate is characterised by well-established, semi-

• 1 Committee meeting took place on the 26 August 2025. It was referred to Committee as a result of the level of objections from residents.
• 2 To three - see section 6.0 of the Statement of Case.

detached pairs of houses benefitting from front and rear gardens, many having small flat roof front porches and some with single garages. The streetscape is quite stark with a dominance of hard surfacing, including tarmac roads and pavements, low frontage brick walls and standard cranked top streetlamps.

The proposed development

• 6. The appeal proposes the erection of four telegraph poles with an above ground height of approximately 7 – 7.5 metres3. The proposal includes the associated overhead network cables for the provision of fibre broadband internet. Off each of these poles would be a series of network cables that would radiate out between the poles all being installed at the same time. Once a property owner has placed an order with their chosen service provider, a drop cable will then be installed between the serving pole and the property. Pole 1, outside No 2 Creggan’s Avenue, Pole No 2, at the corner of Creggan’s Avenue and Corrin’s Way, Pole No 3, outside Nos 5 and 7 Corrin’s Way and Pole No 4, at the cul-de-sac end of Corrin’s Way, outside No 19 Corrin’s Way, would provide the infrastructure for some 46 homes to be connected to a modern fibre Optic cable.

Relevant policy4

• 7. Within the Peel Local Plan5 (PLP) the appeal site is identified as being predominantly residential6.
• 8. General Policy 2 (GP2) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 (IMSP) sets out the considerations required for development to be permitted and includes, that proposals should not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality. Policy compliant development should respect the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them.
• 9. IMSP Infrastructure Policy 3 (IP3) requires that a balance be struck between the need for new, evolving communications systems and the impact the necessary infrastructure would have upon the environment. It also requires the removal of redundant infrastructure.
• 10.National Telecoms Infrastructure Committee Report, September 2017 concluded that if the Island is to stay ahead of the curve and become a world leader in telecoms, we will need appropriate sustained investment, an efficient shared infrastructure and the innovation and confidence to challenge barriers to deploying new technology. The importance of increasing the speed of broadband as a priority across the Island is clear.
• 11.National Telecommunications Strategy, October 2018 concluded that the National Telecoms strategy, laid out in six themes, looks to set a direction of travel by which the Island's telecom infrastructure can be recognised as being world class. It defines strategic outcomes to make it happen, in regulation and legislation, a national broadband plan, subsea cables and planning and

• 3 And 2 metres below ground, set in a hole 400mm-600mm in width – See plan reference MT 2023P-0-0.
• 4 Policies of most relevance.
• 5 Adopted 19 April 1989.
• 6 The Area Plan for the North and West (2022) was not adopted by Tynwald and so its policies carry no weight in the balance of this decision.

wayleaves. The Government has made it clear that enhanced telecoms infrastructure is a top priority. The Isle of Man Government is determined to support the development of telecoms infrastructure which meets the needs of both businesses and the public now and into the future.

• 12.The National Broadband Plan, outlined in the Isle of Man's National Telecoms Strategy, sets out to deliver Island wide ultrafast fibre broadband to more than 99% of the Island's premises with Manx Telecom as the preferred supplier to enable over 40,000 premises (residential and commercial) to have 'access' to the fibre network. Given the diversity of the Isle of Man's landscape and the remote nature of some of the properties, the Isle of Man Government has recognised that delivery of fibre broadband to some areas would be commercially unviable and that funding should be made available to ensure that properties in nine intervention zones will have access to the Fibre. This project was initiated in July 2020 and is set to conclude by August 2024.
• 13.Our Island Plan was updated in March 2024 and notes that the National Broadband Plan continues, with over 75% of targeted homes passed7, so supporting ongoing continued investment to deliver 99% of all homes fibre ready8. Complete the rollout of the National Broadband Plan, driving 99% Fibre Broadband available Island wide such that all parts of our economy and society can benefit from modern and ultrafast internet capability9. Within the section entitled "Outstanding lifelong learning and development opportunities for all" the plan identifies that public services are increasingly digitally-enabled, and residents have access to fast, reliable internet via the Island's National Broadband Plan to create enhanced opportunities for learning in the Digital Age.

Case for the Appellant10 Design and placement considerations

• 14. The proposed poles have been carefully sited to minimise intrusion into pedestrian pathways and to ensure compliance with accessibility standards. Their placement has been selected to avoid obstructing movement and to maintain the functional width of footpaths. Existing footpaths do not meet the current highway standards, though Highways Services did not object to this application and commented that the proposal has “no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and/or parking as at least 1.2m footway width is maintained around the poles.”
• 15. At the design stage we have used the Telecommunications Poles Working Group Best Practice Recommendations guide as part of the planning decisions and design for this scheme. We also took in the considerations of the Cabinet Siting and Pole Siting, Code of Practice, Issue 2; November 2016. (UK Guidance for best practice). These considerations can be seen within the application documents plans.

• 7 Install infrastructure to enable residents to place an order to connect.
• 8 Page 19.
• 9 Page 27.
• 10 Source Statement of Case of the Appellant - email dated 17 October 2025.

Visual Integration and Character

• 16. Wooden telegraph poles are a longstanding and familiar feature of residential infrastructure across the Isle of Man. Manx Telecom currently utilises 2,487 of its own telegraph poles and attaches to approximately 2,500 poles from Manx Utilities’ estate, which comprises around 10,000 poles Island-wide. These installations are essential for delivering fibre broadband services to homes and businesses. The scale and height of the proposed poles are proportionate to their function to meet current standard of clearance height across the carriageway. We don’t believe they are excessive when compared to other street furniture such as lighting columns. This approach reflects established practice across the Island and supports the continued rollout of high-speed connectivity in line with national infrastructure goals.

Compliance with General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan

• 17. We believe the proposal aligns with the relevant clauses of General Policy 2:

• (b) The development respects the character and appearance of the surrounding area by using materials and forms that are sympathetic to the existing built environment.
• (c) The installation does not result in unacceptable harm to the amenity of the area, and any visual impact is mitigated through careful siting and design.

(h) The infrastructure supports essential utility services, contributing to the Island’s connectivity and resilience, which is a key objective of sustainable development.

Previous Planning applications

• 18.It is important to note that all applications have received recommendation for approval from the Planning Case Officer.
• 19.Manx Telecom has previously submitted applications and received approvals for: 23/01236/B – Ballamillaghyn Estate, Mount Rule 24/00258/B – Riverbank Road, Ramsey 24/00445/B – Ballasteen Drive, Andreas. All of these were approved by the Planning Committee and therefore were deemed to comply with Planning Policies and align with strategic infrastructure goals.
• 20.Highlighting an earlier application that has been approved 23/01236/B – Ballamillaghyn Estate, Mount Rule. The house type and topography of the dwelling density is similar to this application. 87% of properties within this application has now moved on to the new fibre network. During the planning approval process 28% of residence objected to the erection of new telegraph poles. 100% of the objectors have moved on to the new fibre network.
• 21.Despite similar infrastructure and planning context, Planning Committee have dealt with the follow applications differently.

• • Riverbank Road (Approved) and Fairways Drive (Refused) are both in Ramsey yet received opposite outcomes.
• • Ballasteen Drive (Approved) and Larivane Close (Refused) are both in Andreas, yet one was deemed acceptable and the other not.

• • Visual impact assessments appear to be subjective, with no clear threshold for what constitutes “negative impact.”
• • Lack of uniform criteria for assessing visual impact
• • Variable interpretation of General Policy 2

Summary

• 22.Manx Telecom recognises the importance of balancing infrastructure improvements with the preservation of local character and amenity. However, we firmly believe that the benefits of delivering enhanced broadband and fibre connectivity—particularly in areas currently not served by fibre today significantly outweigh the limited and localised visual impact associated with the proposed development.
• 23.The installation of telegraph poles is a necessary component of expanding our network coverage and delivering reliable, high-speed connectivity to homes and businesses across the Island. These improvements directly support the Isle of Man Government’s strategic objectives as outlined in the Island Plan, the National Telecommunications Strategy, and the National Broadband Plan.
• 24.In this context, we believe that greater material weight must be given to the long-term public benefit of improved digital infrastructure. The proposed development aligns with national policy priorities and contributes to the Island’s economic resilience, social inclusion, and technological advancement. Manx Telecom remains committed to working collaboratively with planning authorities and local communities to ensure that all infrastructure projects are delivered responsibly, with sensitivity to the surrounding environment and in full compliance with planning policy.

Case for the DEFA11

• 25.The appeal site is identified for residential, and the proposals would seek to comply with IMSP Policy SP1(c) as the applicants are seeking to expand on existing telecoms infrastructure (located below ground) to facilitate service delivery within the immediate vicinity. On this basis the broad principle of development would be supported through compliance with IMSP Policies SP1 and STP1 (c).

Visual impact

• 26.In terms of assessing visual impact and aligning this to the policy narrative, it is noted that General Policy 2 are general development considerations that are specifically focused on ‘development’. In this case for the erection of the wooden telegraph poles, the following excerpts from GP2 are relevant; b - respecting the site and surroundings; c - any adverse impact on the character of the surrounding area.
• 27. At the Planning Committee meeting, Members noted that the use of wooden poles for the provision of fibre internet was not evident anywhere else within the wider residential estate. It was noted that the remainder of the estate was likely

• 11 Source Statement of Case and Extract of Planning Committee Minute.

serviced by an underground network of telecom ductworks which connects to each property. Members were concerned why these few properties could not be served by an engineering solution to have the cables underground like the remainder of the residential estate.

• 28.Members also noted, the proposed telegraph poles will be visible on this street scene as individual telegraph poles and their cabling above, where at present there are no telegraph poles, and they will be read against the backdrop of residential dwelling houses to this part of the street given their placement. This level of new infrastructure would not integrate sensitively with its surroundings.
• 29.Furthermore, the array of network cabling that would criss-cross out from the poles to the individual properties were considered a backwards step in service delivery and collectively would look out of place. The height of the poles was raised as a concern and whether they would be dominant on the streetscape because they would be greater in height than the surrounding dwelling houses.
• 30. Whilst the initial reasons for refusal focused on General Policy 2b,c, a further consideration is the wording from Infrastructure Policy 3 in the Strategic Plan and the presumption against “visually intrusive masts”. If the application is being refused on visual impact (GP2b,c) it would also fail to meet the criteria of IP3 and given the lack of national need and alternative service delivery being explored, a further reason for refusal that is separately aligned with IP3 should be included.

Impact on residential amenity.

• 31. In addition to the reason for refusal, and noting an appeal considers the application de-novo, it would be pertinent to consider General Policy 2g which specifically deals with the impacts on the residential amenity from the proposals. Where proposals are considered to be visually intrusive, they could also be aligned with being overbearing. Whilst this was not included as a specific reason for refusal, but GP2g would be reflective of the residents who objected to the proposals and are against the use of above ground fibre broadband delivery via poles and cables. Their level of objection was recorded in the minutes of the committee meeting, and their specific comments were summarised in the officer’s original report.
• 32.Consideration could be given to any adverse impact upon the neighbouring amenity and guidance on this is available within the residential design guide at Section 7.0 - Impact upon Neighbours. Further consideration could be given to whether there is any potential loss of light/overshadowing; potential overbearing impact upon outlook; and potential overlooking resulting in a loss of privacy.
• 33.With regard to these proposals, consideration could be given to objectively assess where there is any over-bearing impact from the physical presence of the poles in the public interest and whether this would feel oppressive because of their installation within the pavements on this quiet estate road. Should an overbearing impact exist because the development is so close to dwellinghouses, it would need to be aligned whether this would affect any outlook from within an affected dwelling house, from their gardens and any outside domestic spaces

• immediately surrounding the house. Further consideration is needed whether this change of outlook would be acceptable or harmful to the occupant’s living conditions of any residential property when compared to the current situation where the proposals don’t exist in the streetscape.
• 34.When assessing such impact, it could be apparent that the proposed installation of a wooden telegraph pole within approximately 20 metres of the principal elevation of a residential dwelling could result in an unduly dominant and visually intrusive feature in the immediate street scene. Due to its height, vertical form, and proximity to habitable rooms, the pole would appear starkly out of scale with the surrounding residential dwellings, creating a pronounced sense of visual oppression. Furthermore, this overbearing presence could significantly compromise the outlook from principle habitable rooms, diminishing their residential amenity of occupants by imposing an artificial and industrial structure into their immediate visual field on the property’s boundary. The proposal fails to respect the established character and spatial quality of the locality and could materially harm the living conditions of nearby residents.
• 35. The Department also submitted a rebuttal statement following the outcome of two recent appeal decisions:

• 25/90376/B by Manx Telecom for; Installation of 4 telegraph poles to supply fibre communications to; 77-87 Eary Veg and 88, 97, 98 and 99 Cronk Liauyr Tromode - Eary Veg Tromode Douglas.
• 25/90377/B by Manx Telecom for: Installation of 4 telegraph poles to supply fibre communications to; 115-119, 123-125 and 43-51 Slieau Dhoo Tromode Slieau Dhoo Tromode Douglas

• 36.These applications were initially refused by the Planning committee and following an appeal were both subsequently recommended for refusal by the planning inspector and upheld on behalf of the Minister of DEFA12.

Other Parties

• 37. Highway Services – The proposal has no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and/or parking, as at least 1.2m footway width is maintained around the poles. Therefore, no objection is raised.
• 38. Peel Town Commissioners have considered the application and object on the grounds that the erection of telegraph poles with overhead wiring will created a cluttered street scene and will be unsightly for a modern residential urban environment.
• 39. IMSP Policy IP3 sets out that a balance must be struck between the need for new, evolving communication systems to satisfy residential and business demand and the impact the necessary infrastructure will have upon the environment.
• 40. The Peel Local Plan emphasises the need for a quality residential environment through policy 5.15 stating that comprehensive landscaping proposals will be required as part of future submissions.

• 12 I shall return to these appeal outcomes in my assessment.

• 41. Manual for Manx Roads emphasises the need to build a quality environment and reduce clutter whilst identifying aspects of the built form that contributes to quality places13. It also covers a range of techniques to help reduce the clutter of unnecessary street furniture on the highway14.
• 42. All these planning policies and guidance documents encourage the reduction in street furniture and improve the residential street environment through placing statutory undertaker's communication services underground. These planning applications seek to ignore these planning policies and guidance.

Local residents15

• 43. Comments were received from fourteen different addresses raising objections at the appeal stage. They were concentrated in Corrin’s Way, Creggan’s Avenue and Cronk Reayrt. The concerns raised mirrored those reported to the Members of the Planning Committee when a decision was originally taken on the proposal. The representations include a circular letter raising the same points.
• 44. The following considerations have been summarised as follows:

• o Will change the aesthetics and be detrimental to the estate
• o Installation should be buried underground
• o Use existing duct infrastructure;
• o Loss of visual amenity & visual intrusion
• o Loss of a view and outlook from their properties
• o Could be susceptible to storm damage
• o Cheapest solution and no viability have been proposed
• o Negatively affect property valuations
• o Most of the estate’s cables are underground, why not here
• o Will be an eyesore in the street
• o Poles and cabling will be unsightly
• o Poles will be ugly and will ruin the character of this area
• o Potential for bird strikes and danger to wildlife from the cables
• o Poles will be taller than the houses and unsightly
• o Poles will allow other utility providers to use them creating clutter
• o Poles would be a backwards step
• o Noise and Environmental disruption. The OH cables will create wind noise near bedroom windows causing disturbance to residents.
• o Impact on Wildlife - The Estates proximity to Peels fish yards attracts a lot of birds to the area increasing the risk of cable damage and associated service
• outages

