Officer Report
Planning Officer Report And Recommendations
Application No.: 25/90828/MCH Applicant: Mr & Mrs Ian Jones Proposal: Minor change to 20/00388/B (Alterations and erection of 2 storey extension) replacement of roof lights with dormer to front elevation, replacement of pitched roofs on dormers to rear elevation with flat roof Site Address: 40 Douglas Street Peel Isle Of Man IM5 1BD Planning Officer: Paul Visigah Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Split Decision Date of Recommendation: 18.11.2025 Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
- N 1. APPROVAL is hereby given for the following changes as shown on the submitted drawings:
- Alteration of the rear dormer roofs from pitched to flat.
- N 2. The following change is REFUSED:
- Replacement of rooflights with a front-facing dormer.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to the drawings and documents submitted to the Department titled:
APPLICATION FORM, COVER LETTER, 00 - LOCATION PLAN, 01 - EXISTING SITE PLAN, PLANS AND ELEVATIONS, 02A - APPROVED SITE PLAN, PLANS AND ELEVATIONS, and 05 PROPOSED SITE PLAN, PLANS AND ELEVATIONS, all recorded as being electronically received between 02.09.2025 and 30.10.2025. Right to Appeal None Officer’s Report INTRODUCTION
The following application is to be assessed against the criteria set out in Part 3 - Minor Changes Applications of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 specifically Articles 21, 22, 23 and 24.
BASIS OF APPLICATION
- 21(1) At least one of the following applies:
- - this is the only minor changes application that has been made in respect of any particular grant of planning approval;
- - any previous minor changes application has been either refused or withdrawn;
- - the minor changes application seeks approval only for the installation of low carbon technology; or
- - all previous minor changes applications have related solely to the installation of a low carbon technology.
- - PASS - relates to 20/00388/B
- Low Carbon Technology and Permitted Development
- 21(3) The application relates to the approval of low carbon technology and would it be Permitted Development if the building which it is to serve were substantially complete (if this test is passed, ignore section 3).
- N/A
- Limitations on when a Minor Change Application may be made
- 21(2)(a) The Minor Change Application relates to the grant of planning approval in respect of a building
- - PASS - relates to Alterations and erection of 2 storey extension
- 21(2)(b) The application specifies what minor changes are being sought
- - PASS - the change being applied for by this application is for replacement of roof lights with dormer to front elevation, replacement of pitched roofs on dormers to rear elevation with flat roof.
- 21(2)(b) The application specifies why the applicant considers the minor changes to be of a minor nature
- Pass - Provided in Cover Letter.
- 21(2)(c)(i) The Minor Change Application does not increase the number of dwellings or buildings for which planning approval has been granted
- 21(2)(c)(ii)The Minor Change Application does not increase the net external footprint of a building for which planning approval has been granted where this would increase the total floor plan by more than 5% or result in any part of the development being located closer to the curtilage of an adjacent dwelling.
- 21(2)(c)(iii) The Minor Change Application does not alter the site for which planning approval has been granted and which was defined by a red line on the site location map by changing that line
- 21(2)(c)(iv) The Minor Change Application does not make material changes to the vehicular access arrangements for which planning approval has been granted
- 21(2)(c)(v) The Minor Change Application does not alter the conditions (if any) which have been imposed
- 21(2)(d)The Minor Change Application has not been made where the parent approval is less than 21 days old, subject to an undetermined appeal or has expired
- - PASS - original application approved on 8th July 2020 APPLICATION CONTENT
- 22(3)(a) Application Form
- Site location plan (with red/blue lines)
- The planning approval that is the subject of the application
- Explanation of changes being applied for and reasons why
- IF relevant, drawings of the proposed minor changes with buildings and structures amended to indicate the changes
- Flood risk assessment is not necessary in this case
- 22(3)(b) Provision of other documents specified on form but not in Schedule 1
- - PASS - no other documents provided
- - PASS - dealt with at submission
- 22(6) Such further info as Department may request prior to determination (has anything further been requested and provided?
- PASS - None Requested DETERMINATION
- 23(1)(a) The Minor Change does not significantly increase the size or scale of the development in question
- - FAIL - The proposed front dormer introduces a substantial projection and additional bulk on the principal elevation, materially increasing the perceived scale of the development. Unlike the original rooflights, which were low-profile within the roof slope, the dormer adds a box-like form that alters the building's massing and visual prominence from the street. This change is considered significant in terms of scale.
- 23(1)(b) The Minor Change does not significantly change the nature of the development in question
- - PASS - The proposed changes do not significantly change the nature of the development. It remains an extension with dormer accommodation; the alterations are limited to roof form adjustments and replacing rooflights with a dormer, which are design refinements rather than a fundamental change in use or character.
- 23(1)(c) The Minor Change does not result in an approval which, at the time of approval, complied with a Development Plan, National Policy Directive or a Planning Policy Statement, ceasing to do so
- - PASS - remains compliant.
- 23(1)(d) The Minor Change does not result in new or increased adverse impacts on adjoining or neighbouring properties or highway safety or having a significant or disproportionate impact on the environment (irrespective of whether such impacts might be outweighed by other considerations)
- - FAIL - The proposed front dormer introduces a vertical window on the principal elevation, replacing rooflights that offered limited outward views. This change increases the potential for overlooking toward properties across the street and alters the visual relationship with the public realm. Combined with the added bulk, this results in a new adverse impact on neighbouring amenity. While the rear dormer roof change does not introduce new windows and has no such effect, the front dormer fails to satisfy Article 23(1)(d).
- 23(1)(e) The Minor Change is not more than minor and is not of a magnitude to warrant a new application
- FAIL - The addition of a substantial front dormer materially increases the building's visual bulk and introduces new overlooking potential. These combined effects go beyond what can reasonably be considered minor and are of a magnitude that warrants a new planning application. The rear dormer roof alterations remain minor.
- 23(1)(f)The Minor Change does not otherwise fundamentally change the basis on which the grant was originally made.
- - FAIL - The original approval was assessed on the basis of two single-pitch dormers to the right of the roof slope, which were judged acceptable in their context for scale and design. Rooflights were retained on the left to maintain a simple roof plane. The current proposal introduces a box dormer with a dual-pitch roof in place of those rooflights, altering that design approach and introducing unassessed impacts on the Conservation Area and streetscape. This change fundamentally alters elements of the basis on which the grant was originally made and therefore fails Article 23(1)(f).
- 23(2) If it does not do any of the above, must then be considered. - is the application considered acceptable?
- Pass - acceptable as a minor change. FAIL - The application cannot be accepted as a Minor Change. While the rear dormer roof alterations are minor, the proposed front dormer fails Articles 23(1)(a), (d), (e), and (f) due to increased bulk, new overlooking potential, and introduction of unassessed impacts on streetscape character. Accordingly, the application is not acceptable under Article 23(2).
NOTICE OF DECISION
- 24(2)(a) Set out whether all or some of the changes are accepted
- - The proposed alteration of the rear dormer roofs from pitched to flat is accepted as a minor change.
- 24(2)(b) Set out whether any elements are refused, the reasons for that.
- The proposed replacement of rooflights with a front-facing dormer is refused. This element fails Articles 23(1)(a), (d), (e), and (f) due to increased bulk, new overlooking potential, and a departure from the approved design approach, introducing unassessed impacts on the Conservation Area and streetscape.
I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status and/or rights to appeal.
Decision Made : Split Decision Date: 18.11.2025 Determining Officer
Signed : C BALMER Chris Balmer Principal Planner
Customer note This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/ customers and archive record.
