157994

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                                 17/00254/B
                                 Page  1  of  15

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 17/00254/B Applicant : Port Erin Commissioners Proposal : Change of use of part of field to campsite including installation of 10 'Glamping' pods and a welcome centre including the creation of a new pedestrian access from Spaldrick Promenade Site Address : Field 411194 Rowany Golf Club Rowany Drive Port Erin Isle Of Man

Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken : 20.04.2017 Site Visit : 20.04.2017 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee

Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THE PROPOSAL AND THE LEVEL OF OBJECTION RECEIVED.

0.0 PREAMBLE

0.1 This application was deferred from determination at the previous Planning Committee meeting of 5th May 2017. Following that site visit being undertaken on 15th May 2017, the application is again presented to the Committee for determination on 22nd May 2017. The report that follows is essentially identical to that which was presented to the Committee previously, with the exception of paragraph 5.6 (which has been added) and paragraphs 8.2.2 and 8.2.3 (which have been amended), all to take account of a change to the Persons for whom it is recommended Interested Person Status be awarded.

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE

1.1 The site is a parcel of Rowany Golf Course which sits on the eastern side of Spaldrick Promenade, to the north of the clubhouse, to the south of a field that is zoned for residential development (known as 'Site 20') and to the east of the golf course itself. On the western side of Spaldrick Promenade is Collinson House, a large distinctive detached dwelling with copper coloured domed roof. To the south of Collinson House is a group of properties arranged in a square: Traaie Menaugh Drive accommodates a mix of split level, relatively modern dwellings and an apartment building, The Brambles, which is an older building with four storeys of accommodation. Traaie Menaugh Drive slopes downward towards the brooghs above the former outdoor swimming pool that has planning approval for the development of a dwelling (15/01138/A). Across the top of the square, fronting onto Spaldrick promenade, are 'Mannin House', 2 The Promenade, 'Tinsleys' and 'Windyridge'.

1.2 The application site slopes upward from Spaldrick Promenade towards the golf course by 6.5m over 65m (to the bottom of the existing car park) and 9.3m over the whole site over a distance of 92m. The golf club and clubhouse car park stretches across the top of most of the site.

1.3 The boundary of the site (and the adjacent field) with Spaldrick Promenade is formed by a stone wall approximately 1.3m in height. The land behind this is higher than the footway and is grassed. The boundary with the residential site to the north is a rough bramble and gorse hedge.

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                                 17/00254/B
                                 Page  2  of  15

2.0 THE PROPOSAL

2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the creation of a camping facility on the site, using permanent timber 'glamping' (a portmanteau of the words 'glamorous' and 'camping') pods to accommodate the occupants, together with a facility for the administration of the site (a 'Welcome Centre') at the eastern, higher part of the site. The site is proposed to be terraced to accommodate the ten yurts, five on either side of a central pedestrian path.

2.2 The pods proposed have a dome shape and would be 3m to the top of each structure with a footprint of 6m by 4m. Each could accommodate five people. Each pod would have a small timber decked area to the side with a barbecue pit, and planting would be introduced around each unit - hardy shrubs introduced at first with native Manx trees possibly later with a temporary low level timber fence introduced to shelter the boundary planting until it becomes established. A 10m-wide planted zone is to be introduced between the pods and the boundary with the land zoned as residential to the north, which will be designed in more detail when any layout of the residential development is determined.

2.3 It is understood that plans are currently being prepared for the development of this site for housing but there is nothing yet in the public domain.

2.4 A new pedestrian access, which would be locked at night for security purposes, would be provided to Spaldrick Promenade. Ten car parking spaces would be provided within the existing car park, for the glamping pods, each space capable of accommodating a number of motorbikes.

2.5 The proposed Welcome Centre, at the higher end of the site, is a flat, grass-roofed, timber- clad structure, with something of a fat L-shape footprint: the two rectangular elements are 6.5m by 6m and 4.5m by 4m. A flat-roofed open canopy is provided at the entrance and a small window is proposed in the western elevation and two doors in the front with no other elevations accommodating any openings. A small bin store is proposed alongside to the north.

2.6 Lengthy and helpful explanatory statements have been included with the application. The applicant explains that they have undertaken a review of facilities within the village and identified a desire to have a small scale high quality glamping site within the village. They have support from Rowany Golf Club with an understanding that the facility will be mutually beneficial with glampers using the clubhouse facilities and possibly engaging in casual golf. They are also happy to make ten parking spaces available to the facility.

2.7 The pods and administration facility will be prefabricated and brought to the site for installation on timber bases and connected to mains services. Should the business ever wish to relocate, the pods and bases could be easily removed and the site restored to its previous condition.

2.8 The applicant and prospective occupier / developer have been in discussions with Department of Economic Development's Tourism Division, and their intention is to develop a facility equivalent to the Visit England glamping gold standard. Their design avoids having to have a separate toilet and wash block. They have also sought advice on planting and landscaping.

2.9 They explain that a public sewer runs at the boundary of the site and the pods and the administration building can connect into this without any need for excavation of the public highway. The rainwater from each pod will drain naturally into the surrounding ground. The Welcome Centre's grassed / Sedum roof will also absorb rainwater with any surplus draining into the surface water run-off in the existing car park. Electricity and water is already available to the clubhouse and can be extended to the development. The applicant is in contact with Manx Telecom about the provision of a new telephone connection and high speed broadband.

2.10 Pre-application publicity and discussions led to a number of concerns being raised - the suitability of the site for landscaping was one that led to the applicant revising their proposals for

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                                 17/00254/B
                                 Page  3  of  15

planting, given the exposed nature of the site. Further advice will be sought if the application is approved.

2.11 Concern was expressed about noise levels and the applicant has explained that a site manager will be on site at most times (though not living there permanently) to ensure that unneighbourly behaviour is not happening.

2.12 The applicant met with the owner of the adjacent land that is designated for residential, and alterations to the location of the bin store and the administration building were discussed along with the planted buffer zone between the two developments.

2.13 The owner of Collinson House raised concerns about potential impact on their privacy. The applicant notes that only a few windows face the development site and the House enjoys a good degree of privacy from this. The additional roadside planting will assist with further mitigation of any feeling of being overlooked. Collinson House is 18m away from the nearest proposed pod.

2.14 The prospective end-user explains that the site is an excellent one for camping not only because it provides visitors with a magnificent combination of natural features and good commercial and retail facilities, but also as there is a distinct lack of tourist accommodation in the area, as highlighted in the Hotel Futures Report (2016) despite the village having a wealth of facilities in itself as well as the nearby Fleshwick Bay for diving, watching basking sharks, the steam railway and the Calf of Man. There are two glens within walking distance and various walking trails and headlands, a beach, shops and restaurants.

2.15 They explain that the Welcome and Information Centre would accommodate those arriving and departing and can also offer information on local trips and tours. Their intention is to create a wooded, planted environment for the pods, all of which will be accessible by wheelchairs. The potential for financial spend in Port Erin is significant and the facility will employ one full time member of staff as a site manager as well as a night manager.

2.16 The Manx Wildlife Trust recommends Olearia traversii, which is hardy and can be pruned or grown to a range of sizes and shapes. While an instant impact from the planting is desirable, in such exposed conditions the planting of small whips is likely to be more successful.

2.17 In respect of some of the concerns made with regards to the application from local property owners, and being mindful of the site's zoning as Golf Course on the Area Plan for the South, the agent to the application offered a further letter in support of the application. He noted that consultation had been undertaken with the putative developer of the neighbouring land zoned for residential use and that the scheme had been designed to reflect raised concerns, not least that the proposed planting would be between the likely rear gardens of the dwellings and the proposed pods. They reiterated that the use would be for an initial period of seven years, following which the lease would be reviewed if there had been complaints received. Their view is that the temporary nature of the buildings proposed makes the proposal complementary to the zoning. Though he acknowledges the concern raised, he also points to support from the golf club, from the Port Erin Commissioners, and also from the Tourism Division of DED. The existing golf club has lower-than- normal membership numbers, and the car park is generally occupied at roughly 30% capacity. They believe that only 1 or 2 events per year would result in the car park being over-subscribed. They note that the nearest dwelling to the application site - Collinson House - has a good level of privacy from the site, and also he notes that the dwelling is frequently unoccupied. His explains that barbecues will be kept to a minimum and reiterates that there will be a permanent presence on the site to ensure disorder is kept to a minimum: a site manager will be present during the day time and a night manager at other times. He confirmed that no particular use had been proposed for the site under the Area Plan for the South process, with the concept only being instigated by the new Clerk and new Board members; he also confirmed that other sites had been considered (though does not outline these in any detail), with this and Breagle Glen being judged the favoured sites. Breagle Glen was discounted because of difficulties associated with facilitating landscaping to

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                                 17/00254/B
                                 Page  4  of  15

address local residents' concerns. He also emphasised the excellent facilities in terms of the adjacent clubhouse / restaurant with superb coastal views afforded from the site. With respect to concern raised regarding the problems of plants successfully growing, a pair of photographs - one of the hillside / coastal path below Collinson House, and one from the golf club car park - were provided, both showing a variety of shrubs and trees growing successfully in this coastal environment. Finally, attached to that letter was one from Rowany Golf Club, in which the secretary confirmed a decline in membership from 299 in 2012 to 186 in 2016. He notes that the average entry for competitions is 66 people, spread across roughly 10 hours, and this relates to the available 108 parking spaces available to the Club. Once every six years, during the Island Championships, the car park is over-subscribed, and on those occasions the pitch-and-putt course is used for overspill parking. This pair of letters was circulated for information.

2.18 The applicants also wish to emphasise, in subsequent correspondence to the Department, that glamping is not only a growth market on the Island but is more akin to a boutique hotel than a campsite.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY

3.1 Planning approval has been refused on this site for the development of a hotel and leisure facilities under PA 99/1706/A; offices and car parking was refused under PA 87/04771/A, a dwelling and ancillary accommodation under 87/01663/B and a leisure park under PA 88/01255/A. The 1999 application was refused as part of the development was on land designated as Open Space and also that the comings and goings to and from the car park would cause disturbance and nuisance to nearby residents.

4.0 PLANNING POLICY

4.1 The site is zoned as 'Open Space for particular purposes - Golf Course' on the Area Plan for the South. This would bring with it a presumption against the development proposed as set out in General Policy 3 of the Strategic Plan, although this policy also makes provision for buildings associated with recreation and maintenance of such areas under certain circumstances.

4.2 None of the policies within the Strategic Plan allows for tourism development on land not so zoned. Indeed, Business Policy 11 is clear that "Tourism development must be in accordance with the sustainable development objectives of this plan". However, various campsites (albeit that proposed is glamping) have been considered acceptable throughout the Island on land not designated for development - for example at Glendown Farm, where there is a supported need for the development by DED and where the facilities complement an existing tourist use or where existing buildings or facilities can be used, such as the sports clubs. Camping is an acknowledged part of the offer of tourist accommodation on the Island as is indicated in the response from Department of Economic Development (see below). It is also very true that, as there are no sites specifically designated for this purpose, planning approvals granted for campsites will always be on land that not designated for that particular land use, and often on land not designated for any particular use at all.

4.3 Notwithstanding that the site is not designated for the development proposed, it is nevertheless zoned for a particular form of development. It still important to ensure that the development satisfies the general standards of development set out in General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan, in particular that the development:

(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; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality;

==== PAGE 5 ====

                                                 17/00254/B
                                 Page  5  of  15

(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; (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.

4.4 Business Policy 1:

"The growth of employment opportunities throughout the Island will be encouraged provided that development proposals accord with the policies of this Plan."

4.5 Business Policy 11:

"Tourism development must be in accordance with the sustainable development objectives of this plan; policies and designations which seek to protect the countryside from development will be applied to tourist development with as much weight as they are to other types of development. Within the rural areas there may be situations where existing rural buildings could be used for tourist use and Environment Policy 16 sets out the circumstances where this may be permitted."

4.6 Environment Policy 22 (in part) also requires consideration:

"Development will not be permitted where it would unacceptably harm the environment and/or the amenity of nearby properties in terms of:

(iii) vibration, odour, noise or light pollution."

4.7 Finally, Transport Policy 7 should also be considered:

"The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards."

4.7 There is no specific standard for camping in the Strategic Plan, nor for golf courses, which the application relies upon the use of.

4.8 As already noted, the adjacent land to the north is zoned for Residential use on the Area Plan for the South, having formerly been designated as Tourism / Recreation under the Port Erin Local Plan. The Written Statement states that:

"It is accepted that the land is no longer required for Tourism (Area for Buildings) as designated on the previous Local Plan and thus the Department has judged that the site may have some potential for a low density and sensitively designed residential development which retains an open character".

4.9 No density or numbers were prescribed.

4.10 Finally, the land comprising the golf course is subject to the following paragraph of the Area Plan for the South:

"8.7.1 The golf courses in Port St Mary and Port Erin and the golf links in Castletown contribute to the regional provision of sports facilities in the South as well as attracting visitors to the area. They also help maintain a green corridor between settlements and make significant contributions to the open space in the South, and to the landscape character of the area. As such, these facilities will be

==== PAGE 6 ====

                                                 17/00254/B
                                 Page  6  of  15

protected from inappropriate development. They are designated as Open Space - golf course - on the relevant proposals maps."

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Highway Services of the Department of Infrastructure requested that the application be deferred pending further information regarding whether or not the area of the golf club car park proposed to be used in association with the camping was surplus to the club's requirements. These comments were made 30th March 2017.

5.2 The application is supported by Department of Economic Development Tourism Division whose responsibility it is to maintain, encourage, develop, protect, promote and facilitate tourism in, to and from the Island to the best advantage of the Island. They confirm that they have been working with the applicant and consider that there is a small number of glamping sites on the Island and those experience high occupancy rates throughout the year from both on and off-Island tourism. The Department has identified a need for additional, high quality glamping sites to enhance the range of accommodation available on the Island as identified in the Destination Management Plan 2016-2020, specifically paragraph 2.4 which refers to family friendly accommodation which this development could provide. They see glamping as a niche but growing market which demonstrates a good fit with the Island's profile audiences and offers further diversification of the Island's visitor accommodation. Their comments were received 10th March 2017.

5.3 Port Erin Commissioners, who are the applicants, wrote in support of the application in comments made on 15th March 2017.

5.4.1 A number of letters of objection have been received in respect of the application. The comments made are summarised below in no particular order:

o The proposal would result in an adverse impact on the amenity of prospective residents of Site 20, which is zoned for low density, high quality housing, contrary to General Policy 2(k); o The proposal to site 10 glamping pods at Rowan Golf Club is very ill-considered; o The pods with their associated facilities would have a deleterious impact on the local landscape by introducing an incongruous element; o The proposal ignores or shows no basic knowledge of local climactic conditions; o Our local experiences tells us that the idea of planting vegetation to provide effective screening or the desired experience for pod visitors is totally unrealistic; o Whatever species is chosen, the wind and salt spray will either kill off planting or at best will prevent it reaching 3m in height to screen the pods; o The seasonal hostile weather will necessitate high maintenance of the pods if they are to not rapidly deteriorate; o Without proper supervision it is quite likely that the site would generate nuisance elements such as noise, smoke, litter and possibly vermin; o We would politely point out that best practice followed in other tourist areas is to site glamping pods in such a way as they are easily assimilated into the landscape, for instance within established woodland or shielded by hedgerows; o We fully accord with the aim of providing reasonably priced and appropriate tourist accommodation, this is an inferior and poorly conceived attempt towards achieving this goal; o Bearing in mind the very short letting period and the shortcomings we have indicated, the plan would seem unlikely to constitute a successful investment and would be an impairment, not an enhancement, to the village; o The proposal would represent an unjustified departure from planning policy as set out in the Strategic Plan and Area Plan for the South; o The proposed land use is not within an area zoned for such use on the relevant Area Plan and none of the exceptions in General policy 3 apply, and the application should be refused on that basis alone;

