**Document:** Planning Statement
**Application:** 25/90588/B — Single storey extensions to existing garage to provide additional vehicle and machinery storage
**Decision:** Permitted
**Decision Date:** 2025-09-17
**Parish:** Malew
**Document Type:** report / planning_statement
**Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/32910-st-marks-swallows-rest-gibdale-garage/documents/1070221

---

# Planning Statement

## This Planning Statement has been prepared by Ste Stanley, Chartered Member of the Royal Town Planning Institute

## 1. Introduction

![map or plan from page 3](https://images.planningportal.im/2025/06/6875924.jpg)

This Planning Statement supports a full planning application for extensions to an existing small, detached garage at Swallows Rest, Bayrauyr Road, St Marks. The proposal is to create a combined extended car garage with an additional implement storage area, ancillary to the main dwelling. This revised scheme has been formulated in direct response to recent planning history on the site - notably two refused applications for a separate agricultural/machinery storage building elsewhere on the 22-acre landholding. This new application represents a substantially scaled-down and re-sited development, grouped near the house, in an effort to address previous reasons for refusal and to align with relevant planning policies and design guidance.

## 2. Site Context and Planning History

Site and Surroundings: Swallows Rest is a substantial detached property with a floor area (including approved extensions yet to be built) of approximately 800sq.m. Located in a rural area of St Marks, roughly 100m north of Bayrauyr Road, the property is screened by mature hedgerows. The property sits within a sizeable landholding (approximately 22 acres) comprising pasture and garden land. The existing domestic curtilage includes the house and a small, detached garage. The surrounding area is open countryside not designated for development by the prevailing Development Plan documents. There are no immediate neighbouring dwellings that would be directly affected in terms of residential amenity.

Previous Applications: In 2023 and 2024, two planning applications (refs 23/00718/B and 24/00934/B) sought permission for a detached agricultural/machinery storage building on the wider holding (on land identified as Field 430685, north of the dwelling). Both applications were refused primarily on the grounds of insufficient agricultural justification for a new building in the countryside:

• The 2024 application (24/00934/B) proposed a steel portal-frame machinery shed (approx. 25m x 9m, 4.06m ridge height) on the field adjacent to Swallows Rest. The Planning Officer’s report concluded that, “in light of the

appeal decision in 2021 removing the agricultural tie and the evidence presented which demonstrated that there was no agricultural activity… the Department considers that there is no justification for an agricultural building and that no agricultural needexists; as such the proposals conflict with General Policy 3(f) and Environment Policy 15.”. With no active farm business, the building was deemed “unwarranted in the countryside” and likely to detract from the openness and rural character of the area. The proposal was for a storage building intended for tools and machinery to manage the landholding sustainably for nature, rather than for agricultural use. This purpose may have been misinterpreted during the application determination process.

• The 2023 application (23/00718/B) was similarly refused on lack of agricultural need. Notably, an appeal in 2021 (application ref. 20/00473/B) had allowed the removal of the previous agricultural occupancy condition on Swallows Rest. The independent inspector found that the land was of low agricultural quality (only ~30 of 66 acres farmable, and that of poor grade) and that there was no viable agricultural enterprise ongoing. This appeal decision formally lifted the “agricultural tie” on the dwelling, effectively reclassifying Swallows Rest as an open-market residence rather than a farm holding. The implication is that new agriculturalbuildings on the site would be difficult to justify simply by the dwelling’s history, but if approved must meet strict policy tests for countryside development.

## 3. Commitment to Nature Stewardship and Justification for Implement Storage

The applicant has a clear and long-term objective to manage the 22-acre landholding at Swallows Rest for the benefit of nature and biodiversity, rather than for commercial agriculture. This intention reflects a shift towards responsible land stewardship in line with the Island’s sustainability goals. To support this ambition, the applicant has engaged in discussions with Sophie Costain of the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture (DEFA) Ecosystems Policy team. These conversations have helped shape a nature-focused approach to land management, which includes maintaining and enhancing habitats, planting native species and undertaking regular estate maintenance activities such as grassland management and hedgerow care.

In order to deliver this management effectively, it is necessary to retain and secure certain implements on site, such as a compact tractor, mowers and other land management tools. These are essential for routine tasks associated with nature management but are not of a scale or type that would justify a separate large agricultural-type building. The proposed implement store, integrated within the garage extension, is intentionally modest in size and function. It is designed solely to house this necessary equipment. This supports the applicant’s environmental aims while

avoiding the need for a separate rural building that may have greater landscape impact.

