Loading document...
Attn Paul Visigah Planning Division, Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, Murray House, Mount Havelock, Douglas IM1 2SF 27th March 2021
Dear Paul
RE: PA 17/00852/B Ballaglonye Main Road Crosby – Minor amendment application
Please find attached the following drawings:
Existing drawings: 17/002576/ 15 Rev E Site Plan 1 of 3 17/2576/27 rev C Site plan 3 of 3 17/2576/105 rev F Retail Unit 17/2576/300 rev A Site Location Plan and Boundary
Proposed drawings: 17/002576/15 Rev W Site Plan 1 of 3 17/2576/27 rev K Site plan 3 of 3 17/2576/105 rev K Retail unit 17/2576/300 rev D Site Location and Boundary
17/2576/64 rev B Retaining wall to rear of plots 17 to 21 17/2576/81 rev C Wall between plots 17 and 22 17/2576/306 rev A Bin Store 17/2576/900 rev E Site Plan Costa
Amendments have been made to the approved scheme and comments have been added here to the letter that accompanied the planning application in blue as follows:
Retail Unit
The omission of this roller shutter door is an improvement to the scheme and has less impact on the neighbouring properties than the personnel door that has replaced it.
The additional stone has little overall impact and does not detract from the visual aspects of the elevation. The previous approved glazing is reduced in extent.
The ATM was added at the request of the Co-operative Society who are to be the tenants of the unit. This is a facility for the public and will be a very useful addition for the community.
The doors are glass as and have little visual impact being relocated. This amendment was to facilitate the layout of the shop internally and could not have been envisaged at the initial design stage as the tenant was not in place at that time.
Costa do not require a double door and the door is glass and so the impact will be negligible.
The door is for access to the area forming the canopy and was obstructed to the front elevation by structural bracing. The door is glass and is visually unobtrusive.
The entrance canopy is to be used for maintenance and repair of the glass façade. Under the CDM regulations a guard or protection must be fitted to allow access.
The stone wall is approximately 900mm in height and will have a balustrade over to protect from falling. This area was not fully detailed at the design stage and is merely design development. The balustrade is to protect from falling, especially children with the stream being adjacent.
It became apparent when laid out that there was a better solution to the car parking and there is no additional tarmac involved.
Additional trees were planted which is an improvement to the visual amenity.
The finish is better quality and marries with the under cladding of the canopy to create a more harmonious appearance.
The retaining wall ranges from 800mm to 1.5m at the highest point and forms the rear wall to plots 17 to 21. The wall was constructed to level the rear gardens of plots 22 to 28. The approved Landscaping scheme shows a hedge to the rear of these gardens and there is a hedge planted between the retaining wall at high level and the garden fence. This still complies with the landscaping condition and the wall is not above 1.5m in height therefore would be within permitted development rights.
The wall forms the side boundary to plots 22 and 17 and is bounded by a landscaped area in accordance with the Landscape Condition. This wall is not higher than 1.8m and is setback from the road and therefore is within permitted development rights. It is better than a fence in our opinion aesthetically.
This is a standard double garage and would normally be within permitted development rights.
This balancing pond is in lieu of an underground water attenuation system. It also allows for a greater capacity and therefore is a better option than a fixed underground system. It has
also been agreed with the MUA Drainage Department as part of the Surface water works for the site has a whole.
The pipe that was originally shown discharging directly into the River Dhoo has been omitted and the scheme is a better environmental solution as it does not drain the Curraghs area and enhances it instead.
The drainage ditch is covered under the section 8 drainage and diverts water that originally ran in a ditch to the side of the Peel road.
This was a condition that the foul sewer be connected to the sewage treatment works. I have added it here for completeness as it is a requirement of the planning consent that it is connected. The scheme shows the route to Old Church Road.
If you have any queries on the above, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours sincerely,
Mark Pearce
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