==== PAGE 7 ====

                                                 17/00254/B
                                 Page  7  of  15

o Paragraph 8.7, paragraph 93 of the Area Plan for the South recognises the value of golf courses in the south of the Island, which are to be "protected from inappropriate development"; o Even if the proposal were within an area zoned for such a use it would be contrary to General Policy 2; o The proposal adversely affects the surrounding landscape or townscape, as presumed against by paragraph (c) of General Policy 2; o The Area Plan for the South recognises that the golf course helps "maintain a green corridor between settlements" and makes "significant contributions to the open space" and to "the landscape character of the area", and the proposed development and creation of a woodland area would be entirely out of keeping with the existing exposed coastal landscape; o The proposal adversely affects local residents, as presumed against by paragraph (g) of General Policy 2; o The 10 pods proposed would overlook our client's property; o Furthermore, each of the units would have the use of external decking and a barbecue area with significant potential for noise and smoke nuisance from same; o The proposed pedestrian access onto Spaldrick Promenade opposite our client's property is likely to cause significant nuisance as patrons pass through the gate along with 50+ guests at any one time, throughout the day and night; o The proposal is contrary to Environment Policy 22 of the Strategic Plan; o The proposal prejudices the use or development of adjoining land, contrary to paragraph (k) of General Policy 2 as it would be in appropriate for a campsite to be located so closely to residential properties on the neighbouring land zoned for that use, given the potential impact of noise and other pollution; o The applicant has failed to provide any compelling reason as to why the policies to which the proposal is contrary should not be applied; o There is a restrictive covenant preventing building development on this site, appropriate to its former designation as "tourism/recreational use/open space" in respect of which it was sold to the Commissioners; o The Commissioners over the years were keen to maintain the break in development between the top of the Promenade at Spaldrick; o This proposal has been roundly rejected by residents of Breagle Glen and now the Commissioners seek to impose it on Spaldrick; o There is little difference between static glamping pods and static caravans such that there is little difference between luxury camping and luxury caravanning; o Almost every picture reference of glamping show lush, wooded surroundings, which obviously enhance the users' experience as well as shielding them from view; o They are ideally suited for established wooded surroundings, not bare sites in hopeful anticipation of screening in years to come; o There will never be a wooded glad in this part of Spaldrick due to extreme exposure to wind; o The applicants' submissions regarding tree-planting are optimistic to say the least, with the excessive spray created from onshore gales funnelled up to create a hostile environment that curtails and stunts growth of trees and shrubs, with many arboreal casualties at Rowany Golf Club; o I can show you a sycamore that has struggled to grow one metre in 50 years; o A one-metre temporary fence and a letter from DEFA will not be enough to tame the elements on this site; o These pods will not be effectively screened in the short term, if ever; o This sit abuts a main road and so the visual impact from day one will be considerable and should be the prime consideration; o Exposed glamping pods would be an incongruous addition to a promenade already blighted by derelict hotel sites that seem to have gone unnoticed for years by the same Commissioners; o The development / re-development of the promenade requires buildings of stature and architectural merit, the description within which glamping pods do not sit; o The siting of this proposed development opposite what is arguably the most architecturally accomplished building in Port Erin is particularly inept;

==== PAGE 8 ====

                                                 17/00254/B
                                 Page  8  of  15

o As well as prejudicing the development of the land to the north for high specification properties, an inadequately screened development would devalue properties in the immediate vicinity; o There are few legally enforceable conditions governing the daily operation of the site that could be attached to any planning approval; o Where is the overnight sleeping accommodation for staff?; o How long before 24/7 staffing becomes a 24/7 telephone number?; o 10 outdoor fire pits will be unfortunate for residents living downwind; o I respectfully request that this application be considered by a full Planning Committee and that members visit the site in order to see its context with and relevance to the promenade; o I would also urge them to refuse the application; o I believe this will not be at all environmentally friendly; o This is within yards of a national glen - is camping now more important than our treasured green space?; o Who is going to want to stay out there outside of the summer season and who is going to pay for the maintenance? Will it be the Port Erin ratepayers?; o We don't want the extra noise, parking, pollution; o The proposed campsite will generate a large number of cars, motorhomes and vans, and people on Rowany Drive already suffer with parking problems during the summer months; o When there is a function on at the [golf] club, it is hard to get on and off our driveway; o Also, our gardens get full of rubbish (chip wrappers, empty beer / other drink cans and bottles); o We will be inundated with RATS, vermin and gulls etc.; o Most of the people that have bought houses or flats on Rowany Drive did so for the peace and quiet as we are mostly retired people.

5.4.2 The comments were received from the owners / occupiers of the following properties, with the date their response was received given in brackets:

o 'Bradda Mooar', Tower Road, Bradda, Port Erin (4th April 2017); o 'Reayrt Vradda', Rowany Drive, Port Erin (4th April 2017); o 'Collinson House', Spaldrick Promenade, Port Erin (31st March 2017); o 'Tinsleys', Spaldrick, Port Erin (27th March 2017); o 8 Erin Court, Rowany Drive, Port Erin (27th March 2017), and o 'Andes', Rowany Drive, Port Erin (27th March 2017).

