7 April 2005 · Minister for Local Government and the Environment (confirmed Planning Committee refusal on appeal)
Kalaw, 41, Groudle Road, Onchan, Isle Of Man, IM3 2ef
The application sought full planning approval for what was described as an enlargement of the existing part-dormer bungalow, part flat-roofed two-storey dwelling, but plans showed all new walling indicative of a complete redevelopment into a modern design with significant flat roof areas accessible as balconies, a towe…
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 Planning Officer assessed the proposal as a complete redevelopment despite being described as an extension, noting its 'unashamedly modern' design was 'quite out of keeping with its neighbours' du…
Onchan District Commissioners object to the proposal as out of scale, over intensive, and intrusive with privacy concerns; Fire Service references prior observations without new objection; Highways acknowledge receipt without substantive comment; multiple neighbours object on design, privacy, and amenity grounds.
Key concern: proposal is a completely new structure out of scale with adjoining properties and over intensive/intrusive use of the site
Onchan District Commissioners
Objectionthe proposed development would be a completely new structure. It would be out of scale with the adjoining properties and be an over intensive and intrusive use of the site; The Commissioners would continue to recommend that the application be REFUSED
Onchan District Commissioners
ObjectionThe application describes the proposal as 'an extension to existing building'. It would appear however that the proposed development would be a completely new structure. It would be out of scale with the adjoining properties and be an overintensive and intrusive use of the site.
Isle of Man Fire And Rescue Service
No CommentI do not require to appear at the review hearing provided that the previously submitted written observations made on my behalf are taken into consideration by the Planning Committee.
Department of Transport Highways Division
No CommentDoT Highways acknowledges receipt of the above application and will respond to the Secretary to the Planning Committee as soon as possible.
The original application for enlargement of an existing part dormer bungalow and part flat roofed two-storey house was refused by the Planning Committee, primarily due to concerns over height, overlooking, and design out of keeping with the locality. The appellant argued the design was a matter of taste, proposed amendments to address refusal reasons (omitting flat roofs and tower), offered to remove certain windows to mitigate overlooking, and emphasized retention of vegetation and no overdevelopment. The Planning Committee, Onchan District Commissioners, and third parties objected on grounds of overdevelopment, unneighbourly design, scale, and privacy loss. The inspector concluded the proposal would create an overdevelopment, cramped appearance, and significant harm to the locality's character due to size, massing, and innovative 1930s-style design with flat roofs and tower causing overlooking; he dismissed the appeal, upholding the refusal.
Precedent Value
Appeals for modern or stylised dwellings in established residential areas require strong evidence of contextual fit and neighbourly design; offers of amendments or conditions must address core harms comprehensively, as inspectors prioritise visual/amenity impacts over subjectivity.
Inspector: David G Hollis
