9 February 2006 · Delegated - Director of Planning and Building Control (M.I. McCauley)
Garage And Plot, Gellings Avenue, Port St Mary, Isle Of Man, IM9 5bg
The application sought approval in principle to demolish existing garaging and a store, replacing them with a pair of semi-detached houses with integral garages on a site within a designated Residential area on the north western side of Gellings Avenue.
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 officer noted the site is within a Residential designation on the 1982 Development Plan and the proposal represents redevelopment of existing garaging/store with semi-detached houses aligning with…
Time limit for reserved matters
This approval is in principle only and will remain valid for a period of two years within which time no development may take place until such time as details of the reserved matters (siting, design, external appearance, internal layout, means of access, landscaping) have been approved by the Planning Authority. Such reserved matters should form the subject of a single application.
Drawing reference
This permission relates to the erection of a pair of semi-detached dwellings as shown in drawing WL/05/968/1 received on 1st December, 2005.
Ridge height and stepping
The new dwellings must incorporate stepped ridges to take account of the changing ground level and may be no higher than the relative height above ground level of the terrace of three properties to the immediate north east.
no objections
supports the principle as in accord with policies and zoning, brownfield/windfall development
recommend attachment of standard note 2 for water connections
Mixed responses to application 05/92275/A including no objection from Port St Mary Commissioners, support from a planning policy commentator, objection from a neighbour citing previous refusals and rights of light, deferral request from Highways pending parking information, and a standard water connection condition from IoMWA.
Key concern: high pitched roof infringing rights of light
IoMWA Water Supply
Conditional No ObjectionFor single connections to a water main (i.e. a single dwelling) the applicant should contact IoMWA Customer Services, tel. 69 59 49
Conditions requested: condition of planning be that the applicant must contact the Authority to ensure that a connection is obtained for water supply purposes, or an amendment to the existing supply under the terms of the Water Supply Byelaws
Andrew Jessopp
SupportI support the principle of this application as it appears to be generally in accord with the existing policies and zoning for the area, and can be considered a brownfield/windfall development.
J.F. Kelly
ObjectionThis application is remarkably similar to previous applications which have described as a nursery school and a bungalow. The applicant has always persisted in wanting a high pitched roof, which could infringe certain easements in respect of 'rights of light' acquired by this and other properties
Department of Transport Network Planning
No CommentTo ensure the provision of satisfactory vehicle parking arrangements.
Port St Mary Commissioners
No ObjectionMy Commissioners have considered the above planning application to which they have no objections.
The original approval in principle for three terraced dwellings was granted in 1998, but detailed approval was refused by the Planning Committee due to lack of legal right of access to the rear service lane and concerns over amending plans via condition. The appellant argued that prior discussions with planning officers supported the design, access issues could be resolved by condition omitting rear gateways, and refuse collection was feasible from the front. The Council defended refusal citing policy against approving applications leaving matters other than materials for later approval. Objectors raised amenity concerns including privacy, light, and access for the middle plot. The inspector concluded the principle was established and unchallengeable, access issue could be conditioned without harm, and refuse arrangements were acceptable for a middle terrace, recommending the appeal be allowed with an additional condition for continuous rear fencing.
Precedent Value
Demonstrates that prior unchallenged approval in principle strongly protects development principle on detail appeals; inspectors more flexible than committees on conditioning minor boundary/access details if no broader harm.