• 13 Manual for Manx Roads – Section 5.5.1.
• 14 Manual for Manx Roads – Section 5.5.3.
• 15 Source the Planning Officer report to Planning Committee and the full terms of the submitted letters and list of the addresses are reproduced on the Government planning application website.

• o Accessibility/safety issues - poses potential problems for wheelchair user, mobility scooters and parents with prams and pushchairs, narrowing pavement widths through siting of poles
• o Further disruption when poles are replaced at the end of their lifespan of 25-30 years
• o Detrimental impact upon the residents' quality of life
• o Star link is more viable and less intrusive
• o Previous applications have all been refused
• o Images are misleading and would cause a visual obstruction
• o Potential health issues from the overhead wires
• o Proposals are not in the residents' interests
• o No residential engagement from Manx Telecom/ Lack of consultation and disregard for residents’ views.

Assessment by the Inspector

• 45. From considering the evidence presented by both the Appellant and Department, as well as the minutes of the Planning Committee at which the proposal was discussed by Members, and the general essence of the concerns of local residents, the main issues for consideration are as follows16:

• • the impact of the erection of the proposed telegraph poles and associated cabling on the character and appearance of the area;
• • the impact of the telegraph poles on the safety of those using the pavements;
• • the effect on the living conditions of residents, having particular regard to outlook.

Character and appearance

• 46. Corrin’s Way and Creggan’s Avenue, as already described, form part of a wider estate of homes of similar character and appearance. The general character is of dense urban development, where houses closely address the network of interlinked roads and cul-de-sacs. There is a strong sense of enclosure about the layout of the estate and properties are very inward looking, being very much part of the urban built-up area of Peel.
• 47. At the site visit, in the immediate vicinity of Corrin’s Way and Creggan’s Avenue, I did not see any existing telegraph poles within the street scene. However, cranked top streetlight columns were common features set in the pavements of the streets, being not unexpected pieces of infrastructure to support the residential amenity of local residents in the enjoyment of their home environment. They could be considered unobtrusive merely by the familiarity of such structures in the street scene.

• 16 Local residents also raised concerns regarding a possible susceptibility to storm damage were the poles in place. This could be said of any overhead utility and there is no substantive evidence that properly installed infrastructure would have such an impact. A further concern was that the poles may result in a devaluation of homes. It is a long-accepted principle that such a consideration is not a legitimate planning matter to be weighed into the balance of a decision. In both cases I will not consider these matters further.

• 48. The proposed telegraph poles at some 7-7.5 metres in height above ground level, would be taller than the streetlight columns. The wooden poles would be more substantial than other more slender pieces of street furniture.
• 49. In the absence of an already established pattern of telegraph poles, the presence of the proposed four poles would be visually obvious in the street scene. The connecting cabling strung between the poles would have less of an impact being fine in nature and seen partially against the sky.
• 50. Telegraph poles are common elements of supporting infrastructure on the Island both in the urban centres as well as supporting more rural communities. Much as with the street lighting columns, telegraph poles can become common features in the street scene, absorbed into townscape by their familiarity as street furniture.
• 51. The estate which includes Corrin’s Way and Creggan’s Avenue is a pleasant, close-knit, everyday housing estate with a strong urban character and appearance. The introduction of the telegraph poles would represent prominent features within the street, although the natural material of the poles would go some way to soften visual impacts.
• 52. However, I do accept that the introduction of the telegraph poles into this urban housing estate would result in some harm, having an adverse effect on its character and appearance17.

Safety of pedestrians using the pavements

• 53. Manual for Manx Roads sets out that the width of residential footways should be in the order of 2 metres in width. However, the width should reflect the likely degree of useage. A narrower width of 1.2 metres may be permitted over short distances where the speed limit is 30 mph or less.
• 54. Corrin’s Way and Creggan’s Avenue being relatively narrow residential roads, including a cul-de-sac, all with on-street parking, are highways to which 30 mph applies. The insertion of the telegraph poles requiring a hole width of 400600mm and a finished above ground pole diameter of 250-300mm would reduce the existing width of the pavements at the point of insertion, but this would only be over short distances and the poles are proposed to be well spaced out.
• 55. However, I am mindful that the Highway Services were satisfied that as at least 1.2m footway width would be maintained around the poles they raised no objection. I have seen no evidence which would contradict the assessment of Highway Services, and I am satisfied that the proposed insertion of the poles would be in accordance with the terms of Manual for Manx Roads.
• 56. In these circumstances of a residential street location, where only short stretches of the pavement would be affected and compliance with Manual for Manx Roads is accepted, the terms of IMSP Policy GP2 i) would not be compromised.

Living Conditions

• 57. Concern has been raised by local residents that the proposed telegraph poles would over dominate nearby properties. The poles would be located in the pavement but only pole 3 would be directly in front of houses, the others being

• 17 IMSP Policy GP2(C).

off-set. In addition, all the properties close to the poles have intervening front gardens, drives, front walls and some planting.

• 58. There is no doubt that the poles would be visible from these outside spaces and from some forward-facing views from within the houses. However, the poles would only be 250mm-300mm wide, they would be of a natural material and widely spaced in the street scene. Therefore, I do not consider the proposed telegraph poles would result in an oppressive environment for residents nor would they be materially harmful to outlook. In this way the terms of IMSP Policy GP2 b), c) and g), which follow the general thrust of the Residential Design Guide, would not be undermined.

Planning balance and conclusion

• 59. I have identified that there would be some harm to the character and appearance of the immediate locality of Corrin’s Way and Creggan’s Avenue, including some policy harm in respect of IMSP Policy GP2. All of this should be weighed into the negative side of the balance of the decision against the proposal.
• 60.However, as already identified above the terms of IMSP Policy IP3 requires that a balance be struck between the need for new, evolving communications systems and the impact the necessary infrastructure would have upon the environment. It is clear that the Government of the Isle of Man is committed to establishing an up-to-date Ultrafast Fibre Optic Broadband network18, improving speeds and access to the Internet for the population of the Island.
• 61. Government’s goal is to be a world leader in telecoms, with the priority being to increase broadband across the Island19, whilst supporting the development of telecoms infrastructure to meet the needs of both businesses and the public now and into the future20. This is particularly so in respect of residents having access to fast, reliable internet via the Island's National Broadband Plan to create enhanced opportunities for learning in the Digital Age21. These are weighty matters in the balance of the decision.
• 62. The appeal proposal would facilitate connections for up to 46 properties should residents chose to move to ultrafast broadband. It may be possible to underground the connections, but the cost of the works required would be likely borne, partly by the provider and partly by the home-owner. This needs to be weighed into the balance being rationalised against the degree of harm identified.
• 63. In this instance, in the context of the urban character and appearance of the locality of the appeal site, I find the degree of visual harm I have identified to this small section of the wider estate and the urban environment of Peel beyond, to be significantly outweighed by the identified National need and Governmental goal to provide Island wide Ultra-Fast Broadband for the public benefit of the population as a whole, both now and going forward.
• 64. Having identified that the harm to character and appearance is roundly outweighed by the public benefits of the proposal, the potential undergrounding

• 18 National Broadband Plan supporting ongoing continued investment to deliver 99% of all homes to be fibre ready.
• 19 National Telecoms Infrastructure Committee Report.
• 20 National Telecommunications Strategy.
• 21 Our Island Plan.

of required infrastructure as an alternative is not considered to be a necessary course of action in the context of the appeal site.

