5 May 2004 · Planning Committee on review (written representations)
8, The Willows, Ballasalla, Isle Of Man, IM9 2ew
The proposal involved adding a first floor over an existing garage at a large two-storey detached house in a modern residential cul-de-sac estate, raising the garage ridge height by 3.2m to match the main house ridge, providing two bedrooms and bathrooms, with matching external finishes and no change to footprint.
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.
Planning Committee considered the extension would increase massing but could be accommodated on the plot as buildings in this section of The Willows are larger than adjacent areas; side windows to No.…
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 the plans and information submitted as part of this application and date stamped 2nd March 2004.
Materials matching
The external finishes of the extension must match those of the existing building in all respects.
Surface water drainage
There must be no discharge of surface water to the main foul sewer.
no adverse traffic impacts
no objection in principle subject to no surface water to foul sewer
no objection to the extension
no objection whatsoever to the works as planned
phase 2 larger properties with garages, two already have accommodation above; no direct overlooking, distances adequate, hipped roof reduces impact, maintains spacing as no footprint increase
Malew Parish Commissioners objected to the application citing breach of original planning undertakings and over intensive site use; Department of Transport Highways and Drainage Divisions raised no objection with one conditional comment on drainage; neighbours were divided with objections and supports.
Key concern: breach of the undertakings of the original planning
Malew Parish Commissioners
ObjectionThe Commissioners wish to notify you that they object to this Planning Application, as they consider it in breach of the undertakings of the original planning, and it is an over intensive use of the site.
Department of Transport Drainage Division
Conditional No ObjectionNO OBJECTION In principle subject to:; These comments could be incorporated in the approval notice.
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.; 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.; 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.
Department of Transport Highways Division
No ObjectionThe Highways Division of the Department of Transport has no views on the following application, the application having been considered and having no adverse traffic impacts.
The Planning Committee approved application 04/00410/B for a first floor extension over the garage to provide additional bedrooms and bathrooms, despite objections from Malew Parish Commissioners and neighbours citing over-intensive development, loss of privacy, and precedent concerns. The Parish Commissioners appealed, arguing the proposal exceeded original site constraints and would harm privacy in the estate. The Planning Committee defended the approval, noting no footprint change, compatibility with larger phase 2 houses, and minimal privacy impact due to distance and angles. The inspector, after a site visit, found the extension would have modest impact on character, enhance urban design, and not harm neighbour amenity, recommending dismissal. The Minister accepted the recommendation on 17 November 2004, upholding the approval.
Precedent Value
Appeals against approvals are unlikely to succeed without strong evidence of harm; proposals in later phases of estates can be approved if they fit local character and have minimal neighbour impact, judged on individual merits rather than historical concerns.
Inspector: Terrence Kemmann-Lane
