28 July 2009 · Senior Planning Officer
Ellan Cottage, Postal Locality, Jurby East, Isle Of Man, IM7 3ha
The proposal involved demolishing the existing single-storey cottage (approx 114m² floor area) and erecting a larger two-storey replacement in traditional Manx farmhouse style, with main block 12.2m wide x 9m deep x 9m ridge height, plus rear two-storey extension 7.3m wide x 4.85m deep x 7.8m ridge height, resulting in…
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 accepted the principle of replacement as beneficial due to existing cottage's poor form from multiple flat-roof extensions, but determined the proposed 147% floor area increase (281.5m² vs…
Housing Policy 14
Requires replacement dwellings not substantially different in siting/size to existing (floor area ≤50% greater, generally on footprint), unless changes yield environmental improvement; exceptionally larger if replacing poor form with traditional character or reduced visual impact via design/siting. Officer found principle acceptable (poor form from extensions), design traditional/compliant, siting improved site use, but 147% increase failed size test with no reduced visual impact despite screening, harming rural character.
No objections
Do not oppose
The original application 09/00957/B for a rear two-storey extension (kitchen and ensuite bedroom) to an approved replacement dwelling (09/00133/B) was refused by the Planning Committee. The appellant argued the extension would not harm character or appearance, was subordinate and rear-facing, and provided necessary space for a large family with a 147% overall increase less than a previously refused 220% scheme. The Council defended refusal citing non-compliance with Strategic Plan Housing Policy 14's 50% footprint limit and excessive scale. The Inspector found the proposal conflicted with Policy 14 due to the 147% floor area increase over the original cottage, failure to achieve overall environmental improvement, and non-conformity with several Circular 3/91 policies, constituting an unacceptable countryside intrusion. No special circumstances outweighed this objection. The appeal was dismissed on 24 November 2009.
Precedent Value
Strict application of HP14 50% limit prevails even for traditional designs improving existing buildings; personal/family justifications carry no weight; full disclosure of all floor areas essential, as inspectors question 'storage' claims with multiple windows.
Inspector: David Bushby BA [Hons] MCD
