Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
24/90930/MCH Page 1 of 4
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Application No. : 24/90930/MCH Applicant : PCC Limited Proposal : Minor Change to PA 22/01460/B for the installation of two gable windows and four roof lights (retrospective) Site Address : Plot North East Of Cass A Lergy Douglas Road Kirk Michael Isle Of Man IM6 1AT
Planning Assistant: Daniel Spencer Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 21.08.2024 __
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. All changes are rejected. It is considered that the increase of the footprint of the development by 12% is considered more than minor and would move the building closer to the adjacent property. Most proposed changes shown on the plan are not mentioned in the reasons for the minor changes and no reason explaining why they are considered minor is included. Proposed changes would be considered more than minor and would benefit from a new application.
__
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:
==== PAGE 2 ====
24/90930/MCH Page 2 of 4
any previous minor changes application has been either refused or withdrawn;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 22/01460/B
21(3) The application relate 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
PASS - relates to erection of a building
FAIL - The plan proposes an additional roof light on top of the 4 mentioned, a 12% increase in the dwellings floor space, panels on the south elevation garage roof, a possible air source heat pump on the east side of the property, changes/ removal to the layout of approved windows on doors on the east and south elevation which are not mentioned
FAIL - while a reason is proposed in the application to states that there in material change to the overall size however the floor space is increased by 12%.
21(2)(c)(i) The Minor Change Application does not increase the number of dwellings or buildings for which planning approval has been granted
PASS - no increase
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.
FAIL - 12% increase to the footprint of the development which would move it closer to the curtilage of an adjacent dwelling.
PASS - no change to site
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
PASS - No changes
==== PAGE 3 ====
24/90930/MCH Page 3 of 4
PASS - No changes
21(2)(d)The Minor Change Application is not be made where the parent approval is less than 21 days old, subject to an undetermined appeal or has expired
PASS - original application approved 10.08.2023
APPLICATION CONTENT 22(3)(a) Application Form
o Site location plan (with red/blue lines) o The planning approval that is the subject of the application o Explanation of changes being applied for and reasons why o IF relevant, drawings of the proposed minor changes with buildings and structures amended to indicate the changes o Flood risk assessment is not necessary in this case
PASS - provided
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 - increases the dwellings footprint by 12%.
23(1)(b) The Minor Change does not significantly change the nature of the development in question
PASS - nature of original development is not changed
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
PASS - there will be no new or increased impacts compared with the parent approval.
23(1)(e) The Minor Change is not more than minor and is not of a magnitude to warrant a new application
==== PAGE 4 ====
24/90930/MCH Page 4 of 4
- FAIL - Plan includes additional detail that isn't noted in the application or cover letter which would be considered more than minor and would benefit from a new application.
23(1)(f)The Minor Change does not otherwise fundamentally change the basis on which the grant was originally made.
PASS - basis of original approval remains unchanged
23(2) If it does not do any of the above, must then be considered. - is the application considered acceptable?
FAIL - Changes considered than minor and increase in the dwellings footprint is more than 5%.
No changes are accepted.
All changes are rejected. __
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.
Decision Made : Refused Date: 22.08.2024
Determining officer Signed : C BALMER
Chris Balmer
Principal Planner
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal