2. |
TCP/16931/E P/00921/03 Parish/Name: Ryde Registration
Date: 07/05/2003 -
Full Planning Permission Officer: Miss. J. Garvey Tel: (01983) 823571 Alterations
to vehicular access (revised scheme) Cherry House, Binstead Road, Ryde, Isle
Of Wight, PO333NB |
REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
The local Member, Councillor Mr Stephens, has
requested that the application be determined by the Development Control Committee
for the following reasons:
·
The area on the adjacent
drives has turning and parking which does not cause a detrimental impact to
each other.
·
The dimensions of the
proposed wall are not of significant size to cause problems with vehicular
traffic both into and around the respective driveways.
PROCESSING INFORMATION
This is a minor application.
The processing of the application has taken twelve
weeks to date. The processing of this application
has gone beyond the prescribed time limits because of outstanding
consultations, and the need for the consideration by the Planning
Committee.
LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Application relates to a semi-detached property
located on the south west side of Binstead Road, approximately 40 metres to the
north west of its junction to Mayfield Road.
The property makes use of shared vehicular access and turning area with
the neighbouring property to the north known as West View.
RELEVANT HISTORY
April 1995 - TCP/16931/B Conditional Approval was
granted for the formation of a joint vehicular access and hardstanding at West
View and Cherry House.
March 2003 - TCP/16931/D Application for Alterations
to the existing vehicular access with the construction of a 6 metre long and
500 mm high wall sub dividing the shared turning area was refused under the
delegated procedure on the grounds that a reduction in the turning space would
provide inadequate turning for a vehicle to enter and exit the drive in a
forward gear, contrary to Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations for New
Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.
DETAILS OF APPLICATION
Consent is sought for the formation of a low brick
wall 6 metres in length, the maximum height of 500 mm sub-dividing the shared
turning area. The application is the
same as TCP/16931/D, however additional turning diagrams have been included and
a slightly larger turning area has been indicated. The low brick wall is required in order to protect the services
under the hardstanding, these being water, gas and electricity.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY
Relevant policy is TR7 (Highway Considerations for New
Development). It states that any new road
layout, including vehicular access, should be constructed to provide safe
conditions for all road users, particularly the needs of the more vulnerable,
such as cyclists, pedestrians and the disabled and that there is a proper
provision of facilities within the development so as to ensure the safe
movement and separation of vehicular traffic, buses, bicycles and pedestrians.
CONSULTEE RESPONSES
Highway Engineer recommends refusal on the grounds of
inadequate turning. The Highway
Engineer has observed that the erection of the wall is to "provide added
safety protection for all underground services". He considers that if this is the case it would appear preferable
for the applicant to protect these services by strengthening the existing
hardstanding with a stronger concrete mix for example, rather than sacrificing
the existing turning and parking areas.
Whilst it is appreciated by the Highway Engineer that the plans depict
an area just large enough to allow a private vehicle to turn, there is not room
"within the site to provide parking outside of this turning area. This would mean any additional visitors to
the site would be forced to reverse onto Binstead Road, due to the applicant's
car unavoidably blocking the turning area thus creating unacceptable hazard to
highway users. The applicant admits
that this situation occurs in his letter of 7.02.03."
PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS
None to report.
THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS
Two letters of support have been received. The resident of 78 Wellington Road considers
the proposal will improve highway safety.
The letter of support from the applicant's wife and daughter does not
raise any planning issues.
CRIME AND DISORDER IMPLICATIONS
No crime and disorder implications anticipated.
EVALUATION
The main considerations when determining the
application are policy and the effect that the construction of the wall will
have on highway safety.
The property is set back from the road approximately some 6 metres at the closest
point and 10 metres at the furthest.
The total width of the shared turning area is currently 16.5
metres. The proposed wall is to be
sited in the centre of the turning area.
The Highway Engineer considers that the approval of
the wall would impinge on highway safety as sufficient turning would not be
provided.
A condition was imposed on the original approval
stating:
"The joint
hardstanding shall be constructed and retained in full to provide one space per
dwelling and a combined turning area within the site to enable vehicles to
enter and leave the highways at all times in a forward gear to the satisfaction
of the Local Planning Authority."
From my visits to the site the turning area has been
blocked by a parked vehicle, therefore in breach of the above condition.
The points that have been raised in the letters of
representation tend not to relate to planning issues. The interest of highway safety are considered to be of paramount
importance and I therefore have no other option than to recommend
accordingly.
HUMAN RIGHTS
In coming to this recommendation to refuse planning
permission, consideration has been given to the rights set out in Article 8
(Right to Privacy) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (Right to Peaceful
Enjoyment of Possessions) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The impacts this development might have on
the owners/occupiers of the other property in the area and other third parties
have been carefully considered. Whilst
there may be some interference with the rights of the applicant to develop the
land in the manner proposed, it is considered that the recommendation to refuse
is proportional to the legitimate aim of the Council's Unitary Development Plan
and in the public interest.
JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDATION
Having due regard and appropriate weight all material
considerations outlined in this report, I am of the opinion that the
application is contrary to Policy TR7 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development
Plan as the development will not allow sufficient space for a vehicle to enter
and leave the highway in a forward gear.
I also make a second recommendation that the breach of condition 2 on
TCP/16931/B be investigated by Enforcement.
1. RECOMMENDATION
- REFUSAL
Conditions/Reasons:
1 |
The proposed wall will reduce the amount of turning
and parking available, resulting in a development that does not provide
adequate space to enable vehicles to turn on the site and enter and leave the
highway in a forward gear, therefore the interests of road safety are
compromised and is contrary to Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations for New
Development) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
2. RECOMMENDATION
- That Enforcement investigate the Breach of Condition
ANDREW ASHCROFT
Heading of
Planning Services