22 September 2022 · Delegated - Principal Planner Chris Balmer
10, Langdale Close, Onchan, Isle Of Man, IM3 2dd
The site is the curtilage of a two-storey semi-detached dwelling in a predominantly residential area. The proposal involves replacing the existing single-storey hipped-roof conservatory with a matching pitched-roof rear extension featuring a bi-fold door and fixed-panel window, enclosing the southeast elevation of the …
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 assessed the proposal against key considerations of impact on the house itself, character/street scene, and neighbouring amenities.
General Policy 2
Requires development to respect site/surroundings in siting/layout/scale/design, avoid adverse character/amenity impacts, and consider safety/energy. Officer found proposal complies as extension matches dwelling, no harm to street scene or neighbours.
Paragraph 8.12.1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan
Presumption in favour of extensions in built-up areas without adverse impact on adjacent properties or surroundings. Officer applied this directly, confirming no such adverse effects.
Strategic Policy 3 - To respect the character of our towns and villages
Requires design accounting for local materials/character. Extension uses matching roof tiles/finishes.
Environment Policy 42
Focuses on visual design and local character/landscaping. Proposal fits with dwelling and locality.
Spatial Policy 5
New development to positively contribute to environment. Assessed as compatible.
Time limit
The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice. Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
no objection to this application (initial response 28.06.2022; later objection noted but not impacting decision)
no highway interest in this application
Highway Services Division had no objection to the application; Onchan District Commissioners initially approved but later objected to amended plans citing overshadowing and loss of outlook, and supported neighbour objections; neighbour at 8 Langdale Close objected due to loss of light, privacy, and boundary proximity issues.
Key concern: Overshadowing and loss of outlook
Highway Services Division
No ObjectionFrom the Planning List 10 June 2022, there is no Highways HDC interest (NHI) in: 22/00709/B; Highway Services HDC does not oppose (DNO) the following applications; no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and /or parking
Highway Services Division
No ObjectionHighways Development Control notes the amendments uploaded on 15 August 2022 and continues to apply no highway interest to this proposal.
Highway Services Division
No ObjectionHighways Development Control notes the amended description uploaded on 5 September 2022 and continues to have no highway interest in this proposal
Onchan District Commissioners
SupportThe Commissioners would recommend that the application be APPROVED for planning purposes only.
Onchan District Commissioners
ObjectionThe Commissioners continue to recommend that the application be REFUSED on the following grounds: 'Overshadowing and loss of outlook.'
Onchan District Commissioners
SupportOnchan District Commissioners wish to place on record their disappointment that their comments in relation to the amended plans for this application were not considered as part of the planning application process.; Although the Members do not wish to appeal the application decision, they do support the comments submitted by the adjacent property owner who has also opposed the development.
The original application for erection of an extension to replace an existing conservatory and decking (partial retrospective) at 10 Langdale Close was approved under delegated powers on 22 September 2022 despite objections from the neighbour at No.8 and Onchan District Commissioners regarding loss of light, overbearing impact and errors in the officer's report. The neighbour (Mr Robert Smith) appealed citing procedural errors, inaccurate plans, breach of 45-degree rule, and unacceptable harm to living conditions. The applicant and planning authority argued the changes from existing were minimal, complied with GP2 and RDG when assessed against the status quo (existing unapproved structures immune from enforcement), and would not cause unacceptable harm. The inspector conducted a site visit, assessed afresh, found minimal additional harm to outlook/light at No.8 given existing conservatory/decking, and recommended dismissal. The appeal was dismissed with approval upheld subject to updated plans and a 4-year commencement condition.
Precedent Value
Appeals against approvals for minor residential extensions replacing long-standing unapproved structures likely to fail if incremental harm is minimal and assessed against existing baseline under GP2/RDG. Future applicants should provide precise measurements of changes vs existing and highlight PD rights for context; appellants must prove unacceptable planning harm beyond procedure.
Inspector: Richard Perrins
