33744

==== PAGE 1 ====

29 December 2014 14/01345/B Page 1 of 3 PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 14/01345/B Applicant : Mr Graham Leigh Kennaugh Proposal : Widening of driveway and vehicular access (retrospective) Site Address : 56 Summerhill Road Onchan Isle Of Man IM3 1NF

Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken : 17.12.2014 Site Visit : 17.12.2014 Expected Decision Level :

Planning Committee

Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE BECAUSE THE PURCHASER OF THE DWELLING IN QUESTION IS EMPLOYED WITHIN PLANNING AND BUILDING CONTROL IN THE DEPARTMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE

1.0 THE SITE AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

1.1 The application site is the southwesternmost of three attached dwellings lying southeast of the Summerhill Road highway in Onchan. It has a hipped roof and short, forward-projecting porch; both are finished in rosemary tiling, while the dwelling itself is finished in a roughcast render that is painted white.

1.2 To the south west, the dwelling has an attached, flat-roofed garage that continues the front building line of the dwelling. To the front is an area of hardstanding and garden area bounded from the highway by a stone wall with pillars.

1.3 This hardstanding has recently been extended in width; also increased in width is the highway access, which has been formed via the cutting back of the front wall to provide an access of 5.0m in width in place of the 2.5m previously in place. The stone pillar that was previously in situ has been re-placed at the end of the newly-widened highway access, although no drop kerb has been installed to match this. These works, which comprise alterations to the highway access, were done without planning approval; this retrospective application seeks to regularise these works.

1.4 Plans have been provided along with before and after photos, although the plans are not fully accurate to scale. However, the submitted photographs along with those plans, are sufficient on which to base an assessment of the application.

2.0 PLANNING HISTORY

2.1 The site has not been the subject of any planning applications considered material to the determination of the current application. There are also no recent applications for similar works in the immediate area.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY

==== PAGE 2 ====

29 December 2014 14/01345/B Page 2 of 3 3.1 The application site is within an area recognised as being predominantly residential use under the Onchan Local Plan. There are no policies within the Local Plan considered of direct relevance to the assessment of the current application.

3.2 General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan are clear that development of the kind proposed must satisfactorily address matters of highway safety and public amenity.

4.0 REPRESENTATIONS

4.1 Highway Services stated on 17th December 2014 that they did not oppose the application.

4.2 Onchan District Commissioners, in correspondence date-stamped as having been received 10th December 2014, recommend the application be approved.

5.0 ASSESSMENT

5.1 The application seeks retrospective planning approval for alterations that would extend the width of the existing driveway and also widen the access on to the highway. The main issues to consider in the assessment of the application are the impacts upon parking and highway safety, which is perhaps the key issue, and also the impact upon the character and appearance of the property and street scene in general. That the application is retrospective should be neither to its advantage nor disadvantage. However, for simplicity sake, the works proposed are referred to in the past tense.

5.2 The proposed development has allowed for additional parking and provides sufficient manoeuvring space within the curtilage of the property. While there is already a single garage, there is no presumption against providing more parking than would normally be expected for a residential dwelling (two). It is noted that Highway Services offer no objection to the proposal and it is therefore considered that the proposal would not result in adverse impacts upon parking and highway safety. Indeed, in many ways the works are likely to result in an improvement in highway safety inasmuch as the wider access also provides for easier vehicular access and therefore will probably result in less manoeuvring time on the public highway.

5.3 Turning to the issue of public amenity, it is to be noted that the site's stone wall frontage is a common and important characteristic along the Summerhill Road streetscene. Any significant reduction in this walling could therefore be harmful to the streetscene as a result, and careful attention would need to be paid to the retention of appropriate materials to any remodelling of walls along Summerhill Road, most of which exhibit similar (if not identical) heights, depths and stone colour, albeit that there is a variety of gates in place in the area.

5.4 However, it is not considered that the works undertaken could be considered harmful to the streetscene. The pillar has been retained in what appears to be its original form, and although the loss of 2.5m of walling is unfortunate, the fact that the form of the wall is retained, and also accepting the fact that there is limited uniformity in terms of highway accesses in the area, it is considered that the works are not so harmful as to warrant the application's refusal. The positive effect the works would have in terms of highway safety are also welcomed and balanced against this harm.

6.0 RECOMMENDATION

==== PAGE 3 ====

29 December 2014 14/01345/B Page 3 of 3 6.1 On the basis that a favourable conclusion has been reached in respect of the works overall, it is considered that an objection to the application could not be sustained. It is therefore recommended that approval be issued.

6.2 On the basis that the works have already been carried out, and that no further works are required to make the application acceptable in Planning terms, no conditions are recommended to be attached to the approval notice.

7.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

7.1 In line with Article 6(4) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure)(No2) Order 2013, the following Persons are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application: the applicant or, if there is one, the applicant's agent; the owner and occupier of the land the subject of the application; Highway Services, and the Local Authority in whose district the land the subject of the application sits.

Recommendation

Recommended Decision: Permitted

Date of Recommendation:

29.12.2014

Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal O : Notes attached to refusals

--

The approval hereby issued relates to the following plans and information, date-stamped as having been received 27th November 2014: GLK 1A, GLK 1B, GLK 1C, GLK 1D, GLK 1E, GLK 1F, GLK 2A and GLK 2B.

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 : Approved Committee Meeting Date :12.01.2015

Signed :... Edmund Riley Presenting Officer

Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason is required. Signing Officer to delete as appropriate

YES/NO