25 November 2021 · Delegated - Head of Development Management (Stephen Butler)
7, Arbory Road, Castletown, Isle Of Man, IM9 1na
The proposal involves demolishing existing garages and erecting a new pitch-roofed double garage measuring 6.9m wide, 12.1m long, 5.2m high to ridge (2.5m to eaves), with a 83.4sqm footprint (20sqm increase), finished in painted render walls, blue-grey reconstituted slate roof, grey uPVC windows/doors, and charcoal gre…
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 policies including General Policy 2 (GP2), Environment Policies 34 and 35 (EP34, EP35), and Planning Policy Statement 1/01, finding it compliant as the st…
General Policy 2
Requires development to respect site/surroundings in siting, scale, design; not adversely affect character, amenity, road safety. Officer found proposal complies due to design attributes like pitched slate roof matching locality, 900mm setback avoiding neighbour impacts, improved vehicle access.
Environment Policy 35
Permits only development preserving/enhancing Conservation Area character. Proposal has neutral impact as visible garage design is not inappropriate, with traditional slate and render finishes in keeping with area.
Environment Policy 34
Prefers traditional materials for pre-1920 buildings. New slate roof reflects traditional finish; painted render acceptable despite not replicating brick, as roof slope aligns with neighbour.
Transport Policy 7
Requires parking per standards (2 spaces per unit, one in curtilage). Larger garage enhances access without reducing dwelling parking; recessed position improves entry/exit over existing.
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.
Materials approval
All external facing and roofing materials shall remain as shown on the plans and specified within the list of external finishes on the submitted Drawing No. 3061/C/050/1 rev. A received 5 October 2021. No new types of materials shall be added to the external elevations of the development, hereby approved. Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.
Tree protection plan
Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved a tree protection plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. Tree protection measures shall be shown on a layout plan accompanied by descriptive text which includes but is not limited to details of; a) The location of the trees to be retained and their canopy spreads; b) The location of a 'construction exclusion zone'; c) The position of protective fencing and/or other protective measures required to prevent damage to retained trees. d) An appropriate specification for the protective measures proposed. The development must be carried out in accordance with the approved details. No alterations or variations to the approved tree protection scheme or working methods shall be made without prior written consent of the Department. Reason: required prior to commencement to ensure that all trees to be retained are adequately protected from damage to health and stability throughout the construction period to protect and enhance the appearance and character of the site and locality.
do not oppose the proposal
amended plans satisfy concerns with regard to surface water runoff onto the public highway
does not object to the application; trees marked for removal are either smaller than licensable size, fruit trees, or poor specimens not worthy of consideration; recommends condition for retained tree protection
Mixed responses including objection from adjoining owner's agent on structural integrity concerns, no objection from Highways after drainage amendments, no objection from Arboricultural Officer with tree protection condition, and initial highways drainage deferral resolved.
Key concern: undermining of existing gable walls and impact on roof flashings of adjoining conservation area building
Barry Murphy (agent for adjoining owner)
ObjectionMy client has no objection to the principle of the removal of the existing garages and the replacement with new but feels these should be detached form his property.; would amenable to accepting an amended scheme where the proposed building was detached from his building by say 0.9m
DEFA Arboricultural Officer
No ObjectionAll of the trees marked for removal are either smaller than licensable size, are not covered by the Tree Preservation Act by virtue of them being fruit trees, or are poor specimens not worthy of consideration as material constraints. I do not therefore object to this application.
Conditions requested: Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved a tree protection plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. Tree protection measures shall be shown on a layout plan accompanied by descriptive text which includes but is not limited to details of; a) The location of the trees to be retained and their canopy spreads; b) The location of a 'construction exclusion zone'; c) The position of protective fencing and/or other protective measures required to prevent damage to retained trees. d) An appropriate specification for the protective measures proposed. The development must be carried out in accordance with the approved details. No alterations or variations to the approved tree protection scheme or working methods shall be made without prior written consent of the Department.
Highway Services Division
No ObjectionAfter reviewing this Application, Highway Services find it to have no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network efficiency and /or parking. There is an existing dropped crossing and adequate visibility.
DOI Highways Drainage
Conditional No ObjectionAs the plans do not include drainage arrangements for the replacement garage, it is unclear how surface water runoff from this section might be connected to the soakaway.
Senior Highway Drainage Engineer, Highway Services DOI
No ObjectionYes, the amended plans submitted by the agent have satisfied our concern with regard to surface water runoff onto the public highway.
