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
Highways Division and Jurby Parish Commissioners both indicated no objection to planning application 09/00957/B for a replacement dwelling at Ellan Cottage, Jurby East.
Highways Division
No ObjectionDo not oppose has no traffic management, parking or road safety implications
Jurby Parish Commissioners
No Objectionmy Commissioners have now considered the above proposed development, and have no objections thereto
Jurby Parish Commissioners
No Commentmy Commissioners do not wish to add to their comments and views as submitted at the initial stage, but request that those comments and views are taken into consideration
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
