Officer Report

Application No.: 18/00313/C Applicant: Philip Routledge Proposal: Additional use of property as self-catering tourist accommodation Site Address: 2 Holmes Court Rowany Drive Port Erin Isle of Man IM9 6LW Case Officer : Miss Lucy Kinrade Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 05.06.2018 _________________________________________________________________

Conditions and Notes for Approval

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

Plans/Drawings/Information:

This approval relates to floor plans and elevations drawing and site location plan both date stamped and received 22/03/2018. _______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons NONE _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 2 Holmes Court, which is a ground floor, two-bedroom apartment located south of Port Erin Golf Club and Rowany Drive. Along here are a number of purpose-built apartment blocks of similar style and of no particular

• architectural merit, along with some detached dwellings as well. Those with a northern aspect benefit from fine and open views of the golf course and countryside in this part of the Island.
• 1.2 The ownership of the building, which provides four flats, also includes four single garages to the rear.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Proposed is the additional use of the property for tourist accommodation. No other alterations or external changes are proposed.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The most relevant application in the determination of the current application is PA 16/00270/C for the additional use of first floor apartment 3 Holmes Court which was granted full approval in 2016.

4.0 PLANNING POLICY - 4.1 The site lies at the very northern edge of a large area zoned as predominantly residential on the Area Plan for the South 2013. The following policies of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 are considered relevant in the assessment of the application: - 4.2 Paragraph 9.5.8 states: "The use of existing private residential properties as tourist accommodation may be acceptable if it can be demonstrated that it will not compromise the amenities of any neighbouring residents." - 4.3 Business Policy 13 states: "Permission will generally be given for the use of private residential properties as tourist

accommodation providing that it can be demonstrated that such use would not compromise the amenities of neighbouring residents."

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services concluded that there would be no changes to the site access or parking as a result of the development and that the proposed tourist use is likely to be similar to the existing residential use and therefore not expected to increase site traffic or parking demand and therefore no new highway issues should be created. As such Highway Services does not oppose the application (02/05/2018). - 5.2 Port Erin Commissioners resolved to support the application in comments received on 14/05/2018.

6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The application seeks approval for the additional use of a residential property to tourist accommodation. The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment and determination of this planning application are the impact of the proposal on the living conditions of the immediate neighbours and the impact on local amenity. - 6.2 Although there is generally a view in favour of using residential properties for tourist accommodation as outlined in Business Policy 13, there can be times whereby this is opposed. There have been a small number of refusals given to applications looking to gain the same permission; the use of flats for tourist accommodation could potentially have a damaging effect on the amenities of others through the comings and goings of tourists in comparison to permanent residents, although most are granted approval there has been an instance of one refusal - PA 04/00194/C. - 6.3 In the case of apartment properties like this, concern lies in the potential to cause disruptions to the immediate neighbouring properties. In terms of differentiating a tourist and a

• permanent resident it is often difficult to define how each would behave. As a tourist, a person may be out a lot of the time, but may also have a greater number of late nights and be disruptive on return. On the other hand, permanent residents may be at home more, and could be more likely to invite friends or family over for dinner or parties that may be noisy. In general the majority of people tend to behave well and raise no concerns, although there will always be a percentage that may not behave.
• 6.4 Aforementioned the apartment is located within a purpose-built building amongst other such buildings as well as individual, detached dwellings, and also opposite the golf course and club, it is likely that the comings and goings of residents or tourists will be no more apparent than those already living or visiting the nearby area. The property is modest and not sized to accommodate a large numbers of tourists or residents and there is sufficient off road car parking spaces available to the rear and adjacent to the site to ensure there is a limited demand for on street parking and vehicle congestion on the main road.
• 6.5 It is noted that although the nature of the use might be different from permanent residential accommodation, it should also be remembered that the use of the site for private rental accommodation would require no planning approval and could result in frequent and continual turnover of residents.
• 6.6 It is considered the use of the existing residential dwelling as tourist accommodation would have a similar impact, whether it is used for tourist or permanent residential use and therefore would not have a significant impact upon the living conditions of the neighbouring properties.

7.0 CONCLUSION - 7.1 In view of the lack of concern raised with respect to the proposal, it is considered that there is no demonstrable harm arising from the proposal and, in view of the provisions of Paragraph 9.5.8 and Business Policy 13, the application is therefore recommended for approval. INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 (Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent;
• b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested;
• c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material
• d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure and
• e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

8.2 The decision-maker must determine:

• o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and
• o whether there are other persons to those listed in Article 6(4) who should be given Interested Person Status.

I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.

Decision Made : Permitted Date : 14.06.2018 Determining officer

Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management

Customer note

This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.