118254

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      20/00092/B                                     Page  1  of  5

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 20/00092/B Applicant : Sam Burrows Proposal : Widening of vehicle access to create additional off road parking Site Address : 14 Marathon Avenue Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 4HZ

Planning Officer: Mrs Vanessa Porter Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Refused Date of Recommendation: 08.04.2020 __

Reasons for Refusal

R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons

R 1. The removal of the boundary walling with the proposed additional parking space would have a harmful effect on the appearance of the property and would therefore be contrary to General Policy 2 b & c. The proposed additional parking space would also create a Highway Safety issue and whilst the proposal would create additional off street parking spaces, the property already has two parking spaces which meets the Department's requirements.

__

Interested Person Status - Additional Persons

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):

25 Marathon Avenue as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (July 2018). __

Officer’s Report

THE APPLICATION SITE

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      20/00092/B                                     Page  2  of  5

1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 14 Marathon Avenue, Douglas which is a two storey semi-detached property with attached garage situated on a corner plot to the north of the Marathon Avenue cul-de-sac.

1.2 The existing access is 2.7m wide and the hardstanding slightly bigger at 3.1m wide, the existing driveway provides one car parking space and the garage could provide one smaller space, two in total.

1.3 There are a number of properties on Marathon Avenue which have off street parking, of which it is mainly the properties to the inner side of the cul-de-sac. The properties to the outer side and specifically directly opposite the property in question do not have any off street parking.

1.4 Running around the dwelling and to the front of each of the neighbouring properties along Marathon Avenue is a brick boundary wall, pillared around accesses and providing with decorative dentils. The application site itself has a large garden to the side and a garden to the rear/front with vegetation between the property and the small boundary wall. There is a large tree situated to the west of the site which would be in the line of sight for the proposed parking area.

THE PROPOSAL

2.1 The current planning application seeks approval for the creation of a second vehicular access on the site to the westerns side adjacent to the already existing parking. The proposed parking space will be 5 metres by 3.685 metres and will be aided by the removal of approx.. 4 metres of the boundary wall to the front. Within the garden area additional hardstanding will be added increasing the overall driveway to 6.7m wide x 6m length.

PLANNING HISTORY

3.1 There are no previous planning applications identified on this site.

PLANNING POLICY

4.1 The site lies within an area zoned as Predominantly Residential on the Douglas Local Plan 1998, Map 2.

4.2 Of specific relevance to the assessment of this application is General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 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: (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; (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 and (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways".

4.3 Whilst the property is outside of a Conservation Area the property is close to the Olympia Conservation Area as such Environment Policy 36 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 is relevant and states; "Where development is proposed outside of, but close to, the boundary of a Conservation Area, this will only be permitted where it will not detrimentally affect important views into and out of the Conservation Area."

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      20/00092/B                                     Page  3  of  5

REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Douglas Corporation have considered the proposal and have no objection (24.02.20).

5.2 Highway Services have opposed the objection (05.03.20) and state the following, "The existing access is located approximately 6.5m away from the right angled bend on Marathon Avenue where there is limited visibility as it stands.

Widening the access towards the bend will reduce the visibility further exacerbating an already unacceptable situation resulting in a vehicle pulling out onto Marathon Avenue with very little visibility.

This is considered to be a road safety concern making the existing situation worse and therefore, refusal is recommended.

5.3 A representative of the owners of No 25 Marathon Avenue has written in to object against the proposal (04.03.20) - the proposal will result in the loss of an on street car parking space in a residential area which is already congested. The objection is based on the Residential Design Guides which states that proposals which do not result in a net benefit are unlikely to be supported. The representative of No.25 was a former resident in the area and has personal experience in the lack of parking in this area. The majority of properties in Marathon Avenue particularly No's 23-31 do not have off street parking, and parking is frequently not immediately available.

ASSESSMENT

6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of the planning application are the potential impacts of the proposal on the character and appearance of 14 Marathon Avenue and Highway Safety.

6.2 Character and Appearance

6.2.1 The Department has recently published the Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) which addresses the visual amenity of the additional car parking space stating "Proposals which result in the loss of more than 50% of the existing front lawned/landscape garden will not normally be supported, to ensure the character of the street scape is retained and avoid frontages of properties appearing as one large car parking area, detrimental to the appearance of the street scene and to the outlook of residents."

6.2.2 When looking at 14 Marathon Avenue, the property benefits from having a garden to the front and the side elevation thereby the widening of the existing drive will not create a loss of more than 50% of the existing garden.

6.2.3 As noted in section 1, there is a brick boundary wall which runs around the boundary of the properties along Marathon Avenue which has decorative details, when looking at the application it does state that the removal of the wall will be to the next wall increase but there is no mention of whether a pillar is proposed which can be seen at other accesses into the property.

6.2.4 14 Marathon Avenue is one of the properties along the cul-de-sac with the most of the decorative walling due to the corner plot position it takes up. The removal of the wall would be noticeable and has the potential to look misplaced within the cul-de-sac especially with the potential of not keeping to the overall streetscene. This will be especially apparent with regards to how much walling will be removed from the front boundary.

6.3 Highway Safety

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      20/00092/B                                     Page  4  of  5

6.3.1 The Department has recently published the Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) which addresses Highway Safety and in particular the movement of people, "Consideration needs to be given to the movement of people and vehicles entering and leaving the driveway/access. The following advice should be considered: o To allow good visibility splays for cars leaving the driveway, vegetation or other features such as gates, pillars and walls should not be over 1m high within the required visibility splay (see Manual for Manx Roads to determine required visibility splay); and o Cars should not overhand the pavement, should not block the entrance to the dwelling and a clear pathway should be provided at the entrance to the dwelling.

6.3.2 Highway safety is not something which can be taken lightly wherever the parking is going to be. The main issue raised by Highway Services is that the increasing of the existing drive will create an even worse visibility splay than is currently available with the space being just over a metre from the right hand corner which could cause suitable highway issues.

6.3.3 When also looking at the Residential Design Guidance 2019 it states "6.3.3 It should be acknowledged that car parking in front gardens does not necessarily increase the overall amount of car parking capacity within the area. The creation of an off-street space normally required the provision of a new access, which can result in the loss of at least one on-street parking space. Proposals which do not result in a net benefit are unlikely to be supported."

6.3.4 14 Marathon Avenue has the required parking standards from the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 which are "2 spaces per unit, if not within curtilage then located as close to units as possible without compromising residential amenity." Whilst it is noted that the parking is in tandem and one would be situated within the existing garage, the property does meet the requirements.

6.3.5 25 Marathon Avenue has raised an objection stating that the creation of the additional space would not create a net benefit due to the additional space removing on-street parking. Due to the properties on the outer side of Marathon Avenue not having off-street parking the cul-de-sac does have a lot of parking on street. The applicants state in their application form that they wish to extend the existing parking to remove on-street parking.

6.3.6 It should be noted that parking directly outside the property on the area where the space is proposed could create an additional Highway safety issue, with the proposed parking space also creating a Highway issue, potentially worse that there would be no net benefit for the wider streetscene.

CONCLUSION

7.1 For the above reasons the proposal is considered not to comply with GP2(b and c) with regards to the removal of the walling having a harmful effect on the appearance of the property in the streetscene and under GP2(i) under Highway Safety and is therefore recommended refusal.

INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;

==== PAGE 5 ====

                                      20/00092/B                                     Page  5  of  5

(e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

8.2 The decision maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status __

I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.

Decision Made : Refused Date: 27.04.2020

Determining officer Signed : C BALMER

Chris Balmer

Principal Planner

Customer note

This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.