**Document:** Planning Officer Report
**Application:** 03/01453/B — Refurbishment of existing and erection of five additional garages on lock up garage site
**Decision:** Refused
**Decision Date:** 2003-12-19
**Parish:** German
**Document Type:** report / officer_report
**Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/74446-german-heathfield-yard-garages-refurbishment-addition/documents/1558728

---

# Planning Officer Report

## Application No: Page of ### Planning Report and Recommendations #### General Report **Site Visited** **YES/NO** 1. The only recder to Heathhead Yard, Patrick Street, Peel. 2. The yard is currently moved but there are garages along the edge of the yard. 3. Access is onto Patrick Street via a railway roadway between existing buildings. Heathhead has to be able to use it within the Peel Convention Area. 4. Zoning - Predominantly Residential - Peel Lock Plan. 5. Proposed - Reimbursement of existing and electrical. 6. 5 additional garages to use to determine capacity. 7. History - 08/25/2013 - 5 apartments + garages - Revised 17/7/2013. 8. 1/15/2011 - Change of use of yard to parking lotage depot. 9. 4/16/1985 - Use of premises to retail. 10. Building applies - approved at Appleton Street. This use may not have been taken up. #### Summary of Objections/Views - **Healthhead House** - Currently only redeposes all 'garages'. - **Pat (4)** - Restricted walkability onto Patrick St. - depot (Alderdale) onto West views. - **Tunisland** - Goodscotch - concerns about access + possible effects of paths. - **Recommendations** - Approve/Refuse. - **56 Patrick Street** - own adjacent building and roadway, Peel - dc. Signed: 82 Date: 11/12/2013 There is no existing one plan to show the number of existing gdogges and I doubt that there are 15 existing gdogges on the site. The minimum interval size of a single gdoge is 5m 3m 3m 2m 2m space according to Marx 200d:1. I although some are as follows as 2.5m 2m 2m 2m. Given the number of gdogges proposed and the fact that many vehicles will devote to fit inside them and others will have difficulties living in and out of the gdogges, the proposal is unacceptable. The department of transport's objection is justified in this instance. Given that the site has been used to commercial purposes or and it in recent years perhaps a received number may be acceptable with a more realistic layout. The lot would prefer access from what seems best I judge that this is unrealistic. ID 4.12.03 [Table omitted in markdown export] ## Continuation Sheet **APPLICATION No. 03/1943** Page of 1. By virtue of the number of degrees displayed and the recorded initials in available to vehicle sales immediately, unless entry to all, it is placed that the displayed development could be carried to the interests of load duty. 2. Notwithstanding the above, the relevant dimensions of the gadgets could be below the recognized standard size set out in Main Goods 1 and thus contain no impairment to use by all of the smaller models of vehicle. The impact on shown goods also preclude the side manoeuvring of vehicles into and out of the gadgets. Such gadget design and impact could hinder the intended use of the site as an off-road rolling facility. 15-203

---

*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/74446-german-heathfield-yard-garages-refurbishment-addition/documents/1558728*