A bid to convert part of a domestic garage into a residential apartment has been blocked by council development bosses over design, privacy and parking concerns.
Sunderland City Council’s planning department has refused an application for a property at Tunstall Village Green in the city’s Doxford ward.
A planning application lodged with the local authority earlier this year (2025) sought permission to change the first floor of a detached garage used as storage space, into a one-bedroom, self-contained apartment.
Council planning documents said the proposals would have included an “open-plan living room and kitchen/diner, storage cupboard, a bedroom and a bathroom/ensuite”, as well as rooflights installed into the roof space.
During a council consultation exercise on the plans, there were no objections from neighbours.
However, Sunderland City Council’s planning department flagged several issues with the proposed development and refused the application on 30 July, 2025.
Council planners, in a decision report, listed three main reasons for refusal.
This included the proposal offering “very poor residential accommodation as it would not meet National Described Space Standards and would not provide occupiers with acceptable outlook”.
Image: Freepik
It was noted that the proposed development would “not acceptably co-exist with the donor property” at Tunstall Village Green due to “additional noise and disturbance and harm to its privacy”.
Council planners also said the applicant had failed to “satisfactorily demonstrate acceptable parking and access arrangements for the new accommodation and the existing dwelling.”
The council decision report said a request was made to the applicant’s agent to “clarify whether the apartment will be ancillary to the existing dwelling or whether it will be rented out as a holiday let or residential dwelling”, but that this information, and other requested information, had “not been submitted to the local planning authority for review”.
As a result, the council’s planning department determined the plans “based on the information submitted with the planning application”.
It was also noted that “fire safety concerns raised by (council) environmental health (officers) have not been addressed and again, it cannot be concluded that the proposal would provide safe accommodation for occupiers”.
The council decision report added: “It is considered that the proposal would deliver unacceptable living conditions for the occupier of the self-contained apartment, as the roof void would provide very limited space, there would be very limited outlook and there does not appear to be any external amenity space available for residents.
“It is considered that the proposal would not be able to co-exist with the neighbouring property and would harm its living conditions.
“The agent has not satisfactorily demonstrated that parking and access arrangements would be acceptable.”
The applicant has the right to challenge the council’s refusal ruling by lodging an appeal with the Secretary of State.
For more information on the plan, or council decision, visit Sunderland City Council’s planning portal website and search reference: 25/00077/FUL