• 65. I have considered the two recent appeal decisions that the Department have drawn to my attention, but these are in locations of a very different character to this appeal site, with differing interface with the surrounding countryside. Each appeal must be considered on its own merits and on the submitted evidence. This I have done in coming to the recommendation below.

Recommendation

• 66. Therefore, I recommend that on balance the appeal be allowed, and planning permission be granted for the installation of 4 telegraph poles to provide Fibre Optic Connectivity to 1-19 Corrin’s Way & 1-27 Creggan’s Avenue, Peel. This would be subject to the conditions set out at Annex A to this report. If accepted, this recommendation will have the effect of setting aside the decision of the Department to refuse the application.
• 67. In the event that the Minister should agree with the Department’s case and decide to uphold their decision to refuse the proposal their published reason for refusal, which I have reproduced at Annex B, should stand.

Reason

68.The proposed development would support the National Telecommunications Strategy, along with the National Broadband Plan and Our Island Plan in achieving Government’s goal of supporting the development of telecoms infrastructure for the Island which meets the needs of both businesses and the public now and into the future.

Frances Mahoney MRTPI IHBC

Independent Inspector

13th January 2026

ANNEX A

Schedule of recommended conditions

• 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.

• 2. Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Department, any telecommunications cabinet, mounted equipment or wooden telegraph poles must be removed from the land on which it is situated, within 6 months of it no longer being required for telecommunications purposes, and such land must be restored to its condition before the development took place, so far as is practicable.

Reason: To ensure that any redundant infrastructure is removed and to comply with Strategic Plan Infrastructure Policy 3.

Annex B Reason for Refusal – this is the reason as defined by the Members of the Planning Committee and set out on the decision notice dated 11 September 2025.

1. The proposed installation of four wooden telegraph poles and their associated cabling amongst the street scene of 2-storey, semi-detached dwellings, would, due to the height, size and scale of the telegraph poles, result in a negative visual impact which would adversely affect the character of the street scene to an unacceptable degree. As such, the proposed development would be contrary to the provisions of General Policy 2 b), c), and h) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

The following are the two additional reasons for refusal which were promoted within the appeal Statement of Case of the DEFA, subsequent to the refusal of planning permission thereby adding to the DEFA grounds of objection.

• 2. The proposed installation of a wooden telegraph poles and its cabling within 20 metres of the principal elevation of a residential dwelling would introduce a visually intrusive and disproportionate structure into the street scene. Its height and proximity would result in an overbearing impact on the outlook from habitable rooms, materially harming their residential amenity and detracting from the character of the area. The proposal is therefore contrary to General Policy 2g which seeks to protect residential amenity.
• 3. The proposed installation of wooden telegraph poles would introduce visually intrusive infrastructure into a sensitive residential setting, adversely affecting

the character and visual amenity of the area. The application also fails to demonstrate a strategic national need or adequately justify why alternative options have not been pursued. As such, the proposal is contrary to Infrastructure Policy 3, which seeks to balance the need for communications infrastructure with its environmental impact.

Relevant plans

This report and recommendation relate to the following plans and drawings:

Wooden Pole Measurements and Furniture 2023P-0-0 Site Location Plan Poles 1-3 2025P-5-1 Poles 1-4 Cable Distribution 2025P-5-2

• Pole 1 Site Plan 2025P-5-3

• Aerial photo Pole 1 Location 2025P-5-4

• Photomontage Pole 1 2025P-5-5

Pole 2 Site Plan 2025P-5-6 Aerial photo Pole 2 Location 2025P-5-7

• Photomontage Pole 2 2025P-5-8

Pole 3 Site Plan 2025P-5-9 Aerial photo Pole 3 Location 2025P-5-10

• Photomontage Pole 3 2025P-5-11

Pole 4 Site Plan 2025P-5-12 Aerial photo Pole 4 Location 2025P-5-13

• Photomontage Pole 4 2025P-5-14

End of Schedule