**Document:** Planning Officer Report
**Application:** 11/01136/B — Part conversion of garage and extension to rear elevation to provide additional living accommodation
**Decision:** Refused
**Decision Date:** 2011-10-18
**Parish:** Malew
**Document Type:** report / officer_report
**Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/1472-malew-northcroft-conversion-extension/documents/1253960

---

# Planning Officer Report

## Planning Report And Recommendations [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Considerations [Table omitted in markdown export] ### Written Representations None received at time of drafting report ### Consultations [Table omitted in markdown export] [Table omitted in markdown export] [Table omitted in markdown export]

### Officer's Report

1. This application is recommended for consideration by the Planning Committee rather than under delegated powers, as the application is recommended for approval contrary to the views of the Department of Infrastructure's Highways Division.

### The Site

2. The application site represents the curtilage of an existing detached dwelling, 2 Northcroft, Malew Street, Castletown. The site is located on the eastern side of Malew Street, near to its junction with Alexandra Road.

3. The dwelling is a modern two storey house with additional living accommodation in the roofspace. The dwelling faces south into a small cul de sac, so the frontage to Malew Street is the western side elevation. A single storey garage extension is attached to the eastern side elevation of the house.

## The Proposal

4. Proposed are the partial conversion of the existing garage and the erection of a single storey extension to provide additional living accommodation.

5. It is proposed to convert the rear portion of the existing garage into living accommodation and retain the front portion for storage. The garage door to the front would be retained, but an existing window to the rear elevation would be replaced with French doors.

6. The proposed single storey extension would be located to the rear of the dwelling. Due to its position, it would also project out from the western side elevation. The extension would measure 5.2 metres wide by 4.7 metres deep and it would project out from the side elevation of the main house by 1.75 metres. The extension would have a pitched roof over, which would be at a right angle to the roof of the main house and the garage. The height of the extension would be 2.9 metres to the eaves level and 3.8 metres to the top of the roof.

7. The extension would incorporate a new kitchen. There would be four roof lights over and aluminium doors on the eastern elevation facing into the garden.

8. The extension would be rendered and painted to match the existing and the concrete roof tiles would also match the existing.

## Planning History

9. The following previous planning application is considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application:

02/00708/B – Approved at Appeal 01.08.03 Residential development comprising 23 apartments, 2 houses and alterations to existing house. Northcroft, Alexandra Road, Castletown.

10. In addition to this, the following current planning application is considered to be relevant:

11/01137/B – Pending Consideration

Erection of a first floor extension over existing garage

## Development Plan Policies

11. The application site is located within an area designated as Predominantly Residential Use on the Castletown Local Plan Order 1990. The site is not located within the Castletown Conservation Area.

12. On the Modified Draft Area Plan for the South 2011 (Map no. 5), the site is located within an area designated as Predominantly Residential Use.

13. The relevant planning policy from the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 is General Policy 2. Paragraph 8.12.1 for extensions to dwellings in built up residential areas is also appropriate.

14. General Policy 2 states:

"Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:

- (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief;

- (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them;

- (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea; (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks;

- (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality;
- (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space;
- (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways;
- (j) can be provided with all necessary services;
- (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan;
- (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding;
- (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and
- (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."

15. Paragraph 8.12.1 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."

CONSULTATIONS
16. The Department of Infrastructure Highways Division recommend that the planning application is refused. They state that the property currently has one standard parking space within the garage and one sub-standard parking space on the drive, as the drive only measures 4.5 metres. By converting the garage, two sub-standard parking spaces would be created.
17. The Drainage Division of the Isle of Man Water and Sewerage Authority do not object to the proposal, subject to the condition that no surface water is discharged to any foul drainage system, so as to comply with their requirements and the Sewerage Act 1999.

REPRESENTATIONS
18. No written responses have been received from the general public.

ASSESSMENT
19. The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are the impact on neighbouring properties, the impact on the surrounding area in general and highway matters.