As a further measure to reduce on-site development, the applicant has made arrangements to store larger machinery and infrequently used equipment at an offsite location in Balthane. This compromise demonstrates a commitment to minimising built form on the land while still ensuring the tools needed for responsible land care are available and securely stored. This sensitive and pragmatic approach underscores the case for the current proposal, which is proportionate, necessary and aligned with best practice in managing non-agricultural landholdings for ecological value.

The New Proposal: The applicant has taken on board the clear message from these decisions. Rather than pursue another standalone agricultural building (which would possibly conflict with policy due to the land not being farmed), the approach has been altered to a compromise solution which reflects the need for storage of tools and machinery to sustainably manage the 22 acres for nature along with extending the existing garage to create covered domestic car storage of a size that is reflective of the property’s size:

- • Downscaled Development: The new proposal is dramatically smaller in scale than the refused 25m x 9m shed. By extending the existing garage, the development remains modest and proportionate to a domestic use (housing cars and estate maintenance tools) instead of a large farm-style structure.
- • Closer Grouping: The proposal is now positioned as close as physically possible to the main dwelling, in line with best practice. The extension will adjoin the existing garage and remain largely within the established residential curtilage, except for a small section extending beyond. This approach of clustering buildings aims to reduce encroachment into the landscape and visual impact, addressing previous concerns about harm to the rural character.
- • Off-Site Storage Commitment: The applicant is also making a reasonable compromise by agreeing to store certain large machinery and equipment offsite (at a secure facility in Balthane). This reduces the on-site storage requirements and allows the proposed garage/implement store to remain of a modest size. It demonstrates the applicant’s willingness to meet halfway – accepting some inconvenience (off-site storage) in order to alleviate planning concerns about a large or unjustified building on the property.

This planning history and the applicant’s proactive response provide important context. The current application is fundamentally different in nature and impact from the refused schemes, reflecting a genuine attempt to address the Planning Authority’s objections and to find a policy-compliant solution.

## 4. Proposed Development Details

Description of Proposal: This application seeks approval for an extension of the existing garage at Swallows Rest. The proposed development aims to create an enclosed garage space for the applicant’s personal vehicles, incorporating an area for the storage of garden and land management equipment, such as a ride-on mower and upkeep tools. The extension will enlarge the current outbuilding rather than introduce a new separate structure, ensuring that the development remains ancillary to the dwelling and almost entirely within the existing residential curtilage.

Design and Scale: The proposal is for single-storey extensions, designed to be inkeeping with the character of the house and existing garage. The form will employ a pitched roof matching the original garage’s roof shape and slope, ensuring the additions appear similar. External materials will match the existing buildings (rendered walls beneath a slate roof). By echoing the design cues of the main dwelling, the new garage bay will read as a natural, subordinate extension rather than an intrusive new element. According to the Isle of Man Residential Design Guide, any side extension should “respect the proportion, design and form of the existing dwelling”and “appear

as subordinate to the main dwelling”. This proposal embraces that guidance through its careful scaling and matching aesthetics.

Garage Capacity and Storage Use: Once extended, the garage will provide covered parking for the applicant’s own vehicles, which is in scale with a rural family property of this substantial size. In addition, an extension will be added which will be allocated for implement storage - for example, housing a compact tractor and attachments necessary for maintaining the extensive grounds. This implement storage element is intentionally modest; it is sized to accommodate essential estate maintenance equipment only, acknowledging that larger agricultural machinery (excavators, trailers, etc.) will be kept off-site as noted. The design ensures that this storage area remains incidental to the domestic use of the garage. It will not function as a standalone commercial workshop or farm building, but simply as a secure shed for the homeowner’s own equipment. By keeping the storage component modest, the extension stays firmly within the scope of a typical residential outbuilding, acceptable in scale and use for a dwelling of this nature.

Access and Services: The extended garage will continue to be accessed via the existing driveway off Bayrauyr Road. No new access points are proposed. There will be ample turning space within the yard for vehicles entering or leaving the new bays. The extension will utilise existing on-site services (power, etc.) as needed. Given its siting adjacent to the current garage, groundworks are minimal. Construction will likely involve a standard slab foundation.

Overall, the proposed extension is a well-considered addition that serves the applicant’s legitimate needs for vehicle and equipment storage, while remaining in

keeping with the residential use of the property. It is fundamentally an ancillary domestic development, not a new independent use.

