Erection of a dwelling with associated parking

Refusal Reasons

• ✗Due to the overall height, width and form of the proposed dwelling, together with its proximity to the existing dwelling at 'Leyton', which is a departure from the established development density and form of development on this part of Victoria Road, the proposal would disrupt the general rhythm of the overall group of buildings, and result in an obtrusive built development within an area comprising mainly large houses within generous gardens associated with the dwellings. Given the layout and overall density, removal of large areas of mature landscaping, coupled with the quantum of development on the application site, the role of Leyton in contributing to the character of the locality would be diminished, resulting in detrimental impacts on the character and appearance, and the context of this part of Victoria Road, contrary to Strategic Policy 4(b), Environment Policy 42, and General Policy 2 (b, c and g), and the latter part of Strategic Policy 3(b) of the Strategic Plan.
• ✗The proposed siting, layout, scale, and arrangement of the new building on the site, would fail to relate positively and appropriately to the site character as it does not take into account a proper analysis of site context in terms of siting, layout, scale, landscape features, and spaces between buildings, and would have a deleterious impact on the application site, by resulting in a particularly intrusive infill development within the site when viewed from the surrounding area. In fact, the new dwelling which seeks to mimic the main dwelling 'Leyton' would be larger, wider and taller than the existing dwelling, and dominate the site area, thus diminishing the role of the main dwelling within its site. The proposal, therefore, conflicts with General Policy 2(b and f) and Environment Policy 42 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
• ✗The proposed first floor balcony, by virtue of its proximity and height, would result in unacceptable levels of actual and perceived overlooking from the proposal site into 'Leyton', and the proposed development at Plot 1 under PA 21/01468/B, to the detriment of the residential amenity. In this respect, the proposed building is considered unacceptable when assessed against General Policy 2 (g) and the relevant sections of the Residential Design Guide.
• ✗The proposed new dwelling would, by virtue of its proximity, height and overall mass, have an adverse impact upon the outlook of 'Leyton' resulting in an overbearing impact and significant loss of light to the windows on the south elevation which includes principle rooms, which would be to the detriment of the residential amenities of the occupants of Leyton, contrary to General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
• ✗The potential for the loss of biodiversity on site would adversely affect the site character, and would detrimentally affect the amenity value of mature landscaping within the established garden as the proposals do not enhance or protect the landscape quality and nature conservation value to this site. The proposal also has the potential to adversely impact on a variety of biodiversity such as feeding, sheltering and breeding birds, feeding and commuting bats, and invertebrates due to the loss of the mature garden habitat linked to an established registered tree area, and hence the proposal is contrary to General Policy 2 (d and f) Strategic Policy 4(b) of the Strategic Plan (2016), and the IOM Biodiversity Strategy 2015 to 2025.
• ✗There is insufficient information available to understand the flood impacts of the development on the area or the resulting flood impacts on the proposed dwelling contrary to Environment Policy 10 and General Policy 2(l).
• ✗The access arrangements as proposed would create an adverse impact on the existing highway or upon those users approaching from the north, as the visibility in this direction which is below the acceptable standards would be further impeded by existing trees along the site frontage and the proposed 1.6m high fence and gate along the northern boundary of the proposed site, and make it difficult for vehicles to exit the site in a safe and appropriate manner, contrary to the principles of General Policy 2(h and I) and Transport Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan (2016).
• ✗The removal of a Category B Tree Tulip Tree (T2055) on the southern boundary of Leyton, which was surveyed (Drw. No. TS 16119) and marked for retention (Drw. No. TR 16119) on the tree survey documents submitted under PA 20/00293/A, without any new supporting information to justify its removal within the current scheme would be averse to the requirements of Environment Policy 3 and General Policy 2 (f), noting this tree contributes to the amenity value of the site and area.