Impact on neighbouring properties:
20. The proposed rear extension would be positioned closer to the adjacent property to the north than the existing house is. The adjacent property to the north is shown on the submitted plans as no. 1 Northcroft. The boundary between the two dwellings is formed by a solid rendered wall, which is shown on the submitted plans as being approximately 300mm thick. From viewing the plans, the distance between the north side of proposed extension and the south side of the shared boundary wall is approximately 1 metre. There is also a distance of 1 metre between the proposed extension and the inside of the boundary wall to Malew Street.
21. The proposed extension would be positioned alongside the driveway and in front of the garage of the adjacent property. It would be single storey in height with no windows facing towards the adjacent property. Therefore, due to the position, size and design of the proposed extension, there are judged to be no adverse affects on neighbouring properties in terms of being overbearing, loss of light or overlooking.

Impact on the surrounding area in general:
22. Due to its position, the proposed extension would be publicly visible when viewed from Malew Street. The extension would project forward of the main dwelling towards the street by 1.75 metres.

23. The size of the proposed extension would result in it being clearly subordinate to the main house. Although the extension would project further forward towards the highway, it is judged that it would not detract from the overall appearance of the dwelling. The roof of the extension would have a lower pitch than the existing roofs of the main house or garage, but due to the roof of the extension being positioned at a right angle to the existing roofs, it is considered to be acceptable.

Highway matters:

24. The proposal would result in the loss of the existing parking within the existing garage. Appendix 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 requires dwellings to have two off-street parking spaces. If this proposal was to result in less than two parking spaces remaining, then it would be judged as contrary to General Policy 2, part h.

25. The plan of the existing garage shows an internal floor space of 5 metres wide by 5.75 metres long. If a parking space is accepted as 2.4 metres by 4.8 metres, then it is considered that the existing garage is just about large enough for two cars to be parked side by side. However, it more likely that only one car would be parked inside the garage, due to manoeuvrability.

26. The plan of the existing driveway in front of the garage shows an area of approximately 6 metres wide by 4.4 metres long. It is considered that although this area is wide enough for two cars to be parked side by side, because its length is shorter than 4.8 metres, it is possible that the driveway would not be considered acceptable for a new dwelling today.

27. During my site visit on 02.09.11 there was a single car parked on the driveway. I noticed that there was sufficient room for this car to be parked, leaving room for an additional vehicle to the side and without encroaching onto the public highway.

28. The Highways Division have stated that this proposal would create two substandard parking spaces on the driveway, but this parking area would continue to be used as it was originally designed and accepted by the Planning Authority. The existing parking in front of the garage cannot be increased forward in length, as this would result in an encroachment onto the public highway.

29. The driveway already exists and under the original plans for the house (PA 02/00708/B) it was intended to provide parking for two vehicles in front of the garage. Although the size of the driveway is smaller than what would now be allowed, because it was originally accepted by the Planning Authority I do not feel that there are sufficient grounds to support the refusal of this planning application. In addition to this, the existing garage could be used for residential purposes without the need for planning permission. Only the external alteration to the window opening on the rear of the garage requires approval.

RECOMMENDATION

30. For the above reasons, this proposal is considered to be acceptable and is recommended for approval.

## PARTY STATUS

31. It is considered that the following parties should be afforded interested party status:
- Castletown Town Commissioners.

32. It is considered that the following parties, who submitted comments, should not be afforded interested party status:
- The Drainage Division of the Isle of Man Water and Sewerage Authority.
- The Department of Transport Highways Division is now part of the Department of Infrastructure of which the planning authority is part. As such, the Highways and Traffic Division cannot be afforded party status in this instance.

Recommendation

## Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal

C : Conditions for approval
N : Notes attached to conditions
R : Reasons for refusal
- : Notes attached to refusals

C 1. The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.

C 2. This approval relates to part conversion of garage and extension to rear elevation to provide additional living accommodation; as shown in the 1:1250 Location Plan, in addition to drawing numbers AT 1117.1 and AT 1117.2, date stamped 12 August 2011.

I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the Town and Country (Development Procedure) 2005

Decision Made : Refuse Committee Meeting Date : 13/10/11

Signed : Craig Presenting Officer

Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason is required. Signing Officer to delete as appropriate ☑ YES / ☐ NO

---

*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/1472-malew-northcroft-conversion-extension/documents/1253960*