## 5. Planning Policy Compliance

The proposal has been carefully designed to align with the Isle of Man Strategic Plan policies and other material considerations. Key relevant policies include Environment Policies 1 and 15, and General Policies 2 and 3 of the Strategic Plan 2016. The scheme’s compliance with these is detailed below:

- • Environment Policy 1 – Protection of the Countryside: Environment Policy 1 states that “The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake… Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not bepermitted unless there is an over-riding national need… with no reasonable alternative”.This policy sets a high bar for new development in rural areas, presuming against proposals that harm landscape character or are not essential. The current application is consistent with EP1. By enlarging an existing outbuilding close to the house (instead of constructing a new isolated building), the development avoids adverse effects on the wider countryside. The extension is contained within the established residential enclave and does not intrude into undeveloped land. Its visual impact will be minor and localised (essentially read as part of the dwelling’s built form), thereby preserving the openness and character of the surrounding fields. Unlike the refused standalone shed, it stays within an already impacted area. There is no conflict with EP1’s aim of protecting the rural landscape; on the contrary, the proposal represents a sensitive approach that safeguards the countryside by steering development to the appropriate place (next to existing buildings). No overriding national need must be claimed here, as the proposal is de minimis in terms of impact and is the kind of small-scale domestic development normally deemed compatible with rural areas.
- • Environment Policy 15 – New Agricultural Buildings: Environment Policy 15 provides criteria for allowing new agricultural or horticultural buildings when an agricultural need is proven, stipulating that such development must be sited near existing building groups and be appropriate in scale, materials, colour, and siting. In previous applications, the lack of agricultural need meant this policy could not be satisfied, hence permission was refused. In the present case, the proposal is not for a new “agricultural” building per se; however, it is worth noting that the spirit of EP15’s requirements is fully respected. The extension is indeed sited “as close as is practically possible to existing buildings” - it literally adjoins the current garage beside the house. It is small in scale and appropriate in materials and design, as described earlier, meeting the design expectations of EP15. By downsizing the scheme and co-locating it with the

dwelling, the applicant has addressed the core concern behind EP15: to prevent sporadic, unjustified farm structures from blighting the landscape. Here, no conflict with EP15 arises; if anything, the proposal exemplifies an outcome that EP15 envisions if a building were justified – i.e., a well-sited, suitably scaled structure that does not harm the countryside. It bears emphasising that the need being addressed now is a domestic/incidental need (ancillary garage/storage), which is inherently more modest than any claimed agricultural necessity. Thus, while EP15 may not strictly apply to a domestic garage, the proposal’s adherence to EP15’s design and siting principles strengthens its acceptability.

- • General Policy 3 – Development Outside of Zoned Areas: General Policy 3 of the Strategic Plan governs development in locations not designated for development (like this site). GP3 generally prohibits development in the open countryside except for certain exceptions - one being “building operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry” (clause (f)). Previous proposals were assessed against this exception but failed when agricultural “essential” need was not demonstrated. The current proposal takes a different approach that is far more tenable under the policy framework. Rather than being a freestanding new development, the garage extension can be seen as an incidental improvement to an existing residential property. Planning practice typically distinguishes such householder developments from the sort of new speculative building GP3 is aimed at. The scale and purpose of this extension are consistent with normal residential use, and approval would not undermine the intent of GP3. It is noted that GP3’s exceptions do not explicitly list house extensions; however, it is implicit that minor additions to existing authorised buildings are acceptable, subject to detailed considerations, as they do not constitute a new independent development in the countryside. Crucially, the extension of a garage at an existing dwelling does not result in the creation of a new dwelling, nor a new land use in the countryside - it remains part and parcel of the established residential use on site. By keeping the development almost entirely within the curtilage, the proposal avoids the sprawl or leapfrogging of built form that GP3 seeks to prevent. In summary, the scheme upholds GP3 by staying within the footprint of development that is appropriate and by refraining from any unwarranted incursion into greenfield land.
- • General Policy 2 – Design, Layout and Amenity: General Policy 2 sets out general development criteria applicable to all proposals (particularly those within existing settlements or land use zones, but its principles of good design apply universally). Key aspects of GP2 include ensuring developments are of high design quality, respect the character of the area, protect amenity and

provide safe access. Our proposal has been formulated expressly to meet the expectations of GP2 and avoid any such harm:

