19 May 2006 · Minister for Local Government and the Environment (following appeal inspector G Farrington)
Kalaw, 41, Groudle Road, Onchan, Isle Of Man, IM3 2ef
The proposal involved alterations and a two-storey side/rear extension to an existing detached dwelling (part dormer bungalow, part flat-roofed two-storey), including kitchen, utility, double garage at ground floor and three bedrooms plus bathroom above, plus replacing the existing roof with a mansard roof.
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.
Officer initially assessed impact on neighbours as acceptable, with resultant situation 'similar to that of existing properties in the surrounding area and generally domestic in nature'; windows in ma…
no objections to the development proposed
recommend installation of mains wired interconnected domestic smoke detection
no comment / no objection
Onchan District Commissioners objected to the application citing overdevelopment and incompatibility with adjoining properties; Fire and Rescue Service recommended smoke detection; neighbours submitted mixed representations with objections on scale and harmony but later support from some.
Key concern: overdevelopment of the site and out of scale with adjoining properties
Onchan District Commissioners
ObjectionThe Commissioners recommend that the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:- "The proposed unit would be out of scale with the adjoining properties and would be an overintrusive and intensive use of the site."; the proposal would include a significant enlargement of the footprint of the existing and that due to the size and massing would create an overdevelopment of the site causing significant harm to the character of the locality.
Onchan District Commissioners
ObjectionTheir recommendation for that application was for refusal on the grounds that the proposal would be out of scale with adjoining properties and an overintensive and intrusive use of the site.; the Commissioners would respectfully request that the appeal be upheld and the application refused.
Isle of Man Fire and Rescue Service
Conditional No ObjectionThe installation of mains wired, interconnected domestic smoke detection conforming to BS 5446 : Part 1 : 2000, and installed to conform with BS 5839 : Part 6 : 1995, is recommended in accordance with Section 1 of the Building Regulations 2000 – Approved Document B
Conditions requested: The installation of mains wired, interconnected domestic smoke detection conforming to BS 5446 : Part 1 : 2000, and installed to conform with BS 5839 : Part 6 : 1995, is recommended in accordance with Section 1 of the Building Regulations 2000 – Approved Document B
The original application PA 05/0216 for enlargement of an existing part dormer bungalow/part two-storey house with a modern 1930s-style design including tower and flat roofs was refused by the Planning Committee primarily for overdevelopment out of keeping with the area and significant overlooking harm to neighbours. Appellant M P Associates argued the design was innovative, overlooking could be mitigated by conditions and screening, and it suited client needs, but Inspector David G Hollis dismissed the appeal finding the scheme cramped, visually harmful, and unneighbourly despite some retained walls. A revised resubmission PA 06/00082/B for a two-storey extension with kitchen/utility/garage below and bedrooms above plus mansard roof replacement was initially permitted, but third-party appeal by neighbours Mr & Mrs Walshe (AP06/0136) succeeded as the second inspector found the extension's proximity (12-18m) and massing unduly dominant and overbearing on their outlook despite addressing prior overlooking issues. The first appeal set precedent for needing a much smaller design; the second reinforced neighbour amenity dominance as decisive. Final outcome saw initial refusal upheld but later permission reversed.
Precedent Value
Demonstrates even revised schemes must substantially reduce scale/massing and respect boundary distances to avoid overbearing dominance; prior inspector findings on site-specific needs carry strong weight; third parties can successfully reverse permissions on amenity grounds.
Inspector: David G Hollis (2573); unnamed (AP06/0136)
