14 March 2013 · Planning Committee
Sarahs Cottage, Ballaglass Glen Road, Cornaa, Ramsey, Isle Of Man, IM7 1eh
The proposal sought retrospective permission for a new 3.5m wide vehicular access set 2m back from the highway and a slate and stone front boundary wall varying in height from 0.9m to 1.5m due to topography, located within the residential curtilage of a two-storey replacement dwelling in a rural area near the A15 coast…
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 policies restricting countryside development, noting no provision under General Policy 3 (GP3) for walling in unzoned areas and a presumption against built st…
General Policy 3
Requires development only in zoned areas except specific exceptions like rural dwelling replacement; no provision for boundary walling. Officer assessed wall as not fitting exceptions in established curtilage but still harmful due to scale and locality.
Environment Policy 1
Protects countryside outside settlements unless overriding national need; site in undesignated countryside. Proposal failed as wall harmed ecology and countryside for its own sake, with no acceptable alternative.
Environment Policy 2
Prioritises landscape character protection in Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value (AHLV); site on periphery. Wall harmed character despite residential context, unlike smaller local precedents, especially towards Ballaglass Glen.
Highways Division objects to the retrospective application due to inadequate wall heights obstructing visibility splays; Maughold Parish Commissioners express concerns over retrospective nature and loss of traditional hedgerow but defer to Highways.
Key concern: wall height within visibility splay obstructs driver's vision
Highways Division
Objectionif the height of the wall within the visibility splay obstructs the drivers vision, then all walls, within the splay, and above 1 metre in height will have to be reduced; from where I positioned my vehicle, the walls caused an obstruction; the client needs to demonstrate that the walls do not cause any visibility issues along the whole length of the approved splays (I believe this may be 36-23 metres); if any of the wall is above 1 metre within the visibility splay, then the application should be refused; Any wall/vegetation which is within the visibility splay needs to be below 1 metre in height, if it is not set back 2 metres from the edge of the carriageway
Maughold Parish Commissioners
No Commentrequest that all future development is approved prior to initiation; more traditional Manx Hedge removed than the 2004 plans indicated. This is regrettable; The view of Highways on whether the visibility splays have been installed as per the 2004 approval, and whether the current splays are adequate in terms of road safety must also be considered
Conditions requested: all future development approved prior to initiation
Maughold Parish Commissioners
No Commentreserve comment on this retrospective application and defer consideration to the Highways Authority and the Planning Committee
The original application 12/01316/B for creation of new vehicular access and erection of front wall (retrospective) at Sarah's Cottage, Ballasloe Cornaa, Ramsey, Isle of Man IM7 1EH was refused. Mr & Mrs Timothy Rand, represented by agent Chris Penketh of Penketh-Millar Ltd, lodged an appeal on 4th March 2013, rejecting written procedure and implying preference for a hearing or inquiry. Notification letters were issued on 4th April 2013 informing parties including Maughold Commissioners of the appeal process under the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005. The appeal was withdrawn by the applicants, as notified on 2nd August 2013, causing the original refusal decision to stand. No inspector's analysis or decision was produced due to the withdrawal.
Precedent Value
This appeal sets no precedent due to withdrawal before any hearing or decision. Future applicants should ensure commitment to pursuing appeals fully, as withdrawal reinstates the original refusal without resolution.
