**Document:** Appeal Documents **Application:** 10/01711/B — Erection of a replacement dwelling **Decision:** Refused **Decision Date:** 2011-03-08 **Parish:** Braddan **Document Type:** appeal / appeal_submission **Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/156-braddan-36-king-replacement-dwelling/documents/901237 --- # Appeal Documents Please reply to the signatory and quote our reference on all correspondence. Our Ref: 10/01711/B Your Ref: McGarrigle & Jackson 19 Mount Havelock Douglas IM1 2QG ## infrastructure planning and building control bun-troggalys Office of the Minister and Chief Executive Sea Terminal Buildings Douglas Tel: (01624) 685859 Fax: (01624) 686443 Email: planning@gov.im Chief Executive Mr I T Thompson 28th March 2011 Dear Sir/Madam, An appeal has been lodged against the abovementioned planning application and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005. Article 8(2) of that Order requires that I forward this appeal to the Chief Secretary’s Office for referral to an independent person appointed by the Council of Ministers. That person has certain specific functions to perform on behalf of the Minister, which, in summary, requires him to – - consider the application and any written representations made with respect thereto; - invite the Department to make written representations, on behalf of the Committee, to him with respect to the application; - invite every interested person* to make written representations (or further written representations) to him with respect to the application; - give to the Department, and every interested person*, an opportunity to appear before him and to make oral representations to him and to call and examine witnesses; and - make to the Minister a report in writing, including his recommendations as to the determination of the appeal. *An interested person is defined in accordance with Government Circular 1/06, and is granted rights of appeal. The Minister will then consider the report of the independent person before making his appeal determination. Following the Minister’s decision the Department will notify all parties accordingly. [Table omitted in markdown export] Please reply to the signatory and quote our reference on all correspondence. Our Ref: 10/01711/B Your Ref: Drainage Division IOM Water & Sewerage Authority (Mr J Kneen) Meary Veg Balnahowe Santon Isle Of Man IM4 1HL Office of the Minister and Chief Executive Sea Terminal Buildings Douglas Tel: (01624) 685859 Fax: (01624) 686443 Email: planning@gov.im Chief Executive Mr I T Thompson 28th March 2011 Dear Sirs, An appeal has been lodged against the abovementioned planning application which accords with the requirements set down by the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005. At the time that the decision was taken, the Planning Committee, or the Director using the authority delegated to him, extended you interested party status in accordance with the requirements of Article 6 (4) of The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005. As such, you have the right to request and/or participate in any appeal proceedings. I must advise you that an Appellant has the right to withdraw their appeal. If you were not the Appellant in this instance but wish to lodge an appeal, it would be in your interest to write to this office accordingly, and within the timescale given on the decision notice. Article 8(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005 Order requires the appeal be forwarded to the Chief Secretary's Office for referral to an independent person appointed by the Council of Ministers. That person has certain specific functions to perform on behalf of the Minister, which, in summary, requires him to – - consider the application and any written representations made with respect thereto; (Should you wish to view the correspondence submitted in response to this proposal, together with the planning officer's report, you may view them at this office.) - invite the Department to make written representations, on behalf of the Committee, to him with respect to the application; - invite every interested person* to make written representations (or further written representations) to him [Table omitted in markdown export] Please reply to the signatory and quote our reference on all correspondence. Our Ref: 10/01711/B Your Ref: Highways Division Network Planning Department Of Infrastructure Sea Terminal Building Douglas Dear Sirs, An appeal has been lodged against the abovementioned planning application which accords with the requirements set down by the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005. At the time that the application was determined, and in accordance with the provisions of Government Circular 1/06, the Planning Committee, or the Director using the authority delegated to him, determined that interested party status should not be granted to you. As such, you do not have the right to request and/or participate in any appeal proceedings. A copy of Government Circular 1/06 is available by contacting this office, or visiting our website. I can however, inform you that under Article 8(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005 I am required to forward the appeal to the Chief Secretary’s Office for referral to an independent person appointed by the Council of Ministers. That person has certain specific functions to perform on behalf of the Minister, which, in summary, requires him to – - consider the application and any written representations made with respect thereto; (Should you wish to view the correspondence submitted in response to this proposal, together with the planning officer’s report, you may view them at this office.) - invite the Department to make written representations to him, on behalf of the Committee, with respect to the application; - invite every interested person to make written representations to him (or further written representations) with respect to the application; - give to the Department, and every interested person, an opportunity to appear before him and to make oral representations to him and to call and examine witnesses; and [Table omitted in markdown export] ## List Of All Parties [Table omitted in markdown export] ## Planning