Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
21/00432/B Page 1 of 4
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 21/00432/B Applicant : Mr Christopher Williams-Jones Proposal : Replacement of front porch and, creation of garden wall and widening of vehicular access. Site Address : Davenport Queens Road Port St. Mary Isle Of Man IM9 5EU
Principal Planner: Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken : 14.05.2021 Site Visit : 14.05.2021 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 17.05.2021 __
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 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. It is considered that the proposal satisfies Environment Policy 36 and General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to drawings 1909-12 and 1909-13 __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
DoI's Flood Risk Management Division is a Government Department which has raised material considerations and as such should be afforded Interested Person Status in this case. __
Officer’s Report
THE SITE 1.1 The site is the residential curtilage of a semi-detached existing dwelling, Davenport, which sits on the corner of Queen's Road and the slip road which links into High Street. Both properties are bungalows with the application property having a uPVC conservatory on the
==== PAGE 2 ====
21/00432/B Page 2 of 4
south facing elevation with sheds on the corner of the slip road and Queen's Road. There is a vehicular access from Queen's Road to an attached garage.
1.2 The existing boundary of the property to Queen's Road is a stone wall behind which there is a short section of fencing along part of the boundary which partly screens an existing shed whose roof is visible above the wall and fencing with a backdrop of a blossom tree.
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the widening of the existing access from 2.4m to 6m. Also proposed is the demolition of the existing porch facing Queen's Road, the erection of a replacement porch and the erection of a 2.4m high pebble dashed wall between the porch and the boundary angled up from the height of the existing roadside wall up to just above head height enabling a pedestrian door to be inserted in the wall. The new porch has a pitched roof whereas the existing has a flat roof.
2.2 The applicant's agent explains that it is not possible to access the garage by a vehicle due to the narrow access and the angle of the road to the door opening. In addition, the distance between the road and the garage is 4.68m and a vehicle cannot park on the hardstanding without overhanging the footway. What is proposed enables a vehicle to be parked satisfactorily.
PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South (2013) as Predominantly Residential and not in a Flood Risk Area. The proposed Conservation Area for the village runs outside the boundary of the site and the building on the site is not Registered. There are no protected trees on site.
3.2 As such, the following parts of the Strategic Plan are relevant:
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; (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (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".
3.4 The Department has published the Residential Design Guidance (March 2019) which provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property. This provides advice on the provision of vehicular parking, advising that the provision of this should not be at the expense of the loss of greenery in the streetscene which contributes to the character or appearance of the area.
3.5 Environment Policy 36 seeks to ensure that important views from and into the Conservation Area are not compromised by unacceptable development.
PLANNING HISTORY
==== PAGE 3 ====
21/00432/B Page 3 of 4
4.1 The porch and rooflights were added under 96/01879/B and the conservatory under 01/01212/B.
REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Highway Services do not object, noting that whilst the visibility splays have been shown incorrectly, an acceptable level of visibility appears to be available and they suggest that any gates should open inwards with visibility being provided where this is clear above 1.05m and an advisory note should be attached to refer to an agreement under Section 109(A) of the Highway Act (06.04.21).
5.2 DoI's Flood Risk Management Division advise that there is no flood risk management interest in this application (06.05.21).
ASSESSMENT 6.1 The issues are whether the works would have an acceptable impact on the character and appearance of the area, taking into account the proximity of the proposed Conservation Area. The works are a little distance from the nearest adjacent dwelling as there is a stone outbuilding immediately to the north and garaging associated with the dwelling to the north of that. As such, it is not felt that the works will have any adverse impact on the living conditions of those in nearby dwellings.
6.2 The replacement of the porch will result in a more attractive annex and this is supported.
6.3 The widening of the driveway will result in a considerably larger opening with more hard surfacing on view. However, it is clear that what exists does not function adequately as an access or parking space. This will result in a better and safer arrangement for parking and access and the required visibility should involve the lowering of the roadside wall. However, as the mere widening of the access will achieve significant benefits to highway safety, and the lowering of the wall would bring less privacy and a detrimental impact on the character of the area as it would be out of keeping with the surroundings and would reveal more of the existing shed and proposed wall, it is not considered necessary to require this as part of any planning approval. No gates are shown as being proposed on the submitted plans and were they to be erected under the provisions of the Permitted Development Order it is not permissible for gates to open outward over the highway. If planning approval would be required and sought, a condition could be attached to any approval requiring that the gates do not open out over the highway.
6.4 The introduction of walling and the loss of the existing palm and holly trees will have a slightly negative impact on the character and appearance of the area although there is a smaller tree on the southern side of the proposed walling which will screen its impact from this direction. There is significant vegetation to the north which will effectively screen the wall therefrom.
CONCLUSION 7.1 It is considered that the proposal satisfies Environment Policy 36 and General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan.
INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
==== PAGE 4 ====
21/00432/B Page 4 of 4
(e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.
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 4(2) who should be given Interested Person Status.
__
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status
Decision Made : Permitted Date : 18.05.2021
Determining officer
Signed : S BUTLER
Stephen Butler
Head of Development Management
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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal