Officer Report

Application No.: 15/01196/C Applicant: Edward & Catherine Bottomley Proposal: Additional use of residential apartment as tourist accommodation (retrospective) Site Address: Apartment 1 Derby Court 42 The Promenade Castletown Isle of Man IM9 1BG Case Officer : Miss Melissa McKnight Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is the curtilage of Apartment 1, Derby Court, which is a ground floor apartment within a three storey detached building located on the northern side of The Promenade, Castletown. To the east of the site is James Road.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The application seeks retrospective approval for the additional use of the apartment for tourist accommodation. - 2.2 The apartment comprises two en-suite bedrooms, kitchen and lounge and an enclosed patio area. Parking is provided for within a detached garage to the rear of the building.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The application site has not been the subject of any previous planning applications that are considered materially relevant to the assessment of this current planning application. - 3.2 There have been a number of similar planning applications that have sought the additional use of residential apartments as tourist accommodation, albeit in Douglas. Four of these planning applications have been listed below and both were granted planning approval:

34 Piccadilly Court - PA 15/00763/C 43 Empress Apartments - PA 14/01089/C 45 Spectrum Apartments - PA 14/00645/C 49 Piccadilly Court - PA 13/00850/C

3.3 There have been a number of dwellings in Castletown that have sought additional use as tourist accommodation, two of which have been listed below and both were granted planning approval:

7 Queen Street - PA 14/00712/C Cronk Darragh House - PA 13/91428/C

4.0 PLANNING POLICY - 4.1 The application site is within an area zoned as Residential under the Area Plan for the South 2013.

4.2 In terms of strategic plan policy, the Isle of Man Planning Policy 2007 contains two policies that are considered materially relevant to the assessment of this current planning application:

General Policy 2 states: "Development which is in accordance with the land use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:

• a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief;
• b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the space around them;
• c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape;
• d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses;
• e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea;
• f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks;
• g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality;
• h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space;
• i) does not have an adverse effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways;
• j) can be provided with all necessary services;
• k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan;
• l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding;
• m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and
• n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."

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 Castletown Town Commissioners have no objection to the current planning application (12/11/2015). - 5.2 The Department of Infrastructure Highway Services do not oppose the current planning application (04/11/2015). - 5.3 A representation has been received from the owners and/or occupiers of The Rope Walk, owners of No. 4 and 6 Derby Court. The representation includes a copy of the deeds with the representations stating that the letting arrangements of the kind proposed within the planning application are not permitted (17/11/2015). - 5.4 A representation has been received from the owner and/or occupier of No. 5 Derby Court that also includes the above statement and a copy of the deeds (20/11/2015).

6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The planning application does not propose any external alterations or modifications nor have any been carried out. Therefore it is imperative to assess the impacts of the useon the residential amenity of the local residents of neighbouring apartments and the impact of the use on the local area. - 6.2 The Strategic Plan makes it clear that the use of private residential properties for tourist accommodation will generally be acceptable provided that it would not compromise the amenities of

• neighbouring properties. Whilst the application site is not a residential property, it is a residential unit and as such the same principle applies.
• 6.3 The application site lies within an area zoned as residential and there are no other uses within the immediate locality. The area is relatively well populated and as such there are already an existing number of coming and goings. The Promenade is also the main route from Castletown to Derbyhaven and so general noise disturbances, namely passing traffic, are not completely uncommon.
• 6.4 Tourist movements can be very different to that of those residing in an apartment block on a permanent basis. With many shared living areas such as apartments, a different standard of residential amenity is expected than those living in a semi-detached or detached property. There is generally less privacy and more interaction with neighbours through the use of shared corridors and spaces. Permanent residents may be at home more of the time, but be more likely to invite friends or family over for dinner or parties that may be noisy. Furthermore, those who work shifts must not also be disregarded; the apartment could at one day become occupied by someone who works shifts where comings and goings may occur late at night and/or early hours of the morning.
• 6.5 In general terms, the majority of people tend to behave well, although there will always be a percentage that might not, whether they are a permanent resident or otherwise. It is not considered that tourists would treat the building any different than a resident within the building and would not cause significant harm to the residential amenity through an increase in noise and disturbance over and above what most likely occurs at present in and around the area. It is also worth noting that as this application is retrospective with the unit already used as tourist accommodation, no complaints regarding noise and disturbance have been stated within any representation received.
• 6.6 The application site is within walking distance to Castletown town centre and is located close to bus routes and as such, the proposed additional use in this area is deemed acceptable with regards to tourist accessibility and use.
• 6.7 In terms of the impact of the proposal on parking, there is available parking within a detached garage to the rear of the application site and as such there would be no significant impact upon highway safety or on street parking within the area.

7.0 OTHER MATTERS - 7.1 Issues such as covenants and lease agreements are not material planning matters and therefore hold no weight in the determination of this planning application. These are civil matters between the relevant parties.

8.0 RECOMMENDATION - 8.1 Overall, it is concluded that the planning application accords to General Policy 2 and Business Policy 13 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 and the planning application is recommended for approval.

9.0 PARTY STATUS - 9.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, 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 considered material; and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

With effect from 1 June 2015, the Transfer of Planning & Building Control Functions Order 2015 amends the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 to give effect to the meaning of the word 'Department' to be the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture unless otherwise directed by that Order.

9.2 In addition to those above, article 6(3) of the Order requires the Department to decide which persons (if any) who have made representations with respect to the application, should be treated as having sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application.

In this instance, it is recommended that the following persons do not have sufficient interest to be awarded the status of an Interested person in accordance with Government Circular 0046/13 as the persons are concerned exclusively with covenants:

The owners and/or occupiers of Nos. 4 and 6 Derby Court. The owner and/or occupier of No. 3 Derby Court. Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 30.11.2015 Conditions and Notes for Approval: C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions This approval relates to Location Plan and Ground Floor Plan date stamped as received 30th October 2015.

I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Senior Planning Officer in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.

Decision Made : Permitted Date: 02.12.2015 Determining officer

Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer

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.