Loading document...
Application No.: 16/00498/B Applicant: Mr Illiam Christian Proposal: Alterations to vehicular access Site Address: Ballerghy Lhergy Cripperty Union Mills Isle Of Man IM4 2AH Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken: 15.06.2016 Site Visit: 15.06.2016 Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee
THIS APPLICATON IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE OWING TO THE NATURE OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED.
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The site is the land associated with Ballerghy Farmhouse along with the single vehicle width lane access onto the Lhergy Cripperty, albeit that the access widens out considerably in its final few metres before the junction with the highway. The access and access lane is defined in red and the remaining land being defined in blue. With the site is a small group of buildings - the farmhouse and a large barn to the rear and other, smaller stone outbuildings, but the focus of this application is on the highway access to the site, located roughly 700m east of the farm buildings, and where a number of trees are located.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the widening of the existing access. The access at its absolutely widest point is 40m in width; this would not change under the proposal. However, what would change is that the wall running along the Lhergy Cripperty in a southwestern direction would be brought back roughly 2m from the highway relative to its current position, and then for roughly 50m of length would be re-built at an ever-decreasing distance from the highway before reaching its current position. - 2.2 The wall would, in elevation form, be formed of Manx stone and to a height of 1.9m at its highest to 1.2m at its lowest along the highway, albeit there is significant variation between these heights in that 50m stretch as the highway itself undulates fairly significantly. Much of the existing wall is either incomplete or covered in partial banking. - 2.3 Also proposed is the slight relocation of the existing bank in the northeastern direction from
2.4 As part of the proposal, two elm trees and one ash tree would need to be removed in order to make way for the re-positioned wall. The applicant proposes five new ash trees, again at the corner of the junction, in replacement.
3.1 The application site has been the subject of a number of previous applications, and although none of these is considered especially material to the assessment of this application it is worth noting them because a number are recent:
"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:
4.2 It is perhaps worth noting the wording of Environment Policy 2: "The present system of landscape classification of Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV's) as shown on the 1982 Development Plan and subsequent Local and Area Plans will be used as a basis for development control until such time as it is superseded by a landscape classification which will introduce different categories of landscape and policies and guidance for control therein. Within these areas the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration unless it can be shown that:
5.2 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services sought a deferral of the application because the applicant had not defined what the newly widened highway would be laid with. These comments, received 16.05.2016, indicated that the applicant had been contacted to that end but no clarification on this point has been received from the applicant. A telephone conversation with Highway Services following this identified that they viewed the proposal as being likely to result in a highway improvement, confirming as follows in a pair of emails, both received 29.06.2016:
"I have reviewed the proposed remedial works in light of Andrew's comments. Given the carriageway width and location the minor road distance of 2.4m is appropriate. The 85th percentile speed for this section of road are between 34-36mph. The required major road visibility to the right and left should be 90m to minimise risk to highway users. As an existing access, an improvement to 54m would provide the desirable shortest stopping distance for vehicles travelling up to 40mph, As the proposed 70m major road visibility splays falls within between 54m and 90m distances this will result in a reduced risk to highway users and takes into account the ownership and landscape constraints. Given the horizontal and vertical road geometry, the walls either side of the access need to be either reduced to 1m in height or re-aligned. This will unfortunately require the trees be removed."
"An improvement in visibility splay to 70m would reduce the probability of a collision happening and reduce the likely severity of the collision should one occur, the risk category of the access would change from medium to low. The Department supports the application as the applicant is trying to actively manage his and other road user risk at this junction."
5.3 Marown Parish Commissioners indicate that they have no objection (20.05.2016). - 6.0 ASSESSMENT
6.1 As can often be the case in circumstances such as this, a balance has to be struck between the visual impact of the proposal and the defined highway benefit that would result. General Policy
6.2 Proposals to improve highway safety will generally be supported. Proposals to remove trees that positively contribute to the streetscene or countryside will generally be resisted. In this case, then, the balance has to be made between the quality of the trees to be lost and the impact their loss would have on the streetscene, against the defined highway safety improvements that might be said to result.
6.3 The Forester is of the view that a case can be made for the removal of the ash tree. The highway engineer is of the view that there would be a notable improvement in highway safety terms arising from the proposal.
6.4 There is no dispute that the existing access is poor, with visibility to the southwest in particular especially so. The highway can be subject to cars travelling at high speed irrespective of the speed limit and narrowness of the road, and this must make exiting onto the highway troublesome for residents. However, it is to be noted that much of the visibility issue arises from the undulation of the highway and its bend, and there is an argument that simply moving the wall / bank back a couple of metres would not provide a great deal of extra visibility simply because the topography of the area would not allow this. However, Highway Services are of the view that the proposal would result in demonstrable benefit from a safety point of view even having regard to this. - 6.5 The loss of the trees is unfortunate. The Forester raises concern with the proposal but in terms of the trees themselves (or, rather, one specific tree) rather than the benefit those trees offer to the wider streetscene. The Lhergy Cripperty highway is characterised by sporadic pockets of
7.1 The proposal represents a difficult balance. In coming to a view on that balance, regard has been had to the professional views of those most keenly involved with such proposals, and while the conclusions pull in different directions to some degree, it is concluded that it would probably be difficult to sustain an objection in an appeal situation. The highway safety improvement would not be 'significant' as requested by the Forester, but equally that improvement is a quantifiable one. The main issue arises from the fact that the scheme would result in the loss of an isolated group of trees. However, the retention of some of the trees is such that the character of the streetscene would be eroded rather than lost and, accordingly, it is considered that a recommendation to approve is the most logical in the circumstances. Such a recommendation finds support in the relevant parts of General Policy 2, while there is nothing in Environment Policy 1 or 2 (particularly part (b) of the latter) that would require a materially different conclusion to be reached. - 8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS
8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
With effect from 1 June 2015, the Transfer of Planning & Building Control Functions Order 2015 amends the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 to give effect to the meaning of the word 'Department' to be the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture unless otherwise directed by that Order.
9.1 Members noted that the plan referred to in the recommended Condition 2 carried a date in the future, and requested this be corrected.
Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 10.08.2016 Conditions and Notes for Approval: C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
Reason: To comply with article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
The development hereby approved relates to Drawings 001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 006 and 007, and also the untitled drawing showing the visibility splay carrying the date 16/10/2016 and a scale of 1:1000, all date-stamped as having been received 3rd May 2016.
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.
Decision Made : …Permitted.. Committee Meeting Date:…22.08.2016
Signed :………E RILEY………….. Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO only to correct the plan date reference in condition 2 as recommended
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown