Loading document...
The site represents the residential curtilage of an existing dwelling situated off a narrow lane to the west of Colby Glen Road. The dwelling, Silver Beech, sits at the northern end of the site, alongside Glen Arm which lies to the east on the corner of the lane and the public highway. The original dwelling on the site has been demolished to make way for a new property approved on appeal. When that application was permitted, the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2005 was suspended. Glen Arm has a number of windows in its side elevation facing towards the new dwelling, very close to the boundary.
The site lies within an area of Residential use on the Arbory and East Rushen Local Plan and draft Southern Area Plan published on 23rd October, 2009.
The site has been the subject of a number of applications for the redevelopment of the dwelling:
PA 98/1490 - approval in principle for erection of two dwellings in place of the existing dwelling refused
PA 05/1047 - approval in principle for erection of replacement dwelling - refused PA 05/92194 - approval in principle for erection of replacement dwelling - permitted PA 06/0941 - erection of replacement dwelling - refused on appeal PA 07/1687 - erection of replacement dwelling - permitted on appeal
Now proposed is the erection of fencing along the boundary between Glen Arm and the new dwelling. The fence is partly erected. The fence takes the form of a full length panel for the first 6 m from the lane then half panels on top of a bank for the remaining 15.6 m between the properties. The full height of the fencing is to be just under 2 m . The panels are to be horizontal overlapping planks.
Arbory Parish Commissioners and Highways and Traffic Division indicate that they have no objection to the proposal.
The policy in the local plan which states "Within those areas designated and developed for residential purposes, the Department will not generally oppose the principle of alterations and extensions of existing dwellings. Each application will however be judged on its own merits in the light of the appearance of the finished building and its impact on the surrounding area" is similar in implication to General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan which states: "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 space 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 adverse 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; I) 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."
In this case the impact on the amenities of Glen Arm and the visual appearance of the fence as viewed from the lane.
In the first instance the fencing will provide added privacy for those in both properties, particularly as there are windows in Glen Arm which face towards the application site.
The appearance of the fence is little different to any other domestic fence and will be alongside the existing/proposed dwelling or garaging so will not be seen in isolation.
If the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2005 had not been suspended then the fencing could have been erected without the need for planning permission.
It is considered that there are no adverse impacts from the new fencing and indeed positive elements regarding the privacy of those in both the adjacent and proposed dwellings. As such the application is recommended for approval.
The local authority is, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (c) and (d), considered "interested persons" and as such should be afforded party status.
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: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 02.07.2010
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
This permission relates to the construction of fencing as shown and described in the submitted plans and illustrations, all received on 1st June, 2010.
I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to the Senior Planning Officer. Decision Made : Permitted Date : ................................ Signed : ................................ Senior Planning Officer 2 July 2010
10/00773/B
Page 3 of 4
2 July 2010 10/00773/B Page 4 of 4
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown