Loading document...
A Johnstone Planning Appeals Administrator On behalf of the Chief Executive Officer Cabinet Office Government Office Douglas Isle of Man IM1 3PN
15th January 2025 Ref: 23/01345/A
Proposal: Appeal against the refusal for approval in principle for the construction of new housing. Address: 60 Victoria Road Douglas Isle of Man IM2 4HQ
Further to my letter received by planning control on 7/12/202 expressing my strong objection to the planning application referred to above, I now state my case for the refusal of the appeal.
All of my objections in my original letter still stand. I will address the specific points raised in the applicants appeal statement.
The refusal does not, as the applicant states, centre around matters of detail.
A site visit would have confirmed that any development in the gardens of the applicant and their adjoining neighbours would be completely inappropriate and unacceptable to immediate neighbours as myself.
It is irrelevant that the submitted layout was for indicative purposes only. Any development on that site would completely destroy the shared amenity enjoyed by the six properties that own the lower gardens. When the land was purchased by my father in law the clear intention in the deeds of sale to no 60, 58, 54, 52 and 50 was that this amenity be protected by a restricted covenant against any building on the land to the east of the houses.
The quoted distance of 30m of distance between the existing houses and the proposed housing does not take into account the difference in land level between them leading to a removal of privacy for myself.
The layout and design is irrelevant as any building would be unacceptable.
The area is an important green space as it is a fundamental part of this particular group of six houses. The applicant may not use it as a private garden but that does not detract from that principle.
The site is not capable of being developed in such a way as not to impact existing residents and houses. Because it is a much lower level it very much impedes their view and amenity.
The plans for the proposed development clearly show access through the existing garage site so that could not be used for vehicles. Any extra vehicles exiting from that access point - contractors, delivery, visiting, residential would be a significant hazard to vehicles using an already very busy main road and to pedestrians using the, again busy, footpath. None of the houses below no 60 have off street parking so the road is constricted. As the planning officer states -the proposed development would result in an unacceptable harmful impact upon highway safety.
In conclusion I hope that The Minister will come to the decision that this appeal be rejected .
Yours faithfully
I atttach 4 photos
23/01345/A Photo 1.
No. 56. My house.
No. 58. No. 60.
My garden No. 56.
Garden No. 60.
Proposed Development
23/01345/A Photo 2
No. 54 No. 56 No. 58
No. 56 garden
Proper No. No. 58
View from No. 56 - my house 23/01345/A Photo3
No. 56 garden
No. 56 garden
The red square of land is owned by a previous owner of no. 58.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
