171399

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      19/01100/B                                     Page  1  of  4

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 19/01100/B Applicant : Mrs Pamela Maitland Proposal : Removal of wall to widen existing vehicular access Site Address : Sunset View Peveril Road Peel Isle Of Man IM5 1PW

Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken : 22.10.2019 Site Visit : 22.10.2019 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 02.12.2019 __

Conditions and Notes for Approval

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

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.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This approval relates to the Location Plan, Photographs and proposal description date stamped and received 26 September 2019. __

Interested Person Status - Additional Persons

None __

Officer’s Report

THE SITE 1.1 The site is the curtilage of an existing semi-detached dwelling which fronts onto the A4 (Peveril Road). The vehicular access to the property is located at the right section of the dwellings frontage; directly in front of the existing attached garage. The driveway is situated about 16m off Ballaquane Road which links the A4 to Derby Road. The vehicular access is

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      19/01100/B                                     Page  2  of  4

currently formed by a gap in the otherwise established stone wall which is about 1m high, with two piers with caps situated either side of the vehicular access.

THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The proposal seeks planning approval to demolish portion of existing wall and relocate gate post to make good where wall has been removed. Other components of the work will involve dropping drop kerb unto road for equivalent length. This would improve visibility whilst entering the highway from the drive and increase off road parking to three cars. The wall to be removed will measure about 6.2m.

2.2 It is estimated that around 6 tons of stone would be removed by the proposal and recycled.

Planning Policy 3.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is located within an area identified as 'Residential' on the Peel Local Plan 1989 and the site is not situated within a Conservation area. As such, the development is expected to comply with the following Strategic Plan policies:

3.1.1 General Policy 2: "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; i) Does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways."

3.2 Section 6.1 of the RDG 2019 on Boundary Treatments will also serve as a guide in the assessment of the application

3.2.1 Paragraph 6.1.1 Boundary treatments, whether traditional or modern, contribute a great deal to the streetscape and character of an area. They define areas of private space and often make a positive contribution to the setting of the building. Poorly designed boundary treatments can undermine the quality of the built environment. Where new or altered boundary treatments are proposed, care should be taken to ensure that the proposed materials and detailing take a lead from the surroundings.

6.1.2 The suitability of the boundary treatment to the front of a property or facing the road should take account of the context of the area. For open plan estates it is normally better for there to be no walls or fences, with gardens being delineated through their use of low level plants. For more urban areas there may be a predominance of low garden walls with railings above. In rural areas, sod banks or hedging is more likely to be appropriate, unless there are stone walls present.

6.1.3 Unless circumstances dictate otherwise, generally no walls or fences should be higher than 1m where they face a highway. Boundary features to the side and rear boundaries can generally be higher (2m) without causing concerns. However, there are circumstances where there is a need for lower boundary heights in particular on corner plots, or if there is a public highway to the side and/or rear of the site.

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      19/01100/B                                     Page  3  of  4

6.1.5 Overall, removal or substantial alteration of historic boundary treatments is unlikely to be acceptable. Boundary treatments should be designed in materials and details that respect the surrounding streetscape or area and boundary treatments should not be oppressive and should allow the building within the site to remain engaged with the wider streetscape.

PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The application site has been the subject of two previous planning applications, one of which is considered to be materially relevant to the current application.

4.2 PA 03/00073/B for the erection of Garage and first floor extension to replace existing attached garage to side of dwelling - APPROVED

REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.

5.1 Representation from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division confirms that they 'Do not oppose' in a letter dated 4 November 2019. They have however stated that a section 109A Application be attached for the lowering of the kerb.

5.2 Peel Town Commissioners have stated that they 'Do not oppose' the application in a letter dated 28 November 2019.

ASSESSMENT 6.1 The application proposes the demolition of about 6m of existing Manx stone wall and the widening of the existing access. The application form indicates that the proposal is to help facilitate improved visibility from the existing access which is currently restricted in both directions.

6.2 This section of Peveril road is bound along both sides by long stretches of Manx stone walling and sod hedging both which positively contribute to the character of the Island. Along the same side of the road as this property are a number of neighbours, each which have a range of widths providing vehicle access or off road parking for their properties. The stretch of highway directly adjacent to these houses is not controlled by any parking or yellow line restrictions meaning that additional vehicles can park either side of the existing access without being controlled.

6.3 It is, however, worth noting that the key challenge with the existing access is the challenge with visibility which poses a threat to highway safety, as the property already has two parking spaces which are sufficient for the residents. The application has demonstrated through the supporting photos that visibility is currently poor when existing the dwelling, especially with the on-street parking common on both sides of the dwelling's access. During a site visit it was clearly evident that visibility from the existing access was poor due to the nature of the existing wall which restricts views to the highway, the narrowness of the existing driveway, the prevailing on-street parking conditions, as well as the proximity of the access to the junction between the A4 and Ballaquane Road.

6.4 Given that this stone wall positively contributes to the overall character of the area, any removal here needs to be balanced against the expected gain in the overall highway safety improvement to the site and the surrounding area. However, it is noted that the removal of the wall would allow scope for vehicles egressing the site with improved visibility over to the adjacent side of the road and for a longer distance. The widening of the access is also likely to reduce the need for on street parking; the removal of vehicles from the road is also likely to help improve visibility in each direction and helping to reduce levels of traffic congestion along the highway; which is a common feature during peak periods.

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      19/01100/B                                     Page  4  of  4

CONCLUSION 7.1 The proposed works will improve highway safety and will not have any adverse environmental impact and as such, the application is supported.

INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested; (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

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 in Article 6(4) who should be given Interested Person Status.

8.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot 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 : Permitted

Date: 03.12.2019

Determining officer

Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett

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.