Minor Change to PA 22/01460/B for the installation of two gable windows and four roof lights (retrospective)

Why Was This Refused?

• ✓Footprint of the dwelling increased by 12%, exceeding what qualifies as a minor change
• ✓Plans included additional changes not referenced in the application or cover letter
• ✓No explanation provided for why the undisclosed changes should be treated as minor
• ✓Changes would move the building closer to the adjacent property
• ✓Application failed tests under criteria 23(1)(a) and 23(1)(e) of the minor change procedure
• ✓A new full planning application required to address the scope of changes
• ✓increase of the footprint of the development by 12%
• ✓would move the building closer to the adjacent property
• ✓Most proposed changes shown on the plan are not mentioned in the reasons for the minor changes
• ✓no reason explaining why they are considered minor is included
• ✓changes would be considered more than minor and would benefit from a new application

The application was a Minor Change request linked to parent approval 22/01460/B, seeking retrospective consent for two gable windows and four roof lights on a new dwelling north east of Cass A Lergy, Douglas Road, Kirk Michael. The officer's assessment found two decisive failures against the minor change criteria. First, the proposed changes increase the building's footprint by 12%, which is considered a significant increase in size or scale. Second, the submitted plans included additional changes not mentioned in the application form or cover letter, with no explanation of why those changes should be treated as minor. Together, these failures meant the application could not be processed as a minor change and would instead require a full new planning application.

The application failed two of the statutory minor change tests. The footprint increase of 12% was judged to significantly increase the scale of the development, and the plans contained unarticulated changes that were considered more than minor in magnitude. A new planning application would be needed to properly consider these changes.

Policies Assessed (5)

Planning History (1)

Documents (8)