**Document:** Officer Planning Report **Application:** 11/01705/B — Erection of fencing and three stone pillars to existing front wall **Decision:** Refused **Decision Date:** 2012-01-27 **Parish:** Rushen **Document Type:** report / officer_report **Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/2059-rushen-cass-struan-beach-road-fence/documents/1262149 --- # Officer Planning Report ## Planning Report And Recommendations [Table omitted in markdown export] ## Officer's Report ### The Site The site represents the curtilage of the Cass Struan, Beach Road, Port St. Mary which forms part of a row of two storey terraced properties (end terrace) located on the northern side of Beach Road and south of the Castletown Road. The boundary treatment of the site which fronts onto Beach Road is made up of a dwarf stone wall with a hedgerow above. This boundary treatment is replicated and continued along the entire row of neighbouring terraced properties and further along the boundaries to the properties to the east and west of the application site along Beach Road. ### Planning Status The site lies within an area of existing residential use on the Isle of Man Development Plan Order 1982 and under the Modified Draft Area Plan for the South. The site is not within a Conservation Area, nor is proposed to be within a Conservation Area under the Modified Draft Area Plan for the South. The property is not a Registered Building but lies direct adjacent to Cott-Ny-Greiney which is a Manx traditional single storey cottage which is registered. - Isle of Man Development Plan Order 1982 - Isle of Man Strategic Plan 20th June 2007 - Modified Draft Area Plan for the South Due to the zoning of the site and due to the proposal the following policy is relevant in the determination of the application:- ### "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: - (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief; - (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; - (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses; - (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea; - (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; - (j) can be provided with all necessary services; - (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan; - (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding; - (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and - (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption." ### Planning History The application site had been the subject of a number of previous planning applications. However none of those are consider of material to the assessment and determination of this application. ### The Proposal The application seeks approval for the erection of fencing and three stone pillars to existing front wall. This work includes the retention of the existing dwarf stone wall (1 metre high) but the erection of 3 stone pillars above which would have a total height of 1.9 metres. Infilling between the stone pillars it is proposed to erect timber fencing. The hedgerow is proposed to be retained. ### Representations Port St. Mary Commissioners and Department of Transport Highways and Traffic Division raise no objection to the application The Planning Authority has received no written representation objecting to the proposal. ### Assessment The main issue to assess is whether the erection of three pillars and timber fencing to a height of approximately 1.9 metres along the front boundary wall would have a detrimental visual impact upon the amenities of the street scene. Currently the boundary treatments of the application site and the adjoining neighbours have a very similar style and height which contribute to the attractiveness of the properties and the street scene in this location. There is a concern with the proposal due to the general character of the area being mainly low boundary features or natural vegetation. The existing boundary wall is relatively modest and is not prominent within the street scene. This application is proposing to increase the height of the dwarf wall by erecting three pillars and fencing along the front wall which albeit would be approximately the same height as the existing hedgerow would introduce a harsh less natural barrier. It is considered the erection of the fencing on to the boundary wall will create a prominent and incongruous addition to the property which will look out of place within the street scene. The proposal will adversely affect the visual amenities and character of the locality. There is also concern that approval of this scheme could potentially encourage similar inappropriate development in the locality and would make any subsequent application for a similar scheme more difficult for the Planning Authority to resist. ### Recommendation Overall, it is concluded the proposal would be contrary to General Policy 2 of the Isle Of Man Strategic Plan. It is recommended that the application be refused. ### Party Status It is considered that the following meet the criteria of Government Circular 1/06 and should be afforded interested party status: #### Port St Mary Commissioners The Department of Transport Highways and Traffic Division is now part of the Department of Infrastructure of which the planning authority is part. As such, the Highways and Traffic Division cannot be afforded party status in this instance. ### Recommendation **Recommended Decision:** Refused **Date of Recommendation:** 25.01.2012 --- ### 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 R 1. By reason of its height and siting the proposed boundary fencing and pillars would introduce an incongruous feature in the street scene that would be detrimental to the visual amenities of the locality. As such, the proposal fails to accord with the provisions of General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 --- I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control / Development Control Manager/ Senior Planning Officer. **Decision Made:** Refused **Date:** 27/1/12 ### Determining officer (delete as appropriate) Signed: G. H. W. Anthony Holmes Senior Planning Officer Signed: Michael Gallagher Director of Planning and Building Control Signed: Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer Signed: Jennifer Chance Development Control Manager --- *Data sourced from the Isle of Man public planning register under the [Isle of Man Open Government Licence](https://www.gov.im/about-this-site/open-government-licence/).* *Canonical page: https://planningportal.im/a/2059-rushen-cass-struan-beach-road-fence/documents/1262149*