DEC Decision Notice

Savage And Chadwick Architects Armitage House Lord Street Douglas IM1 1LE

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1999 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019

In pursuance of powers granted under the above Act, and subordinate Orders and Regulations, the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture determined to REFUSE an application by ASAP LTD, Ref 22/01114/B, for the Demolition of existing three apartments on site and erection of six replacement dwellings at Sea Court Victoria Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 6AQ for the following reason(s):

• 1. The proposed siting, layout, scale, and arrangement of the new buildings 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 development within the site when viewed from the surrounding area. The proposal, therefore, conflicts with General Policy 2(b and f) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, and Paragraphs 3.1.4 to 3.1.7 of the RDG 2021.
• 2. Due to the overall height, width, form and layout of the proposed development, 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. The development would also result in the removal of large areas of mature landscaping which contribute to the character of the locality and townscape, resulting in the decline of the landscape quality and nature conservation value of this urban area 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.
• 3. The proposed second floor bedroom windows, by virtue of their proximity and height, would result in unacceptable levels of actual and perceived overlooking from the proposal site into 'West Hill', , to the detriment of the residential amenity. Likewise, the scheme, by virtue of its proximity, height which towers to three storeys, and overall mass, would have an adverse impacts upon the outlook of 'West Hill' resulting in an overbearing impacts, particularly as the existing mature landscaping which would serve to soften any overbearing impacts would be removed. In this respect, the proposed development is considered to be unacceptable when assessed against General Policy 2 (g) and the relevant sections of the Residential Design Guide.
• 4. The potential for the loss of biodiversity on site would adversely affect the site character, and would detrimentally affect the amenity value of the mature landscaping

within the 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 habitats linked to an established wooded area which houses protected species, and there is insufficient information to clearly ascertain the resulting impacts on ecology or that the appropriate mitigation has been provided for ecological loss. Therefore, the proposal is contrary to General Policy 2 (d), Strategic Policy 4(b), Paragraph 7.8.6, and Environment Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan (2016), and the IOM Biodiversity Strategy 2015 to 2025.

Date of Issue: 20th June 2023

Director of Planning and Building Control

Guidance Note

This decision was made by a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority delegated to them.

This decision refers only to that applied for under the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 and its subordinate legislation.

A copy of the Officer’s report and any correspondence which led to the assessment and decision is available to view on the Government’s website (via Online Services www.gov.im/Viewapplications) or at the Department’s offices Murray House, Mount Havelock, Douglas.

Appeal Any appeal must be in writing and submitted to the Department within 21 days of the date of this Notice. The appeal must contain:

•  the grounds for making the appeal;
•  payment of the planning appeal fee (currently £335); and if relevant, confirmation that the appellant wishes to have the appeal determined by means of an inquiry and payment of the additional inquiry fee (currently £125).

Where the appeal is submitted by the applicant they must:

•  specify in detail and by reference to material planning considerations the reasons why the appellant disagrees with that determination; and
•  Where against a refusal, on the grounds of deficient detail or supporting documentation, set out why they consider the information or documentation forming part of the application was sufficient in the circumstance.

If the appeal is submitted by someone who has interested Person Status but is not listed in Article 4(2) of the Development Procedure Order 2019, that person must relate their grounds for making the appeal to issues which they included in representations made prior to the application being determined.

Failure to meet all of the relevant above requirements will mean that the appeal cannot be validated.

An appeal form and more detailed guidance are available either from Planning & Building Control, Tel 685950, or from the Department’s website www.gov.im/planningappeal

If this decision becomes final because there is no appeal, the Department’s public reference copy (counter copy) of the planning application (should one have been received) may be collected by the applicant or their agent from Murray House. Please note that if the counter copy of the application is not collected within thirty days following the last date on which a planning appeal can be made it will be destroyed without further notice.