Plans for the redevelopment of three sites in Peel have been met with a wave of objections from residents and interest groups.

The owners of Empire Garage have applied to demolish three of its sites and build shops, flats and terraced housing on Marine Parade, Cross Street and Stanley Road.

However, since the applications were submitted, there have been 65 submissions made by residents and interest groups, of which 60 have stated their outright objection to the proposed developments.

A further four didn’t state their position and one man actively supported the plans, provided changes were made to the parking plans.

The majority of the opposition centres on three themes: the plans are unsympathetic to the area; the plans don’t have enough parking; and the proposed buildings are taller than anything else in the area.

Most residents stated they are not opposed to the change, recognising the business is coming to an end, but they object to the buildings proposed.

One group of residents is represented by a joint objection issued by the Peel Residents Association which was created following a meeting in Peel last month.

The association lists the reasons for its objections including a lack of parking, health concerns over dust and exhaust emissions during demolition and construction, and it being a major change in a conservation era, amongst others.

The association also submits the results of a parking survey it said it has carried out in order ’to demonstrate there is nowhere for additional or new residents to park unless adequate provision is provided for allocated parking within the proposed sites’.

The applications, as submitted, do not meet current parking laws on new build properties.

Similar objections were made by the Peel Heritage Trust which also raised concerns over the impact on the buildings in a conservation area.

Objections have also come from Manx National Heritage which said some of the buildings are of ’potential heritage significance’ due to their association with Peel’s fishing past, of which the buildings are some of the few remaining examples.

According the MNH, the applications dismissing the sites as being of ’no historical importance’ is a ’significant error’.