Officer Report

Application No.: 25/90552/B Applicant: Mrs J Kennedy Proposal: Conversion of two single garages into double garage; alterations to door and roof. Site Address: Double Garage Off George Paddock Car Park Farrants Way Castletown Isle Of Man Senior Planning Officer: Jason Singleton Photo Taken: 14.08.2025 Site Visit: 14.08.2025 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 08.09.2025 _________________________________________________________________

Conditions and Notes for Approval

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions

• C 1. 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.

• C 2. The garage hereby approved shall at all times be made available for the parking of private motor vehicles(s) and shall be retained available for such use. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of local amenity.
• C 3. The garage(s) hereby approved shall not be used for any commercial or business use or storage from within.

REASON: The garages sit within a residential area and any use other than the parking of vehicles would be detrimental to the character of the area and those neighbouring residents amenity.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposed extension to the existing garage and front porch would be in accordance with General Policy 2 of the IoM Strategic Plan.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This decision relates to drawings and supporting information received on 29th July 2025, referenced; 01, 02, 03, 04, 05.

_________________________________________________________________ Right to Appeal

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given the Right to Appeal as they have submitted an objection that meets the specified criteria: No.28 Queen Street, Castletown

_________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report THE SITE

1.1 The application site identified in red represents a pair of single garages which sits centrally to a block of 12 garages of similar type and size. The block of garages are single storey with a slight sloped pitched roofs with a corrugated sheet finish material and to the front are individual up/over garage doors. THe roof slopes from the rear to the front and is guttered with UPVC and down pipes to the front elevation. - 1.2 These garages sit to the rear of those properties that face onto Queen Street and is accessed via the man public car park off Farrants way. This roadway passes the front elevation of the garages also provides for vehicle access to some of those properties that front onto Scarlett Road with a number of parking spaces at their rear. - 1.3 To the rear of these garages is No. 53 Scarlett Road and their front elevation to the property and gardens. Teh rear of some of these garages is also their boundary wall. THE PROPOSAL

2.1 Proposed is the amalgamation of the two existing garages to create 1 larger garage space in place of the 2 existing ones; installation of a wider up/ over garage door to suit the new "double" width. Part of the application also proposes the installation of a new roof above these two garages that would sit proud of the adjacent roofs by approx. 400mm with a corrugated roof sheet in grey or black. The lifting of the roof would ensure an opening height of 2.2m from Ground level. PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 None. PLANNING POLICY - 4.1 The site falls within an area zoned as Residential on the Area Plan for the South Map 5Castletown. The site is adjacent to the conservation area to the south and is not within an identified flood risk area, neither area there any registered trees to be impacted by the proposals.

4.2 The following policies from the 2016 Strategic Plan are considered pertinent in the assessment of this application; Strategic Policy

• 2 Priority for new development to identified towns and villages
• 3 To respect the character of our towns and villages

Spatial Policy 2 Castletown is defined as a Service Centre

General Policy 2 General Development Considerations

Environment Policy 36 Views in / out of Conservation Areas

3.4 Paragraph 8.12.1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 states: "As a general policy, in built up areas not controlled by Conservation Area or Registered Building policies, there will be a general presumption in favour of extensions to existing property where such extensions would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent property or the surrounding area in general." - 3.5 Residential Design Guide (2021) This document provides advice on the design of new houses, extensions and ancillary structurers to existing properties as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential properties and sustainable methods of construction.

REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Malew Parish Commissioners had not commented at the time of writing.

5.2 DoI Highways Services had not commented at the time of writing.

5.3 28 Queen Street Castletown, objects (12/08/25) for reasons that it could; Compromise parking to the rear of their property and their vehicle could become damaged is larger vehicles are trying to turn into the larger garage. Further concerns regarding the "domestic use" and what this could entail and gives an example of a motorbike team generating excessive noise and could have a detrimental impact upon their "tight Knit" residential amenities. The application is not a resident of Castletown and the use could be a commercial use as it's not serving an immediate residential property. The roof are asbestos sheeting and want to make sure this is removed in a safe manner. None of the residents were made aware of the proposals or have been notified of it being submitted neither has the statutory notices been put in place. ASSESSMENT - 6.0 The key considerations in the determination of the application are;

• - Design and visual impact (STP2, SP2 GP2b,c,)
• - Impact upon neighbouring amenity (GP2g)
• - Highway Safety (GP2h,I)

DESIGN AND VISUAL IMPACT

6.1 The site falls within the existing settlement boundary of Castletown and an area zoned for residential development, and principally the works to an existing structure would be in accordance with SP2 and STP2.

