Appeal Letter and Notice

Mark Pearce Marown Court Main Road Glen Vine IM4 4BQ Dear Sir/Madam,

Telephone (01624) 685958 Email: [email protected] Contact: Scott Gallacher Our Ref: MEC /AP25/0002 Date: 4th July 2025

On Appeal

Appeal Ref: AP 25/0002 PA No: 23/01066/B Address: Leyton Victoria Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 6AQ Proposal: Construction of two new houses to replace existing single house

I refer to the appeal in respect of the above planning application.

I am directed to advise you that the Minister for Environment, Food and Agriculture, in pursuance of section 3(2) of the Government Departments Act 1987, has delegated responsibility for the determination of this appeal to Mr Lawrie Hooper, MHK.

In accordance with the provisions of The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, I herewith give notice of the appeal decision.

Mr Hooper, MHK, on behalf of the Minister for Environment, Food and Agriculture, has considered the report, concurs with the appointed person’s conclusions, and accepts the recommendation that the application should be Refused. Formal notice of this decision is attached.

Yours faithfully

Scott Gallacher Chief Officer

cc. Mark Pearce, 12 Strathallan Crescent, Douglas, IM2 4NR

The Town And Country Planning Act 1999

The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019

Mark Pearce Marown Court Main Road Glen Vine IM4 4BQ

Appeal Ref: AP25/0002

In pursuance of his powers under the above Act and Order/Regulations, and under delegated powers from the Minister for the Department of the Environment, Food and Agriculture, Mr Lawrie Hooper, MHK does hereby in the name of and on behalf of the Department REFUSE planning application 23/01066/B by Mark Pearce for Construction of two new houses to replace existing single house - Leyton Victoria Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 6AQ for the following reason(s):-

Reason(S) For Refusal:

1. The scheme fails the statutory tests of Section 16 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 as the development would fail to preserve the building and the features of special architectural and historic interest which it possesses.

1. Overall, it is judged that the proposed demolition of the existing registered Arts and Crafts style dwelling 'Leyton', and its replacement with two new dwellings, while attempting to mimic the style, would fail to protect or enhance the fabric and setting of the Registered Building, and would be detrimental to the character and significance of the heritage asset. This would contravene Environment Policies 30 and 32, and Strategic Policy 4(a) of the Strategic Plan 2016, and RB/6 of Planning Policy Statement 1/01.

1. The proposed replacement dwellings, whilst superficially resembling elements of the Arts and Crafts style dwelling on site, would fail to authentically replicate the inherent quality, craftsmanship, and detailing of the existing registered building, and as such represents a loss of genuine historic fabric and architectural character. The mimicry proposed would lack the authenticity and patina of the original building, resulting in a contrived and ultimately superficial representation of the style. The inherent value of the original building, rooted in its history, materials, and craftsmanship, cannot be replicated in the new dwellings, however stylistically similar. Therefore, the proposals are considered to be at variance with the provisions of Strategic Policy 4 and General Policy 2 (c).

1. The proposal fails to demonstrate that the replacement dwellings represent a genuine improvement in design terms. The mere replication of some stylistic elements does not constitute an enhancement as required by Strategic Policy 5. The proposed development offers no innovation in design, nor does it make a positive contribution to the street scene beyond superficial imitation of existing features. The loss of the original building's unique character and contribution to the area's heritage is not outweighed by the proposed replacement, which offers neither comparable architectural merit nor demonstrable public benefit, such that the scheme would also be contrary the provisions of Environment Policy 39.

1. The demolition of the Registered Building is unacceptable, as the application does not demonstrate that all reasonable efforts have been made to preserve the building, nor has sufficient justification been provided for its total loss. As such, the unnecessary loss of the building would fail to preserve the building, its setting and features of special architectural and historic interest and is contrary to SP4, GP2, EP 30, 31 and 32 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, RB/3, RB/6 of Planning Policy Statement 1/01 Policy and Guidance Notes for the Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man.

1. The inclusion of the first floor balconies on the front elevation of the proposed development at Plot 2, by virtue of its elevated height and proximity to the low boundary wall which separates both curtilages, holds the potential to result in a sterilisation of the immediate neighbouring site (which is only situated 5m from the edge of the balcony) and would prejudice the potential re-development of part of this site which is zoned for residential development, contrary to General Policy 2(k) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

1. Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that surface water can be adequately drained from this site, in a safe, convenient, and environmentally acceptable manner, without creating in adverse impacts on the site and immediate vicinity, and therefore the proposal is contrary to General Policy 2 and Paragraph 11.8.1 of the IOMSP.

1. Insufficient information has been provided to support that the proposed development would not impact on the ecology of the site, or result in detrimental impacts on the conservation value of the adjacent site, and as such the development is considered to be contrary to Environment Policy 4, Strategic Policy 4(b), and General Policy 2 (d) of the Strategic Plan.

1. The application is refused due to non-compliance with permitted development limits and insufficient information regarding the visual impact of the proposed garages. The proposed garages exceed the permitted development floor area limit of 36 square meters (being approximately 49sqm, individually), necessitating planning permission. Additionally, the application lacks essential details about the height, form, design, external appearance, and material finishing for the proposed garages. This absence of information prevents the Department from adequately assessing the potential impact of the garages on the character and appearance of the site and area. Consequently, the proposal cannot be properly evaluated for compliance with GP 2 (b, c, g, k, n), EP 42, and STP 3 (b) of the Strategic Plan.

Date of issue 4th July 2025 By Order of the Minister

Scott Gallacher Chief Officer

Note 1: A copy of the report of the appointed person is appended hereto.

Note 2: All parties should note that there is no prescribed right of appeal relevant to the Minister’s decision herein and accordingly the only right of challenge is by a petition of doleance brought to the High Court of Justice of the Isle of Man. Such doleance proceedings required to be issued promptly and in any event within 3 months.

Note 3: The letter which accompanies this notice forms part of the notice in accordance with Article 13 (3) of the Town & Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019.