31 October 2008 · Acting Senior Planning Officer (delegated under Article 3(13) of the Town and Country (Development Procedure) Order 2005)
Site Of 3, King Edward Road, Onchan, Isle Of Man, IM3 2ja
The site is the curtilage of a three-storey end-terrace property in poor repair on the north-western side of King Edward Road in Onchan, within a predominantly residential area. The proposal involves alterations and a rear extension to renovate the property as a single dwelling (potentially five bedrooms), with four re…
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 compared proposal overlays with refused apartment schemes (04/00923/B, 05/01307/B - larger scale rejected for neighbour harm, poor access/parking) and extant apartment approval (06/01578/B - s…
Policy O/RES/P/21 of the Onchan Local Plan (Planning Circular 1/2000)
Permits extensions/alterations to residential property if appropriate in scale, massing, design, appearance and impact on adjacent property. Officer assessed proposal complies as scale/form in keeping with locality and similar to approved precedent; modest differences from 06/01578/B not harmful to No.5.
General Policy 2
Permits development in residential zoning if respects site/surroundings (siting/layout/scale/form/design), no adverse amenity/character/highway impacts, adequate parking/access. Officer confirmed compliance: respects locality, no unacceptable neighbour harm, parking suitable, no road safety issues.
Time limit
The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
Approved plans
This approval relates to drawing no. P/48/1(a) date stamped the 18th July 2008.
Do not oppose
No objection
No objection
DOT Drainage Division raised no objection subject to surface water drainage conditions; Onchan District Commissioners supported approval; neighbouring residents B P B M Frost strongly objected citing loss of light, impact on living conditions, and design concerns.
Key concern: loss of light and significant detriment to living conditions of neighbouring property No.5 King Edward Road
Department of Transport Drainage Division
Conditional No ObjectionNo Objection; There must be NO discharge of surface water (including that from roofs and paved areas) from this proposed development to any foul drainage system(s); If this "existing drainage" discharges (directly or indirectly) to the foul sewerage system then it should be noted that an alternative means of surface water disposal must be provided.
Conditions requested: There must be NO discharge of surface water (including that from roofs and paved areas) from this proposed development to any foul drainage system(s) so as to comply with the requirements of the Department of Transport Drainage Division and the Sewerage Act 1999; The applicant is required to establish where the existing surface water from the property is disposed and discuss this matter with the Drainage Division prior to work commencing on site; The applicant is requested to supply the Division a copy of any Building Control Application in relation to the surface water discharge from this development
Onchan District Commissioners
SupportThe Commissioners have nothing further to add or detract from their views made at the initial stage that the application be approved.
Prior application 04/00923/B for 4 apartments was approved by Planning Committee but third-party appeal 2417 by Frost was allowed by Inspector D.S. Hollis, refusing permission due to overdevelopment, harm to adjoining amenities at No.5, and inadequate parking/access. Subsequent application 05/01307/B for 3 apartments was refused by Planning Committee and appeal dismissed by Inspector John S Turner on grounds of inadequate access/parking harming safety, harm to No.5 amenities, and unacceptable living conditions for proposed apartments contrary to Circular 2/88. The 08/01409/B application for alterations/extension was permitted despite Frost's third-party appeal (AP08/0226), but no inspector's report or final outcome is provided. Appellant Frost argued the proposal harms their light/outlook citing prior inspectors' findings. Earlier appellants (Purcell) argued modifications addressed previous concerns.
Precedent Value
Demonstrates narrow sites with shared unmade lanes cannot support apartment conversions without adequate parking/access; prior inspector findings carry strong weight; proposals must demonstrably avoid harm to neighbours' light/outlook.
Inspector: John S Turner (05/01307/B); David G Hollis (2417)