Appeal To The Minister For The Department Of Infrastructure ### Town And Country (Development Procedure) Order 2005 **PLEASE COMPLETE CLEARLY AND RETURN TO:** **THE MINISTER,** **DEPARTMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE** **PLANNING AND BUILDING CONTROL DIVISION** **MURRAY HOUSE** **MOUNT HAVELOCK** **DOUGLAS, ISLE OF MAN** **IM1 2SF** #### Planning Application No. 10/01711/B Quote the Department's planning application number (e.g. 10/XXXXX/B) and the site address. **Site Address** 36 King Edward Park, Onchan, IM3 2AB #### Planning Applicant'S Name **Mr & Mrs Paul Collins** If the application was made by a company and name of the company has changed since the initial application was made, this must be clearly indicated. **I/We-hereby appeal under the terms of Article 8 of the Town and Country (Development Procedure) Order 2005 against the Planning decision relating to:** #### Apellant **McGarrigle + Jackson agent for Mr & Mrs Paul Collins** *Mr & Mrs Paul Collins* In the case of a first party appeal the identity of the appellant(s) should normally be the same as the applicant(s). Where the applicant and/or the appellant is a company or other corporate body, the corporate body should be named, not an individual person. #### Agent Details (If Any) Leave this section blank if there is no agent. Where an agent is specified, all correspondence relating to the appeal will be directed to the agent. Any change of agent must be notified promptly and confirmed in writing. **Address** 19 Mount Havelock Douglas IM1 2QG **RECEIVED ON** 25 MAR 2011 **DEPARTMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE** #### PROCEDURE (delete as appropriate) Do you agree to this Appeal being dealt with by the written procedure (i.e. an exchange of written submissions plus a visit to the site by a Planning Inspector)? **YES/NO** **Note:** Agreement to this procedure is likely to mean the Appeal being considered more quickly. ## Notes 1. Quote the Department of Infrastructure's planning application number (e.g. 10 / X X X X X / B). 2. The name of the person or Company who made the original planning application. If the name of the company has changed since the initial application was made, this must be clearly indicated. 3. Give brief details of the substance of the application (e.g. the development proposed). 4. All parties to an appeal must agree to the appeal being decided on written submissions (plus a site visit) or a hearing has to be held. 5. The person making the appeal is requested to sign this form. If signing on behalf of a company, or the applicant as an agent, the relationship between the signatory and the appellant/company must be clearly stated. Where you are an agent requesting an appeal on behalf of a client or the authorised signatory of a company, it is imperative that your relationship MUST be clearly stated. Failure to note this relationship may result in the appeal being declared invalid. 6. The person appealing should quote his/her/their address to which all correspondence concerning the appeal may be sent. ## Chief Secretary'S Office Oik yn Ard-Scrudeyr PLANNING APPEALS OFFICE Government Office DOUGLAS Isle of Man IM1 3PN Direct Line: (01624) 685280 Fax Number: (01624) 685710 E-mail: planning.appeals@gov.im CHIEF SECRETARY W Greenhow, ACMA 15th April 2011 Our Reference: L09NEW/AP11/0039 Planning Secretary DOI Planning & Building Control Division Murray House Mount Havelock Douglas Dear Sir/Madam, ### Town And Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005 **Planning Application:** 10/01711/B **Applicant:** Mr & Mrs Paul Collins **Proposal:** Appeal against refusal for erection of a replacement dwelling, 36 King Edward Park Onchan Isle Of Man IM3 2AB Further to my letter of 29th March 2011 regarding the above captioned application. I have been advised by the applicants' agent that they wish to withdraw their appeal request. The original decision made by the Planning Authority to refuse the application will therefore stand. Yours faithfully, A Johnstone Planning Appeals Administrator Mr A Johnstone Planning Appeals Administrator Planning Appeals Office Chief Secretary's Office Government House Douglas IM1 3PN Dear Mr Johnstone, Re: PA 10/01711/B - Erection of a replacement dwelling. 36 Kind Edward Park, Onchan. Please find enclosed a statement that sets out the position of Planning Authority in respect of the above planning application. The statement comprises of two parts: 1. the case officer's report which was considered by the Senior Planning Officer when determining the application. The recommendations in the report were accepted in all respects; and 2. set of suggested conditions of approval in the event that the appointed Planning Inspector be minded to recommend the application be approved. Yours sincerely Anthony Holmes, BA(Hons) DipTP(UC) MRTPI Planning Officer enc. Department of Infrastructure Murray House, Mount Havelock, Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 2SF ## Appeal statement on behalf of the Planning Authority Appeal no: L01NEW/AP11/0039 Planning application no: 10/01711/B Subject: Erection of a replacement dwelling. 36 Kind Edward Park, Onchan. Appeal by: The applicant against the Planning Authority's decision to refuse planning approval. Statement prepared by: Mr A Holmes BA(Hons) DipTP(UC) MRTPI, Planning Officer ### Considerations [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Written Representations [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Consultations [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Officer's Report THE APPLICATION SITE AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The application site comprises the residential curtilage of a detached dwelling that is located on King Edward Park in Onchan. The proposed development comprises the erection of a replacement dwelling. PLANNING HISTORY The application site has not been the subject of any previous planning applications that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application. REPRESENTATIONS Onchan District Commissioners recommend that the planning application be refused. The grounds for their objection can be summarised as concern that the proposals do not