25 February 2026 · Delegated
Crofton, Four Roads, Port St. Mary, Isle Of Man, IM9 5lq
This application at Crofton, Four Roads, Port St Mary sought permission for several works: replacing roof slates, adding a rooflight to the west elevation, fitting solar panels to the south elevation, altering the sunroom roof, and converting a first-floor window into an accessible roof terrace on the east elevation. The site sits within a residential terrace, with a block of garages to the north and the rest of the terrace to the south. The officer's assessment considered the character and appearance of the building and its setting, as well as the potential impact on neighbouring amenity — noting in particular that the proposed roof terrace could increase the opportunity for overlooking into neighbouring properties at first-floor level. Despite this concern, the application was permitted by delegated decision on 25 February 2026.
The application was permitted on a delegated basis on 25 February 2026. The officer considered the proposal acceptable in terms of its character and appearance and its impact on neighbouring amenity, leading to approval.
General Policy 2
accords with the provisions set out in General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016
General Policy 2: 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: (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief; (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; (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea; (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (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; (j) can be provided with all necessary services; (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan; (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding; (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption. 6.3 Development outside of areas zoned for development
Transport Policy 3
assess the application against Transport Policy 3
Transport Policy 3: New development on or around existing and former rail routes should not compromise their attraction as a tourism and leisure facility or their potential as public transport routes, or cycle / leisure footpath routes. 11.3 Highways and Traffic 11.3.1 The ability of new and existing highways to safely and efficiently accommodate the traffic generated by new development is an important factor when considering the location and layout of new development. Not only must the tr affic routes involved be of a size which is capable of taking the projected volume of traffic but they must also be designed so that points of potential traffic conflict such as junctions and roundabouts are in an appropriate location and of a suitable des ign, including provision for pedestrians. The need for new and improved highways in order to facilitate new development must be balanced against the environmental objectives of this plan.
Community Policy 7
consideration shall also be given to Community Policies 7 and 11
Community Policy 7: The design of new development and the extension and refurbishment of existing buildings and development must, as far as is reasonably practical, pay due regard to existing best practice so as to help prevent criminal and anti-social behaviour. 10.12.2 The Isle of Man Constabulary has suggested that neighbourhood police stations, where the public can meet police officers, are needed to improve community safety. In the majority of cases these will need to be provided within existin g communities as opportunities arise. Consideration should be given to incorporating such facilities in larger new developments in association with other community facilities.
Infrastructure Policy 5
Infrastructure Policy 5 in respect of water conservation
, if it can be demonstrated that development there would not result in an incursion into the countryside. However there is no corresponding proposal for residential areas. Proposed Change 75 (in PIP5) now indicates that appropriate colour washes should be applied to the Proposals Map, to show the Mount Murray and Braddan Hills areas as 'Predominantly Residential'; and the Snugborough Estate as 'Industrial'. I agree with this. I also recommend that the whole of the waste management area at Richmond Hill should be similarly delineated and washed over as a site for 'Special Industry' (as defined in paragraph 9.2.3 of the Strategic Plan). CHAPTER 4 - LANDSCAPE Landscape Character Areas and Areas of High Landscape Value 25 Chapter 4 of the draft Area Plan is headed 'Landscape - Character and Appearance'. It draws on a Landscape Character Assessment Report which was prepared for the Government by consultants in 2005. The report describes the qualities of a series of Landscape Character Areas, and identifies landscape features that are worthy of protection. It excludes consideration of the urban areas of Douglas and Onchan. 26 Landscape Proposal 1 of the Area Plan states that the broad landscape strategies and key views for each Character Area are to be regarded as policy statements on matters of landscape in the East. Applicants for planning approval must demonstrate that consideration has been given to these strategies and key views. Twenty different Character Areas are identified. The key strategy for each of them is to 'conserve' (or 'conserve and enhance') the 'character, quality and distinctiveness' of the area; and of certain specified landscape features. During the inquiry, a number of objectors to proposed land allocations argued that this policy of landscape conservation should outweigh other considerations which might tell in favour of development. In my view, if landscape policy fails to distinguish between areas of outstanding beauty or cultural interest on the one hand, and less sensitive areas of countryside on the other, it may become increasingly difficult to find sites for essential development. 27 The approach set out in the Area Plan is intended to replace a landscape policy which has been in place since 1982, and is encapsulated in Environment Policy 2 of the present Strategic Plan. That policy identifies Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV). Within each AHLV the protection of the character of the landscape is normally the most important consideration for development control purposes. By implication, outside of AHLVs, other factors can be given relatively greater importance. I consider this to be a useful policy tool, in so far as it identifies those areas which can best absorb necessary development without harming the most sensitive landscapes. A similar policy applies in England, where the protection of the landscape is given priority in National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The general extent of AHLVs is shown in the Strategic Plan's Key Diagram. 28 Some necessary development will inevitably change and possibly detract from the character of the landscape. Examples might include the extraction and processing of minerals, the management of waste, the generation and transmission of electricity, the construction of roads, or the erection of factories and houses. In my view, it is important that landscape policy should provide guidance as to where such development might best be absorbed into the landscape with minimum harm. 29 Accordingly, it seems to me that consideration should be given to the continued designation of Areas of High Landscape Value in the Area Plan, and that priority should be given to the protection of the landscape in those areas. The Area Plan should define the precise boundaries of the AHLV. ( I note that the rural areas of both Braddan and Onchan are currently covered by a blanket AHLV designation, which may be difficult to justify). I am aware that development control officers find the descriptive material set out for each Landscape Character Area in the draft Area Plan to be useful. I see no reason why the material in question should not be retained in the Area Plan, alongside AHLV. 30 I recommend that consideration be given to the designation, in the Area Plan, of Areas of High Landscape Value, with precise and justified boundaries. Environment Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan would continue to apply within such areas. Effect of Proposed Development on the Landscape North of Douglas and Onchan 31 Miss P Newton and Dr K Kilmurry each referred to the potential impact of proposed development of sites on the northern edge of Douglas and Onchan, referring particularly to the adverse effect of building on the skyline, and the need for an overall scheme of landscaping. I consider it important that development briefs for the sites in question should make provision for the preparation of masterplans which would include comprehensive landscaping schemes. Details of these would