6.2 The scope of works does not include any increase in the footprint of the garage but merely removing an internal centre wall between the two garages to form one larger garage space with a wider door to fit this new opening and the re-roofing with a slightly higher profile (approx. 400mm) to provide for garaging for vehicles.

6.3 The design of the garage central garage door and roof would be considered proportionate to the front elevation and remains to serve that specific purpose for garaging. The level of finish is to reflect the existing in terms of materials and profiles to match that of the existing garage could be considered complementary which helps to ensure the built form once adapted, is in keeping with the character and appearance of the remaining garages. Nor

• would the proposals be seen to have any detrimental visual impact when looking into or out of the Conservation area, which is opposite the site and is the rear of those properties on Queen Street.
• 6.4 When visiting the site, the row of garages is not readily visible from the main highway of Farrants Way but only becomes apparent when travelling past the rear of Queens Street and the front elevation of the row of garages. As such, the merging of the garaging space would not be apparent however the increase in roof height above the exiting would be marginally visible but would not be considered to have any detrimental visual impact upon the character of the area.
• 6.5 Overall, these aspects of development are deemed to be an acceptable form of development that complies with those sections of General Policy 2(b) & (c) and the RDG 2021. NEIGHBOURING AMENITY
• 6.6 When considering whether there would be any adverse impact (loss of light, overbearing impact upon outlooks and/or overlooking) upon any of the neighbouring properties from the adaption works to the garage. Those immediate neighbouring properties are those that front on to Queens Street (opposite) No's 26 &28 whom are directly opposite the application site and those to the rear of the garage, that is No. 53 Scarlett Road who share a boundary wall. Here the rear of the garage wall is the side / boundary wall to No.53 and their front gardens.
• 6.7 The level and scale of development proposed here, especially being limited to single storey in height and to an existing structure are considered to be relatively modest and not judged to cause harm to the enjoyment of the neighbouring amenity though any loss of light, overbearing impact or loss of privacy, specifically those to the front and rear.
• 6.8 However, and noting the letter of objection from No.28 Queens street, the concerns over the misuse of the garage are valid and could also have an impact on those to the rear of the site. The land use designation is residential and such a commercial or hobby use would be considered detrimental to the residential character of the area and could lead to the creation of a statutory nuisance though noise and smells. The use of the garages could be limited through a suitably worded condition, limiting its use to only the parking of domestic vehicles to provide for off road parking and no other uses.
• 6.9 Furthermore, at the time of the site visit, 14th August, the yellow site notice was affixed to the central down pipe and on display. The issue regarding ownership and who owns the units is one of a private or civil matter that is not considered a material planning consideration in this instance. Any damage to private property (in this case parked vehicles) would equally be a civil or criminal matter and not one that can be addressed through the planning function.
• 6.10 On balance, the proposed alteration works to the garages would be considered to be compliant with those sections of General Policy 2(g) with the inclusion of condition on the use of the garage. HIGHWAY SAFETY

6.8 No comments have been received from Highway Services, but as the works are more cosmetic to an existing structure and do not propose any creation or widening of access onto a public highway it is likely there are no concerns with highway safety. Given the nature of the proposals and the level of information on drawings ensures the proposal would be seen to comply with GP 2 (h&I) of the Strategic Plan. - 7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 For the above reasons, the proposal would not harm the character of the area or that of the conservation area and would comply with General Policy 2, Environmental Policy 36, of the IOMSP. The application is therefore recommended for approval. RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE - 8.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted).

8.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to:

• o applicant (in all cases);
• o a Local Authority; Government Department; Manx Utilities; and Manx National Heritage that submit a relevant objection; and
• o any other person who has made an objection that meets specified criteria.

8.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10. - 8.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required):

• o any appellant or potential appellant (which includes the applicant);
• o the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, the Department of Infrastructure and the local authority for the area;
• o any other person who has submitted written representations (this can include other Government Departments and Local Authorities); and
• o in the case of a petition, a single representative.

8.5 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given the Right to Appeal.

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 and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status and/or rights to appeal.

Decision Made : Permitted Date: 09.09.2025 Determining Officer

Signed : C BALMER Chris Balmer Principal Planner

Customer note This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/ customers and archive record.