Whereas the previous case had involved inaccurate plans, this case was, he wrote, “an instance of unreasonable behaviour by the Planning Committee”.

Not for the first time, Independent Planning Inspector, David Ward has taken the opportunity to criticize the planning department in one of his reports.

The latest criticism relates to the conduct of the planning committee in refusing two planning applications, when previously an almost identical application, by the same appellant, had been approved; but with negative conditions attached.

The applications, by Migrah Foxdale Ltd, relates to proposals to develop houses on a site adjacent to Springfield Terrace, Foxdale, Patrick.

The Planning Committee had chosen to disregard the advice of the planning officer and decided to take a more precautionary approach - to the twin concerns of potential contaminated land and shallow mine workings - and refused the applications.

This was despite an earlier approval, by the Minister, in 2007; and no evidence that any matters had changed since then. The inspector believed the decision of the planning committee had been the “most extreme action of a range of alternatives put by the officers to the committee.” He went on to report the planning committee “did not appear at the Inquiry to support their refusal”.

The inspector recommended both appeals be allowed - a recommendation accepted by the DLGE Minister, John Shimmin - and referred to a previous comment he had made in respect of “unreasonable behaviour” of parties involved in appeals; a proposition which he said the Department had indicated would be further examined.

He thought this appeal fell into a similar category where the behaviour of one party had resulted in unnecessary costs for the appellant; and, in the interests of introducing “important disciplinary benefits”, the award of costs would be merited.

Whereas the previous case had involved inaccurate plans, this case was, he wrote, “an instance of unreasonable behaviour by the Planning Committee”.

Whilst he noted in the UK the policy “does not make it unreasonable for a planning committee to disagree with its officers” he added they “must have sound reasons for doing so”. He pointed out though, in this case, “the reasons neglected an accepted approach, approved by you, to matters on which there are outstanding issues for which there is a reasonable prospect of resolution.”

The Minister noted the comment but said there is no provision, within the current regulations, to make an award in the circumstances involved in this appeal; but the issue will form part of the current planning process review.

However, he added he would be holding a meeting with the planning committee to discuss the issues raised by this appeal.

Since this decision was made by the Minister, and the inspector’s report published, it has been announced that the Chairman of the planning committee, Clare Christian MLC, is to be replaced by Juan Watterson MHK.

It is currently unknown whether the contents of this report had any bearing on the decision; but it certainly helps justify the reshuffle. It may also offer some explanation why Mrs Christian was spotted, exiting the planning office at the end of last week, with a more than grumpy look on her face.

As for Mr Watterson, he inherits a planning division in more than small amount of turmoil: a legal challenge to the Strategic Plan still in place, an ongoing review of a less than satisfactory planning process, and a shortage of quality planning officials; to name but three issues for him to tackle.

The Manx Herald wishes him well; and very much hopes he will be able breath new life into this ailing part of government.