Officer Report

Application No.: 16/01360/B Applicant: Mr Christopher & Mrs Andrea Worsfold Proposal: Erection of detached garage Site Address: Cliftonville Cottage Fistard Port St. Mary Isle of Man IM9 5PQ Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken: 04.01.2017 Site Visit: 04.01.2017 Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee

Officer’s Report

THE APPLICATION IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE OWING TO THE REQUEST OF A SENIOR PLANNING OFFICER.

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of a detached dwelling, 'Cliftonville', which is situated to the north of Fistard Road in Fistard itself. A dwelling of traditional Manx countryside vernacular, Cliftonville benefits from some attractive hood mould details around its windows. It fronts onto the highway and has a single storey, lean-to extension at the eastern elevation: there is a driveway / parking area further to the east, which is 8.8m long, with a garden stretching behind. Within the garden is an enclosed patio area, and much of the garden is raised above the road level. - 1.2 To the west and east are other dwellings, Fistard Cottages to the west and Pargys to the east. Pargys is situated 15m at its nearest point from Cliftonville, with the western elevation of the former presenting a ground floor door and gable window facing towards the application site. Between the dwellings is garden land with some semi-mature trees and stone walling helping provide screening. The sense of separation between the dwellings is aided by their being set at something of an angle to one another. - 1.3 To the southeast of the application site is a detached dwelling, Lyndale, which is angled perpendicular to the highway. Its front garden sweeps around to the south and southwest.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the erection of a single garage on the driveway. Owing to the slight angle at which the dwelling sits to the highway, the garage would be situated between

• 4.1m and 4.5m back from the pavement. It would measure 5.5m in length internally and 3.3m in width internally, with a door 2.7m in width. The eaves are 2.1m above ground level, with a roof apex 3.5m above ground level. A sectional, up-and-over garage door is shown, and around this would be a hood mould to match that of the main dwelling. The garage would be rendered and painted to match the existing dwelling. The roof would have a fairly shallow pitch and finished in blue/grey slate. A small access hatch to the loft above the parking area is shown.

2.2 The applicants have submitted a letter in support of their application, which explains the garage is to be used for a classic 1948 MG TC (car) that has been recently inherited. - 2.3 An application is required - rather than the applicant relying on the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 - because the garage would be less than 6m from

• the nearest highway and also ever so slightly less than 1m from the boundary, and this is contrary to parts (h) and (i) of Part 17 of the Order.
• 2.4 The garage has been amended slightly in design - an increase in internal length being the result - following concern raised by Highway Services in respect of the proposal (see paragraph 5.1, below). The amended design, along with an email from the applicants, was circulated for 14 days. The email outlines that the new garage is long enough to accommodate all modern family cars, that the driveway at Cliftonville can only accommodate one car, that there are at least two full-sized parking spaces at the front of the property [presumably this means on the highway], that additional parking is available along the highway, that Fistard Road is entirely a residential and not a throughroad, that the creation of off-street parking some years ago at considerable cost should not now be held against them - indeed, they feel it should be encouraged, that the garage completes the modernisation process they have taken with Cliftonville, and that the criteria for new housing does not fit with traditional IOM dwellings and therefore some flexibility is surely called for by everyone to enhance current and future standards of living.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The application site has been the subject of a number of applications seeking approval for various alterations and extensions to the dwelling, the most recent being PA 15/00055/B. None of these alterations affected the siting of the proposed garage, and therefore none is considered specifically material to the assessment of the current proposal. - 3.2 Perhaps of more direct relevance is the issued approval to PA 07/00352/B, the application seeking the creation of the parking bay / driveway mentioned above in this report. In her explanation and assessment of the proposal, the case officer commented as follows:

"This application proposes a similar parking facility to that proposed in the previous application but overcoming the objections thereto. The application differs from the previous one in that the boundary walls beside the access are to be lowered to afford visibility over them for drivers emerging from the site. The Department of Transport also suggest in pre-application advice that there should be a traffic mirror installed opposite the access although this would involve the use of land which is not within either the defined site or the control of the applicant so cannot properly be required by condition. The applicant has confirmed however that he has the permission of the landowner in question and as such a note may be attached recommending the installation of such a mirror. [Such a note was attached to the approval notice, but no mirror has been installed.]

"The Department of Transport also require the provision of a dropped kerb which may be required by condition as this represents work within the highway which does not need permission as it would be undertaken at the instruction of and on behalf of the Department of Transport, as Permitted Development.

"Finally, there is presently a post box in the wall which is to be lowered. If the wall is lowered to the height required by the Department of Transport (that is, 1m) the post box would be too low to be useful. The applicant has liaised with the Post Office who have no objection to its being removed."

3.3 The "previous application" referred to in the comments is PA 06/01858/B, which was refused on grounds of failing to provide adequate visibility from the driveway.

4.0 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - 4.1 The application site is within an area zoned as "Predominantly Residential" identified on The Area Plan for the South. Given the nature of the application, it is appropriate to consider General Policy 2 and Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan.

- 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Highway Services objected to the application on 6th March 2017. They noted that the existing driveway is between 8.8m and 9.2m in length, arguing that this is sufficient to

• accommodate two parked cars. They note that the garage would be 4.4m in length - below the standard of 5m - and that this would leave a driveway length of between 4.3m and 4.7m, below the 6m required in front of a garage, although they note that this can be reduced to 5m if the door is a roller door as proposed. As the proposal would, in effect, replace a situation where two cars can be satisfactorily accommodated with a situation that would provide two substandard parking spaces, the net result is the loss of two off-road parking spaces and accordingly Highway Services have recommended refusal of the application as it does not provide adequate parking as required by GP 2(h) of the Strategic Plan.
• 5.2 Port St Mary Commissioners on 12th December 2016 initially asked for the application to be deferred pending their forthcoming meeting, and then offered no objections.

- 6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 Parts (h) and (i) of General Policy 2, along with Transport Policy 7, together set out that new development should provide for sufficient parking standards and safe access for all users. Parts (b), (c) and (g) of the former policy require that new development should be appropriately designed for the site on which it is proposed to sit, and in a manner that would not affect neighbouring living conditions in terms of privacy or outlook issues. Each issue is taken in turn. Highway safety and parking standards - 6.2 People should of course be encouraged to provide off-road parking, as the applicants have done in this case some years ago. However, it is clearly a retrograde step to then reduce that provision. In this case, the garage now proposed is clearly long enough to accommodate a motor vehicle and in most cases will also be wide enough. Highway Services contend that the driveway is large enough to accommodate two vehicles at present and, while this may be true with some manoeuvring, it is unlikely to be a comfortable arrangement, with tandem parking also rarely offering the most convenient way to park two cars. - 6.3 It is also noted that there is on-street parking available and while this should not really be relied upon to provide an adequate level of parking for dwellings, equally it is true that parking pressures do not seem to be particularly high in the area - and nor is this situation likely to change given that there appears to be few places in which additional dwellings could be located in the area. It is therefore considered that the application, while not ideal, would not result in a materially harmful impact on highway safety. Accordingly, no objection is made to the application in the context of either parts (h) or (i) of General Policy 2. The proposed design - 6.4 The form and materials of the garage are considered to be acceptable in this location, with the above-garage door detailing and natural slate roof to be particularly welcomed. It would be sufficiently far from neighbouring properties to conclude that it would not affect their living conditions, while its design, form and finishing materials are appropriate to the character of this semi-rural location.

- 7.0 RECOMMENDATION

7.1 It is concluded that the application is acceptable and accordingly is recommended for approval. A condition should be attached to any approval notice requiring that the garage be kept free at all times for the parking of a private vehicle. - 8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• o The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent;

• o The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested;
• o Highway Services of the Department of Infrastructure, and
• o The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 04.04.2017 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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

• C 2. The garage hereby approved shall at all times be made available for the parking of private motor vehicles(s) and shall be retained available for such use. Reason: To provide adequate off-street parking.

The development proposed relates to the Site Plan and to the Location Plan and also to Drawings 1258.10 (date-stamped as having been received 8th December 2016) and 1258.11 Rev 1 (datestamped as having been received 13th March 2017).

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 : Permitted Committee Meeting Date: 24.04.2017

Signed : E Riley Presenting Officer

Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).

Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO

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.