2 October 2020 · Delegated - Head of Development Management (Stephen Butler)
7, Laureston Grove, Douglas, Isle Of Man, IM2 4bg
The application proposed converting the paved front yard of a two-storey mid-terrace dwelling into a driveway for two parking spaces, involving removal of the low brick boundary wall, creation of a dropped kerb, and rearrangement of flowerbeds.
Click a button above to find applications similar to this one.
See how this application compares to similar ones — policies, conditions, and outcomes side by side.
The officer assessed the proposal against General Policy 2 (GP2) of the Strategic Plan and Residential Design Guide (RDG), finding it unacceptable principally because it would result in over 50% loss …
General Policy 2
GP2 permits development respecting site/surroundings in siting/layout/scale/design/landscaping (b), not adversely affecting townscape character (c), not harming local residents' amenity or locality character (g), and providing safe/convenient access/adequate parking (h). The officer found failures in (b), (c), (g), and (h) due to boundary wall removal blurring public-private transition, over 50% garden loss, primary window outlook loss from parked cars, and precedent pedestrian risks.
Residential Design Guide Section 6
RDG 6 covers boundary treatment, driveways, and front gardens, requiring new treatments to match surroundings, minimum driveway space, retention of planting, and no support for >50% front garden loss to avoid car-dominated frontages harming streetscene/outlook. Proposal failed due to wall removal without matching ends, >50% landscaped loss (even on paved yard), and hardstanding directly before primary window.
Residential Design Guide 2019 Section 6.3.4
Specifies proposals unlikely supported if losing >50% front garden, without minimum space, planting to soften impact, matching boundary features, separate pedestrian access, or grass/gravel strips; parking not directly before primary windows to avoid outlook loss. Failed on garden loss percentage, parking before primary window, and inadequate boundary/landscaping mitigation.
No objection but request section 109A if approved. Dimensions adequate for two spaces, meets parking standards, no significant road safety issues, improvement to highway efficiency from removing on-street parking.
Highway Services raised no objection subject to conditions, while Douglas Borough Council objected due to non-compliance with strategic plan policies and residential design guidance on loss of front garden and impact on amenity.
Key concern: non-compliance with Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and Residential Design Guidance 2019 regarding loss of front garden and impact on streetscape character
Highway Services Division
Conditional No ObjectionThe proposal is acceptable in highway terms on removal of the boundary wall and creation of a dropped crossing over the footway to connect to the public road for which a separate s109(A) Highway Agreement is necessary.; Accordingly, Highway Services raises no opposition subject to conditions for the proposal to accord with Drawing no’s: 1 and 3A. An advisory for a s109(A) Highway Agreement should apply too.; Recommendation: DNOC
Conditions requested: proposal to accord with Drawing no’s: 1 and 3A; s109(A) Highway Agreement; Surface water should drain into the site; hardstanding be formed of a consolidated and bound material
Douglas Borough Council
ObjectionDouglas Borough Council has resolved to raise an objection to the application; The Council does not believe the proposal respects the site and surrounding neighbourhood and that the proposed development will have an adverse effect on the character of the locality.; Given the above reasons Douglas Borough Council has resolved to object to the application.
Thie Vargr (resident at 6 Laureston Grove)
ObjectionI object to planning application 20/000876/B for the aforementioned reasons.; Should the application be approved, I would be faced with the side of a large ugly SUV vehicle sat a metre or so higher than my own garden and a little over a metre from my living room window.; Sight line - I would argue rather firmly that the line from number 7 towards Thie Ain and Ivydene is incorrect.
