9 March 2020 · Director of Planning and Building Control (Jennifer Chance)
31, Eskdale Road, Onchan, Isle Of Man, IM3 2ah
The application proposed demolishing an existing detached garage and replacing it with a rear/side extension to the bungalow, including a main dining room addition (6.3m x 4.4m, 27.7 sqm, 3.6m high flat roof with parapet) and a small bathroom extension (2.4m x 1.3m, 3.1 sqm), using pebble dash walls and anthracite uPVC…
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 considered the proposal against the presumption in favour of extensions in residential areas but found the extension's visual impact unacceptable.
General Policy 2
Requires development to respect site/surroundings in siting/layout/scale/form/design (b), not adversely affect townscape character (c), and not harm locality amenity (g). Officer found proposal failed these due to visible bulk, flat roof mismatch, and dominance on corner plot/streetscene.
Residential Design Guidance (2018) - Extensions subordinate to existing house
Extensions should appear subordinate, not overbearing/dominating. Proposal's size (50%+ length increase) and height failed this, dominating the bungalow.
Residential Design Guide 2019 Paragraph 3.2.2
Extensions should match existing roof pitch/shape; pitched roofs preferred over flat, especially if publicly visible. Flat roof on pitched bungalow, publicly visible from road, created clumsy join and was inappropriate.
Residential Design Guidance (2018) - In keeping with street character
Extensions should match street character/appearance. Proposal's design failed to harmonise with residential area of predominantly detached properties.
Residential Design Guidance (2018) - Side extensions
Side extensions must respect dwelling proportions/form, subordinate to main house, avoid flat roofs (pitched essential), match ridge/pitch. Publicly visible side extension with flat roof broke building line harmony.
Residential Design Guidance (2018) - Corner plot extensions
Corner plot extensions highly visible from highway; must not dominate streetscene or disrupt openness. Proposal on corner plot was visually over-dominating despite not breaking building line.
support the application
Highways initially objected due to inadequate driveway length and width for parking but later recommended conditional no objection with specific access and surfacing requirements; Onchan District Commissioners supported the application.
Key concern: drive length not long enough to accommodate two vehicles without overhang onto footway
Department of Infrastructure Highways
Conditional No ObjectionRecommendation: DNOC; The drive length proposed for the proposed extension is not considered long enough to accommodate two vehicles without potential overhang of a parked vehicle onto the footway.; As a result, refusal is recommended.
Conditions requested: Prior to occupation, provide plans for approval indicating car parking area widened to at least 6.0m perpendicular to property boundary no. 33 over minimum 5.5m from southwest facing wall; driveway including dropped kerb at least 5.0m wide perpendicular to boundary no. 33; construct as approved and retain thereafter; Prior to occupation, provide bound and stable surfacing for driveway and parking area over entire width for 5.0m back from highway boundary
Department of Infrastructure Highways
ObjectionThe drive length proposed for the proposed extension is not considered long enough to accommodate two vehicles without potential overhang of a parked vehicle onto the footway.; The drive could be widened to 6.0m in width to accommodate two vehicles side by side but this does not form part of the proposals.; Recommendation: OBJECT
Onchan District Commissioners
SupportThe Commissioners would recommend that the application be APPROVED for planning purposes only.