respect the site and surrounding in terms of their scale, form and design and that they would adversely affect the amenity of the neighbour. The Department of Infrastructure Highways Division do not oppose the planning application. The Isle of Man Water and Sewerage Authority do not oppose the planning application. The owners and/or occupants of 9 Eskdale Road, which directly adjoins the application site, object to the planning application. The grounds for their objection can be summarised as concern regarding the overall increase in size and in particular the increase in height. They believe that this will lead to a loss of light, loss of privacy and loss of view. The owners and/or occupants of 64A Harbour Road, which directly adjoins the application site, object to the planning application. The grounds for their objection can be summarised as concern regarding the overall increase in size and in particular the increase in height. They believe that this will lead to a loss of light, loss of privacy and loss of view. The owners and/or occupants of 2 Harbour View, which is located approximately 40 metres north of the application site, object to the planning application. The grounds for their objection can be summarised as concern regarding the overall increase in size and in particular the increase in height. They believe that this is an over development of the site and that the design is not in keeping with the surrounding area. The owners and/or occupants of 62 Harbour Road, which is located approximately 20 metres north of the application site, object to the planning application. The grounds for their objection can be summarised as concern that the proposed development will lead to a loss of view. ## Planning Policy In terms of local plan policy, the application site is within an area recognised as being within predominantly residential use under the Onchan Local Plan. Policy O/RES/P/21 of the written statement (Planning Circular 1/2000) that accompanies the Onchan Local Plan states: "Extensions and alterations to existing residential property will generally not be opposed where such proposals are appropriate in terms of scale, massing, design, appearance and impact on adjacent property." In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 contains one policy that is considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application. General Policy 2 states: "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development: (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief; (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea; (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space; (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; (j) can be provided with all necessary services; (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan; (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding; (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption." Paragraph 8.12.1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 states "As a general policy, in built up areas not controlled by Conservation Area or Registered Building policies, there will be a general presumption in favour of extensions to existing property where such extensions would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent property or the surrounding area in general." ### Assessment The planning application seeks planning approval for the erection of a replacement dwelling on the application site. The proposal was the subject of pre-application discussion with the applicant's agent. As part of the assessment of the planning application the applicant's agent was made aware of the various representations and submitted a response to them. The application site is double fronted with aspect onto both King Edward Park and Harbour Road. The existing dwelling contained within the application site is positioned with the two gable ends facing onto these two different sides, an orientation that is repeated with the proposed dwelling. As can be seen on site there is a significant difference in the form and design of the properties that adjoin the application site on the two different sides. It is considered reasonable to suggest that this position makes redevelopment of the application site more difficult than first thoughts would suggest. The proposed dwelling remains orientated with both gable ends onto King Edward Park and Harbour Road. In terms of size the footprint of the proposed dwelling is similar to that of the existing dwelling. Whilst the proposed dwelling appears significantly taller than the existing dwelling on the submitted drawings it can be seen through a lowering of ground level on site the actual increase in height is limited to a ridge level increase of 1.54 metres above the ridge level of the existing dwelling. In terms of assessment the three main issues to consider are i) impact on public amenity; ii) impact on private amenity; and iii) impact on highway safety. In respect of impact on public amenity it can be seen the surrounding area contains a variety of dwelling types of differing sizes. The proposed dwelling is designed for the application site and to that extent is a unique design. Whilst there is no intrinsic reason why a unique design cannot be used within a residential area it is still necessary to consider the merits of individual design and how such design would fit into its surrounding area. In this instance, it is evident that the applicants have attempted to balance the desire to provide the maximum amount of habitable accommodation against developing a dwelling of appropriate size and design for the application site. Although this approach is understandable it is considered that the execution is unacceptable. Specifically, the style of the proposed dwelling is unacceptably out of keeping with the character of the surrounding area. Despite the stepped appearance of dwellings in this section of King Edward Park the proposed dwelling will still appear overly large and out of keeping with the predominantly bungalow form of development found within King Edward Park. From the other side, although the increased height of the proposed dwelling would potentially bridge the gap between single storey and two storey