- • Design and Character:The garage extension is designed to blend with the existing dwelling. It will use matching or complementary materials and echo the architectural form of the house and garage, ensuring it is sympathetic and not incongruous. By keeping the extension’s width and height in proportion to the main house, it will clearly appear secondary and not overwhelm the original building - a principle stressed in the Residential Design Guide and embraced here.
- • Visual Impact on Surroundings:Because the extension will be tucked beside the existing garage, the visual impact on the wider landscape will be minimal. There is no change to the site’s silhouette on the skyline and no protrusion into open views. From public vantage points (such as Bayrauyr Road), the new built form will be largely indistinguishable from the current grouping, especially given the screening hedgerows and significant setback. The extension’s exterior finishes will be nonreflective and in keeping with the rural vernacular (e.g. stone, render in neutral tones, dark tiled roof), so it will not draw the eye or appear out of place. By avoiding any overtly industrial or agricultural appearance, the building will maintain the residential character of Swallows Rest’s setting.
- • Neighbour and Residential Amenity:There are no immediately adjacent neighbours; the nearest dwellings are some distance away such that issues of overlooking, overshadowing or noise do not arise. Nonetheless, the proposal ensures no amenity harm: the use (garage/storage) is quiet and normal for a house, and all activity will be contained within the building or existing yard. Lighting, if any, will be domestic-scale (e.g. down-lighters over garage doors) and sensitively positioned, avoiding any undue glare beyond the site. Therefore, the amenity of the area remains protected, consistent with GP2.
- • Access and Safety:The development will utilise the existing driveway and parking/turning arrangements, which are safe and adequate for the slightly increased garage capacity. No additional traffic will be generated beyond existing residential patterns. The Highways Division raised no objection to the previous larger proposal, and this much smaller, internal development likewise poses no highway concerns. In short, the scheme maintains safe and convenient access for vehicles and pedestrians in line with GP2 requirements.

In light of the above, the proposal can be seen to accord with the relevant Strategic Plan policies. It particularly addresses the fundamental conflict identified in earlier refusals (lack of justification under GP3/EP15) by altering the nature of development to one that is acceptable in a countryside context. Additionally, it adheres to GP2 and the Design Guide, ensuring a high standard of design that preserves the character and amenity of the locale.

## 6. Design and Guidance Considerations

As noted, the Isle of Man Residential Design Guide 2021 is an important reference for ensuring good design outcomes. The proposed garage extension follows the guidance for householder developments in several ways:

- • Subservience: The extension is kept subordinate to the main house - in height, width, and overall massing. It will not exceed the dwelling’s proportions; instead, it will read as a clearly secondary element. The Design Guide emphasises the need for side additions to appear subordinate and for rooflines to ideally be lower than the original dwelling’s ridge. The design achieves this subordinate appearance.
- • Materials and Detailing: A successful extension should employ materials that either match or complement the existing building. In this case, the intention is to use the same palette as the house/garage as confirmed by the proposed elevation drawings. This ensures visual unity between old and new.
- • Avoiding Adverse Impact on Character: Given the rural landscape sensitivity, the design avoids any features that could harm the scenic amenity. The extension will not, for instance, have an overly large expanse of bright cladding or garish colours; it will be neutral and recessive. Its single-storey profile nestled by the house means any glimpses of the building from afar will be seen against the backdrop of the existing dwelling, not as a new feature breaking the horizon. The modest scale and careful design therefore avoid harm to both the immediate streetscene/landscape and the broader character of the area, in line with guidance.

In summary, the design approach demonstrates a conscientious adherence to the Residential Design Guide and best practice. The result will be an extension that “fits in”aesthetically and environmentally, causing no harm to the character or amenity of the site or surroundings.

## 7. Material Planning Applications

In support of this proposal, reference is made to recent decisions that demonstrate the acceptability of domestic garage buildings and implement stores within residential curtilages, in areas not designated for development.

## The Nab, Crosby (Ref: 22/00705/B):

![The image displays a composite architectural drawing sheet featuring a proposed site plan on the left and multiple elevations, floor plans, and a cross-section of a building extension on the right.](https://images.planningportal.im/2025/06/6875925.jpg)

Permission was granted for a large, detached building comprising a four-bay garage with a first-floor fitness studio within the grounds of a rural residential property. The building, which included a ridge height of 8 metres, was approved despite its location outside a designated development area. The Planning Officer concluded that the proposal was acceptable under Environment Policy 1 and Housing Policy 16, given its high design quality, limited visual impact due to its siting, and its association with the main dwelling. This case demonstrates that well-designed, appropriately located buildings of substantial scale may be acceptable where they are clearly incidental to residential use and maintain countryside character.

