DEC Officer Report

Application No.: 21/00533/B Applicant: Mr John Booth Proposal: Widening of vehicular access and driveway (retrospective) Site Address: 39 Bymacan Close Ballabeg Castletown Isle Of Man IM9 4EL Planning Officer: Mr Nick Salt Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 21.07.2021 _________________________________________________________________

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.

• C 2. Prior to the first use of the amended access and parking area hereby approved, the amended access arrangements and parking provision shall be completed in accordance with the Proposed Driveway Layout Plan received 04.05.21.

Reason: To ensure adequate vehicular access to the site and adequate parking provision in accordance with General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan.

N 1. The applicant is advised that the alteration to the highways, in the form of dropping kerbs, will require a Section 109(A) Highway Agreement to be made post planning consent.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.

The proposal is considered to accord with General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 of the IOMSP, and the land use designation as per the Area Plan for the South. No unacceptably adverse impact has been identified as likely with respect of the appearance of the site and surrounding area, and the residential amenity of the neighbours, parking or access.

Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the following plans and drawings received 04.05.21: Location Plan Site Plan Proposed Driveway Layout Plan

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article (4(2)):

27 Bymacan Close, Ballabeg as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status.

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 4(2)):

42 Bymacan Close, Ballabeg as they are not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy. _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site relates to a detached dwelling in Bycaman Close in Ballabeg. The site adjoins no.38 to the east and no.40 to the west. The frontage of the dwelling is mostly tarmacked, with small planted sections to either corner. - 1.2 The site does not relate to any Registered Building and is not within a Conservation Area. It is within a Predominantly Residential area as designated by the Area Plan for the South.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The proposal is for the dropping of the kerb along the frontage of the dwelling, to provide access for 5 cars. The existing planting areas to the front corners of the site will be reduced slightly and reconfigured, with some additional tarmac added.

- 3.0 PLANNING POLICY

3.1 The site falls within an area designated as Predominantly Residential in the Area Plan for the South. As such, General Policy 2 (GP2) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan is the key policy in the consideration of this application. - 3.2 GP2 states that 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;
• (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses;

• (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; and
• (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways.

3.3 Transport Policy 7 requires new development to provide parking provision in accordance with the Department's current standards. These are set out in IOMSP Appendix 7 and require

• 2 spaces per typical residential unit. The Manual for Manx Roads sets out the minimum requirements for visibility and parking space size.

3.4 DEFA's Residential Design Guidance (2019) is a material consideration. Section 6.3 of the guidance relates specifically to driveways and front gardens.

- 4.0 PLANNING HISTORY

4.1 No recent or relevant planning history identified. - 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 DOI Highways have no objection to this application subject to condition for vehicular access arrangements to accord with the submitted drawing. They note that the proposed parking space dimensions meet requirements. (21.05.21).

5.2 DEFA Forestry Team have no objections, noting that a license to remove a tree was issued under the Tree Preservation Act 1993. The directorate has no objection to removal of this tree. (08.06.21). - 5.3 Arbory and Rushen Parish Commissioners object to the proposal (25.05.21) for the following reasons:

• - the retrospective nature of the application
• - loss of on street parking
• - if such unsympathetic development was undertaken across the Friary Park estate there would be a very significant loss of on street parking
• - due to the lack of permeability of the materials used there would be significant problems with rain water run off potentially causing flooding

5.4 Neighbour Representations

• 5.4.1 42 Bymacan Close object to the proposal (24.05.21) for the following reasons:

• - unacceptable and unnecessary change to the road
• - removing on-street parking

• 5.4.2 27 Bymacan Close object to the proposal (25.05.21) for the following reasons:

• - existing parking is sufficient for 4 cars, not 3
• - the placement of cones demonstrates that the applicant intends works not shown on the plans
• - Close is not wide enough for on-street parking on two sides
• - Will reduce on-street parking availability for neighbours

- 6.1 ASSESSMENT

6.1 The key considerations in the assessment of this planning application are the visual impact on the character and appearance of the site and wider street scene and on the adjacent highway.

6.2 Design and Appearance

• 6.2.1 As referenced earlier in this report, General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan requires that development respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them and does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape. The frontage of no.39 as existing is largely characterised by an expanse of tarmac parking which is not reflective of the wider street scene and does not contribute positively to the character and appearance of the site or wider area. Nevertheless, this assessment can only access the impact of the current proposal.
• 6.2.2 Section 6.3 of the RDG provides guidance on hardstanding to the frontage of dwellings. It is preferable that proposals do not result in the loss of more than 50% of existing front lawned/landscaped gardens. The proposal would see an approximate 5m2 reduction to the front planting area due to its proposed reconfiguration, with approximately 15m2 retained. Therefore, less than 50% of the existing front planted garden would be lost. The additional parking to the frontage would not have an unacceptable visual impact as planted areas are to

• be retained to either side, thus preventing any severe visual harm to the appearance of the street. The level and scale of the works proposed would not significantly materially affect the character or appearance of the street scene.
• 6.2.3 Impact on the character and appearance of the street scene is similarly considered to be acceptable. It is concluded therefore that the proposed extension and alterations would be in accordance with GP2 of the IOMSP.

6.3 Parking and Access

• 6.3.1 The dropped kerb and alterations to the frontage would create direct access to a total of 5 parking spaces, which the applicant states is required due to the growth in occupancy of the household. This would provide an additional 2no. directly accessible parking spaces (i.e. those which do not require a 'shuffling' of vehicles to enter/egress the site safely).
• 6.3.2 DoI Highways have reviewed the application and consider the proposal to be acceptable. No concerns have been raised in relation to overall parking provision in the area or highway safety. 1-2 additional parking spaces would be provided, exceeding and in accordance with the IOMSP parking standards. The proposal accords with TP7 in this regard.
• 6.3.3 The concerns raised by the Commissioners and by neighbours in relation to on-street parking provision are noted. It is accepted that some on-street parking capacity would be removed, for potentially 1 to 2 vehicles - based on the plans showing approximately 10 metres of kerb to be dropped, and parking spaces being a minimum length of 5 metres. It is considered that the potential loss of on-street parking would be offset by the provision of offstreet parking for vehicles associated with no.39 which would otherwise park on the street. Submitted photographs by one objector clearly shows 4 vehicles parked on the site, which demonstrates that there is a genuine need for a large amount of parking on the site. It is considered that, given the lack of parking restrictions on the street and surrounding streets, a lack of on-street parking is unlikely to be a significant issue.
• 6.4 Other Matters

• 6.4.1 The loss of the tree to the frontage has been agreed with DEFA Forestry via the appropriate license and there is no objection to this element of the works.
• 6.4.2 In terms of drainage - specifically run-off onto the highway, it is not considered that the development in question would significantly increase the levels of hardstanding, which already have the potential to drain surface water onto the road via the existing dropped kerbs. It is considered that the alterations would not exacerbate any such risk.

- 7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 In summary, the proposal is considered to accord with General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 of the IOMSP, and the land use designation as per the Area Plan for the South. No adverse impact has been identified as likely with respect of the appearance of the site and surrounding area, and the residential amenity of the neighbours, parking or access. - 8.0 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;
• (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 above who should be given Interested Person Status

I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Principal Planner 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: 21.07.2021 Determining officer Signed : J SINGLETON Jason Singleton Principal Planner

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.