31 October 2007 · Planning Committee
Cummal Beg, Barroose Lane, Baldrine, Isle Of Man, IM4 6an
The proposal sought permission to retain an existing garage built outside the original residential curtilage of the dwelling Cummal Beg and to extend the curtilage into adjacent open countryside/agricultural land.
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 considered two main elements: the impact of the garage and the curtilage extension. The garage has the same dimensions, scale and massing as the one refused under 02/00076/B, which was dee…
Residential Policy 1 of Laxey and Lonan Area Plan Order 2005
Restricts residential development to designated areas; alterations/extensions to existing properties accepted only if sympathetic to character and appearance of building and surroundings. Officer found garage not sympathetic due to size, height and location, visually detrimental in rural/high landscape area.
Policy L/OSNC/PR/1
General presumption against development in open space areas. Curtilage extension deemed unwarranted intrusion into open countryside beyond existing curtilage.
General Policy 3
Development not permitted outside zoned areas except in listed exceptional cases (e.g. agricultural worker housing, conversions). Proposal falls outside exceptions as domestic garage/curtilage extension in countryside.
Environment Policy 1
Countryside protected for its own sake; development adversely affecting it not permitted without overriding national need and no alternative. Garage and curtilage extension adversely affect countryside.
Environment Policy 2
Within Areas of High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV), landscape character protection paramount unless development does not harm character or location essential. Garage visually prominent and harmful due to height and separation from dwelling.
Do not oppose
Lonan Parish Commissioners strongly recommend refusal due to unacceptable change of agricultural land to residential use, oversized garage in prominent position, and precedent concerns; Highways Division has no objection; private individual raises precedent concerns with conditional support.
Key concern: change of use of land from agricultural to residential with no justification and dangerous precedent
Lonan Parish Commissioners
Objectionthere is no justification whatsoever for this change of use, is unacceptable and permitting this could set a very dangerous precedent; The Board recommends that the land is returned to agricultural use and the garage removed
Department of Transport, Highways Division
No ObjectionDo not oppose
G A Clark
Conditional No ObjectionWhy is this not accommodated in the original curtilage; If this is approved there should be a condition at least requiring the new boundary to be a Manx hedge
Conditions requested: new boundary to be a Manx hedge to make it look in time like an original boundary
The original application PA 07/01526/R for retention of a garage and extension to residential curtilage was refused by the Planning Committee. The appellant argued that the garage siting was necessary due to drainage constraints and vehicle access issues on the approved site, that the design matched the dwelling's roof pitch, visibility was minimal, and the curtilage extension was minimal and contained existing features like the septic tank. The Council defended the refusal citing the garage's excessive size, height, and prominence outside the curtilage, and unnecessary extension into agricultural land. The Inspector found the garage visually prominent due to its ridge height and location, the curtilage extension contrived and undesirable, and the approved site feasible despite appellant claims; he concluded non-compliance with policies protecting countryside and recommended dismissal. The Minister accepted the recommendation on 8th April 2008, directing removal of the garage within 3 months.
Precedent Value
This appeal demonstrates that in rural/AHLVSS areas, functional necessity for curtilage extensions or outbuildings must be evidenced robustly (e.g. engineering plans for drainage); unsubstantiated claims fail against policy protection of countryside, even with prior approvals for alternative schemes. Applicants should prioritise sites within existing curtilage and avoid prominence.
Inspector: John S Turner