## Barrule View, Foxdale (Ref: 16/00398/B):

Approval was granted for a detached building measuring 10m x 12m for use as a garage and machinery store within a large curtilage. The building was situated to the rear of the main house and partially screened from public views. It was accepted that a property of such scale required storage for equipment necessary to maintain its grounds. The Planning Officer emphasised that the visual impact was low due to the building’s location, subdued external finishes (dark brown or green cladding), and use for purposes incidental to the occupation of the main dwelling. The rationale supports the principle that domestic outbuildings for storage/garaging can be justified on land not designated for development, provided that scale, siting and use are appropriate.

| |
|---|

Both of these approvals lend weight to the proposition that the proposed garage extensions at Swallows Rest is consistent with prevailing planning practice. The current proposal is similar in scale to these examples, and more integrated with the host dwelling (being an extension rather than a standalone building). It is sited as close as possible to the existing dwelling, uses appropriate design and materials, and is clearly ancillary to residential use. The decisions confirm that such development, in non-designated countryside, can be supported where landscape and amenity impacts are negligible and the use is incidental to domestic enjoyment of the property.

These cases further reinforce that this proposal for Swallows Rest is both policycompliant and reasonable in planning terms.

![Architectural drawings showing elevations, a section, and a floor plan for a proposed single-storey garage extension.](https://images.planningportal.im/2025/06/6875926.jpg)

## 8. Conclusion

This proposal for a garage extension at Swallows Rest represents a measured and policy-aligned response to the site’s planning context. After two refusals for a large separate outbuilding, the applicant has significantly revised their plans in order to address the concerns of unnecessary and harmful development in the countryside. The current scheme’s key merits can be summarised as follows:

- • Reduced Scale and Impact: The extension is much reduced in size when compared with the previously refused building, and by attaching it to the existing garage it stays within the envelope of the home’s immediate area. This reduces its visual and spatial impact, maintaining the openness of the surrounding fields and vistas (consistent with Strategic Plan Environment Policy 1 on protecting countryside). The development will be virtually indistinguishable as a new element to anyone passing by, thereby preserving the rural amenity.
- • Policy Compliance: As an ancillary domestic extension, the proposal fits comfortably within the intent of planning policies for countryside development. It poses no threat to the integrity of policy safeguards - rather, it exemplifies how a property owner can improve their facilities in a responsible, policycompliant manner. Furthermore, the scheme actively demonstrates compliance with General Policy 2 through its high-quality design and respects the detailed criteria of the Residential Design Guide 2021 for extensions (subservient form, matching materials, etc.).
- • Considered Compromise: The applicant’s willingness to store some machinery off-site and to accept a smaller on-site building is a reasonable compromise that should be acknowledged in the planning balance. It reflects a genuine attempt to find a middle ground between the applicant’s needs and the policy stance aimed at protecting the landscape. The result is a proposal that achieves the functional requirements (secure parking and equipment storage) in a way that minimises planning harm. Such a good-faith response to previous feedback is the mark of a responsible developer and weighs in favour of approval.
- • Acceptable Use as Part of Planning Unit: The proposed use, which includes garaging personal vehicles and storing maintenance tools, is entirely ancillary to the primary residential function of the property. It is common practice for rural homeowners to have outbuildings for such purposes. The scale of the garage is appropriate for the applicant's household requirements and the size of the property. This development will not introduce any commercial or intensive activity. From a planning perspective, this use is fully compatible with the residential character of the site and does not constitute a material change of use or intensification that would be of concern.

In light of the above points, the proposal is in accordance with the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 (notably Environment Policies 1 and 15, and General Policies 2 and 3) and the applicable design guidance. There are no overriding objections on environmental, landscape or amenity grounds. All prior reasons for refusal have been thoughtfully addressed. The development is small in scale, sensitively designed, and logically sited - effectively balancing the applicant’s requirements with the need to protect the countryside.

Conclusion: Given the comprehensive alignment with planning policy and the negligible impact of the proposal, it is respectfully submitted that the application should be viewed favourably and approved. This garage extension is a well-justified improvement to Swallows Rest that upholds the principles of appropriate development in the rural area.

---

*Data sourced from the Isle of Man public planning register under the [Isle of Man Open Government Licence](https://www.gov.im/about-this-site/open-government-licence/).*
*Canonical page: https://planningportal.im/a/32910-st-marks-swallows-rest-gibdale-garage/documents/1070221*