DEC Officer Report

Application No.: 20/00689/MCH Applicant: Mr & Mrs David Hudson Proposal: Minor changes application for PA 17/01304/B involving window reconfiguration and installation of a heat pump Site Address: Langdale Gansey Port St. Mary Isle Of Man IM9 5LA ### Planning Officer: Miss Lucy Kinrade Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 15.09.2020 _________________________________________________________________ Notes for Approval All the requested minor changes are considered acceptable. Plans/Drawings/Information; The application relates to drawing numbers PL 101, PL 301, PL 302, BC 002, BC 101, BC 102, BC 301 and BC 302 all date stamped and received 15/07/2020 and an email dated 10/07/2020 and ASHP Data Sheet date stamped 15/07/2020.

Officer’s Report

|Requirement|Source|Analysis|Pass| |---|---|---|---| |Basis of Application|Basis of Application|Basis of Application|Basis of Application| |Only one minor changes application may be made in respect of any particular grant of planning approval.|21(1)|No other minor changes in relation to 17/01304/B|YES| |Must relate to a grant of planning approval in respect of a building|21/2)(a)|PA 17/01034/B relates to works to an existing dwelling|YES| |Must specify what minor changes are being sought and why the applicant considers them to be of a minor nature|21(2)(b)|Application form specifies the following changes:<br><br> Installation of air source heat pump which is bigger size than PDO.<br> the alteration of a two playroom windows into one<br> removal of a sunroom skylight due to cost<br> alteration of sunroom corner window to non-corner window<br> modification to the apex window<br> windows above beds in bedrooms 3 and 5 decreased in height.<br>|YES|

|Cannot increase the number of dwellings or buildings for which planning approval has been granted|21(2)(c)(i)|The proposal remains as one single dwelling|YES| |---|---|---|---| |Cannot increase the net external footprint of a building for which planning approval has been granted|21(2)(c)(ii)|No change to external footprint|YES| |Cannot alter the site for which planning approval has been granted and which was defined by a red line on the site location map by changing that line|21(2)(c)(iii)|No change to red line for the site|YES| |Cannot make material changes to the vehicular access arrangements for which planning approval has been granted|21(2)(c)(iv)|No changes|YES| |Cannot alter the conditions (if any) which have been imposed|21(2)(c)(v)|No changes to conditions.|YES| |Cannot be made where the parent approval is less than 21 days old, subject to an undetermined appeal or has expired|21(2)(d)|Was originally approved 26th Feb 2018|YES| |Requirement|Source|Analysis|Pass| |Application Content|Application Content|Application Content|Application Content| |Application Form|22(3)(a)|Provided|YES| |Information in Schedule 1:<br><br> Site location plan (including flood risk assessment)<br> The planning approval that is the subject of the application<br> The changes to that approval which are being applied for<br> An explanation as to why those changes are being applied for;<br> (if relevant) the site plan, and the plans, elevations and sections of the proposed buildings and structures amended to indicate the changes.<br>|22(3)(a&c)|Site and location plan provided Not in flood risk area Has referenced parent approval Has set out changes in application form and annotation bubbles on new drawings. Has provided full elevations and floor plans drawings for proposed minor changes.<br><br>Drawings provided from parent approval information provided for air source heat pump|YES| |Document specified on form but not in Schedule 1|22(3)(b)|N/A|N/A| |Fee|22(3)(4)|Dealt with at application validation|YES| |Such further info as Department may request prior to determination|22(6)|It is not considered any further information is required|YES| |Requirement|Source|Analysis|Pass| |Determination|Determination|Determination|Determination| |Must not significantly increase the size or scale of the development in question|23(1)(a)|The overall size and scale of the development remains unchanged|YES| |Must not significantly change the nature of the development in question|23(1)(b)|The proposal remains as a single dwelling house and the nature will not change in this respect|YES| |Requirement|Source|Analysis|Pass| |Must not result in an approval which, at the time of approval,|23(1)(c)|The minor changes remain in compliance.|YES|

|complied with a Development Plan, National Policy Directive or a Planning Policy Statement, ceasing to do so| |The ASHP proposed is explained to be beyond the size permissible under the amended 2020 PDO. Figures provided by the agent by email dated 16/09/2020 confirms that the calculated MCS figure is 41dB and less than 42dB stated in the PDO and not considered to result in any unacceptable harm to the neighbours, minded that the nearest neighbour is apx 60m away on the opposite side to the ASHP.| | |---|---|---|---| |Must not result in new or increased adverse impacts on adjoining or neighbouring properties having a significant or disproportionate impact on the environment (irrespective of whether such impacts might be outweighed by other considerations)|23(1)(d)|It is not considered that there are any new or increased adverse impacts on neighbours and there are no significant impacts on the environment.|YES| |Must not be more than minor and to be of a magnitude to warrant a new application|23(1)(e)|The changes are considered minor|YES| |Must not otherwise fundamentally change the basis on which the grant was originally made.|23(1)(e)|The minor changes remain for a single dwelling and do not fundamentally change the nature of the original parent approval.|YES| |If it does not do any of the above, must then be considered. – is the application considered acceptable?|23(2)|The proposed changes are considered acceptable|YES| |Notice of Decision|Notice of Decision|Notice of Decision|Notice of Decision| |Set out whether all, some or no changes are accepted (And which is which)|24(2)(a)|All the proposed changes are considered acceptable.|All the proposed changes are considered acceptable.| |For any elements refused, the reasons for that.|24(2)(b)| | |

I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.

Decision Made : Permitted Date: Determining officer

Signed : A MORGAN Abigail Morgan Principal Planner

Customer note

This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the assessment and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.