5.5 Haven Homes Limited, who have purchased an option to develop Site 20, have appointed Hugh Local Architects to comment on the application on their behalf. Their comments, date- stamped as having been received 3rd April 2017, can be summarised as follows:

o Haven Homes Limited intend to develop Site 20 for low density, high quality housing; o Of concern are the potential noise and visual impacts of the proposal on the amenity of prospective residents, which was discussed with Port Erin Commissioners prior to the submission of the planning application; o After due consideration, it is still felt that four amendments will most likely address these concerns and non-compliance with General Policy 2(k), namely: (1) inclusion of an acoustic and visual landscape barrier, at least 10m-wide, along the full extent of the party boundary, provided that Haven Homes Limited have an input into the design, specification, installation and maintenance regime for such a barrier, and will be required by condition or legal agreement with the applicant, (2) relocation of bin store away from the property boundary; (3) accommodation of the Welcome Centre away from the property boundary into pods to match the glamping units, and (4) acceptance of a planning condition, if approved, restricting the use of any eternal recreational space to between the hours of 7am and 10:30pm; o The proposal clearly contravenes General Policy 2(k) and should be refused;

==== PAGE 9 ====

                                                 17/00254/B
                                 Page  9  of  15

o The whole of the area occupied by Rowany Golf Club is zoned as Open Space for that particular purpose, not for camping or glamping use, whereas Site 20 is specifically zoned for Residential Use; o Use of the application site for glamping was not anticipated by the Area Plan at the time of its adoption.

5.6 Hugh Logan Architects, again acting on behalf of Haven Homes Limited, addressed correspondence to the case officer that was received via email on 9th May 2017 and in hard copy on 5th May 2017. The correspondence requested that both they and the owner / occupier of Bradda Mooar, who has written on behalf of her father who owns Site 20 and which is adjacent to the application site, be awarded Interested Person Status.

6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 Tourism is provided for on a number of sites within Port Erin - the Bradda Glen cafe and car park, the Falcon's Nest Hotel, the Cherry Orchard Hotel and apartments and can also be included within areas of Mixed Use. There are no Tourism sites identified in Port St. Mary. None of these sites, other than a small part of the Bradda Glen site, is grassed or open. Rushen Football Club grounds have permission for use of their field and clubhouse for camping during race periods as have Colby AFC and Castletown FC elsewhere in the south. Camping is also available in Castletown during the Southern 100 alongside the race headquarters. Glendown Farm on Truggan Road has an approved camp site.

6.2 It is also true that the land is zoned for development, albeit a very specific use and one unlikely to bring a significant level of noise, disturbance or visually unpleasant structures. Moreover, the site is within an area of the edge of Port Erin that many people would view as being on the fringes of the village but very likely a part of it. Golf clubs are often located in such areas and provide a beneficial 'transition' between the built environment and open countryside. That is the case here, though it is still considered that the site and land to the south positively contributes to the character of Port Erin by virtue of its openness. Any harmful loss of this openness, and the contribution it makes to this characterful edge-of-village location, is clearly to be resisted.

6.3 It is most unfortunate that the application has been submitted following the re-zoning of the land to the north from tourism-related uses. That area of land was available for that use for a period in excess of two decades, and were this current application proposed on that land, contiguous to the north, and against the Port Erin Local Plan, then it would clearly be acceptable in principle. However, that is not the case, and the proposal must be considered on its merits. In essence, the acceptability of the proposal distils down to its impacts on neighbouring living conditions in terms of noise and general disturbance, its visual impact, its impact on the adjacent land zoned for residential development, and also its impact on highway safety. The latter is addressed first.

Highway safety and parking provision

6.4 The deferral sought by Highway Services is understandable given the slight lack of detail in this regard when the application was originally submitted. However, it now seems clear from the information subsequently submitted that there is sufficient parking on the adjacent golf club car park site, which is within the application site, to accommodate the parking levels required of the development without causing problems for parking elsewhere. The ten spaces reflect one space per pod, albeit that no parking is specifically allocated for the site manager: there is another part of the car park that could provide this parking. While there may be the very rare occasion when overflow parking is required, this would seemingly occur through the activities of the golf club whether the camp site were to be approved or not, and therefore the lack of ten spaces on those occasions is not considered material to the outcome of the application.

==== PAGE 10 ====

                                                 17/00254/B                                      Page  10  of  15

6.5 Moreover, the site is connected to both the Sea Terminal and the airport via regular bus services, and it may well be that tourists arrive via public transport, thereby reducing parking requirements. In any case, it is not considered that there is a sufficient justification to object to the application on grounds of parking provision.