development found on Harbour Road the overall form of the proposed dwelling is also unacceptably out of keeping and unduly obtrusive. By attempting to address the different characters of the two distinctly different sides the proposed development fails to satisfy either. The design of the proposed dwelling is awkward with a variety of different roof pitches, roof slopes, dormer types and fenestration. Such design is unacceptably out of keeping with the character of the surrounding area. As such, the proposed development is contrary to Policy O/RES/P/21 of Planning Circular 1/2000 and General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007. The impact of the proposed development on private amenity is considered to be acceptable. The overall increase in height compared to the existing dwelling is not as great as first appears on the drawings and, as such, any loss of light to unlikely to be significantly greater than the existing situation. As for the effect on privacy, although the proposed development includes two elevated balcony areas it can be seen that these would overlook areas that are already publicly visible. Their impact is therefore considered not to be significant enough to warrant refusal. Finally, whilst a number of representations refer to a loss of view it has to be accepted that there is no right to a view in terms of planning. As for impact on highway safety the proposed development is concluded not to unduly harm highway safety, with vehicular access arrangements remaining basically the same as existing. This conclusion is supported by the representation from the Department of Infrastructure Highways Division. It is recommended that the planning application be refused. ## Party Status It is considered that the following parties that made representations to the planning application should be afforded interested party status: Onchan District Commissioners; The Isle of Man Water and Sewerage Authority; The owners and/or occupants of 9 Eskdale Road; and The owners and/or occupants of 64A Harbour Road. It is considered that the following parties that made representations to the planning application should not be afforded interested party status: The Department of Infrastructure Highways Division; The owners and/or occupants of 2 Harbour View; and The owners and/or occupants of 62 Harbour Road. ## Recommendation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal 0 : Notes attached to refusals R 1. By reason of its design the proposed development is concluded to be unduly out of keeping with the character of the surrounding area. As such, the proposal fails to satisfactorily accord with the provisions of Policy O/RES/P/21 of Planning Circular 1/2000 and General Policy 2(c) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007. I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Senior Planning Officer. Decision Made : Refused Date : 8/3111 Signed : ## Part 2 - Suggested conditions 1. The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice. 2. This approval relates to drawing no.s P01, P02, P03, P04 and P05 date stamped the 19th November 2010. ## Chief Secretary'S Office ### Oik yn Ard-Scrudeyr **PLANNING APPEALS OFFICE** Government Office DOUGLAS Isle of Man IM1 3PN Direct Line: (01624) 685280 Fax Number: (01624) 685710 E-mail: planning.appeals@gov.im **CHIEF SECRETARY** W Greenhow, ACMA Our Reference: L01NEW/AP11/0039 29th March 2011 Secretary to the Planning Committee Murray House, Mount Havelock, Douglas Dear Sir/Madam, --- ### Town And Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005 Planning Application: 10/01711/B Applicant: Mr & Mrs Paul Collins Proposal: Appeal against refusal for erection of a replacement dwelling, 36 King Edward Park Onchan Isle Of Man IM3 2AB An appeal has been lodged in respect of the above application. As a party to the proceedings you are therefore requested to submit a full, written statement of your case. Incorporated with your statement of case should be the names of any witnesses you intend to call, together with full written proofs of evidence. A copy of your statement will be made available to the other parties involved in this appeal and it would therefore be appreciated if you could supply 8 COLLATED SETS of your submission of case and witnesses proofs of evidence. If submitting colour photographs, please note that photocopies are acceptable. This information must be in my hand not later than 5 p.m. on 19th April 2011. If the information is not submitted the Inspector may determine the appeal only on the basis of the evidence available to him. Copies of the application form, submitted plans and letters received by the Planning Committee are all sent to the appointed Inspector as part of the appeal papers. **Please note** we currently have a large number of applications waiting to be heard at Inquiry. I am therefore unable to give you an exact date for the Inquiry hearing, however I will write to you again once a date has been set for the Inquiry. At this time the submissions received will be circulated to all interested parties. For more information please visit our website http://www.gov.im/cso/ Yours faithfully, A Johnstone Planning Appeals Administrator Our Ref: 1667-02/MHJ/dmg 24th March 2011 The Minister for Local Government and the Environment Murray House Mount Havelock Douglas IMI 2SF Dear Sir 10/01711/B Erection of a replacement dwelling at 36 King Edward Park, Onchan, IM3 2AB Please find enclosed Notice of Appeal duly signed and completed on behalf of our client Mr and Mrs Paul Collins. Yours faithfully MTM Jackson Partner encs cc Mr & Mrs P Collins RECEIVED On 25 MAR 2011 DEPARTMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE McGarrigle + Jackson 19 Mount Havelock Douglas Isle of Man IM1 2QG Tel: 01624 628141 Fax: 01624 629334 E-mail: info@mcgarrigle-jackson.com www.mcgarrigle-jackson.com Partners: Niall McGarrigle BA(Hons) Dip.Arch MA (Urb.Des) RIBA Michael H. Jackson ICIOB AMASI --- *Data sourced from the Isle of Man public planning register under the [Isle of Man Open Government Licence](https://www.gov.im/about-this-site/open-government-licence/).* *Canonical page: https://planningportal.im/a/156-braddan-36-king-replacement-dwelling/documents/901237*