Visual impact

6.6 It is to be remembered that the site lies within an area of land zoned for a particular use - Open Space, specifically a golf course. Therefore, while it is certainly not to be expected that the site will come under pressure for significant levels of built development, its use for a golf course is accepted. Therefore, applications seeking approval for golf course-related buildings would also be acceptable in principle, subject of course to the normal considerations of the resulting visual impact.

6.7 In this case, concern has been raised about the appearance of the glamping pods, and specifically that they are inappropriate for locations that are exposed (such as this) and should be located within established woodland or well-screened areas where they become more quickly and readily a part of the landscape. This is an understandable concern. Equally, such locations are rarely within sustainable locations, which is the clear case here. Port Erin has sufficient facilities to provide for all the pods' occupiers reasonable needs without any reliance on private car.

6.8 The appearance of such buildings will not be to everyone's tastes: the view has been expressed that they are little different to mobile caravans, which seems a rather exaggerated description, whereas other people may well view small timber structures such as are proposed as having as limited impact on the landscape as would garden sheds. There are other associated proposed works as well, of course, and the barbecue pits, terraced areas and the administration centre

6.9 It is also highly likely that at such point as the neighbouring land is developed - and this does seem a reasonable presumption to make, given that objections have been received from the housebuilder with an option to develop the land - the impact of glamping pods here will be balanced against the new dwellings. It would be wrong to place too much weight on this since no tentative proposals have been submitted to the Department and as such it is not possible to have an appreciation with regards the likely visual impact, but as a general principle it would also be wrong to set this likelihood wholly aside.

6.10 It is worth considering what value the land offers at the moment. As outlined in representations, the Area Plan for the South is clear that this golf club contributes significantly to the openness and landscape character of the area and, accordingly, that inappropriate development will be resisted. An assessment is therefore required as to the extent to which what is proposed represents 'inappropriate development'. Evidently, the expressed local opinion is that it is inappropriate for the many reasons identified.

6.11 A very balanced judgement is required. In this case, it is considered that the overwhelming objections made in respect of the visual impact from the owners of dwellings that are nearby the application site must be given significant weight in this balance. The site itself is not large and, while the golf course as a whole assuredly contributes to the open and natural character of the area, it remains proportionally a very small part of the overall land in question - albeit a particularly prominent and visible one. The fact is that the Area Plan for the South was adopted very recently, and to depart from its provisions when there is clear and well-made local opposition to the proposed development is difficult to support. The intention to screen the proposed pods is welcome, and judicious consideration of the planting species is particularly appreciated, even if it must be the case that this will take some time to fully bring the benefits hoped. The buildings proposed are not considered to be in and of themselves unattractive - indeed, their form reflects the somewhat flowing nature of the landscape and the natural timber finish is well-considered. Nevertheless, they, along with the associated terracing and barbecue areas would be at odds with the character of the

==== PAGE 11 ====

                                                 17/00254/B                                      Page  11  of  15

area, and would serve to reduce the "green corridor" that currently contributes to the separation of parts of Port Erin here.

6.12 Accordingly, unless there are material considerations that suggest otherwise, it is concluded that the proposal should be refused because of the harmful impact it would have on the open character and natural appearance of this prominent location, contrary to paragraph 8.7.1 of the Area Plan for the South and parts (b), (c) and (g) of General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan.

Impact on neighbouring residential living conditions

6.13 The proposal has evidently concerned nearby neighbours. Their worries are understandable. Camping often brings with it undesirable impacts (or at the very least the fear of undesirable impacts), and it is reasonable for local residents to feel secure that the most recently adopted zoning on the Island should carry significant material weight in assessing planning applications.

6.14 The intention to have a site manager is clearly to be welcomed and will unquestionably result in better site administration than a lack of such a presence. Equally, though, such a presence may only result in stopping of anti-social behaviour once it has started, rather than preventing it altogether. As ever with proposals such as this, it is in the interest of the site owner / site tenant to ensure that the site is properly managed in order to continue good relations with those living nearby.

6.15 Therefore, a similarly balanced judgement must be made in respect of this issue and it is somewhat unfortunately concluded that that judgement must again go against the proposal. Were the neighbouring residents in favour of or neutral towards the proposed development, then it is considered that the presence of a site manager would be sufficient to conclude that the impact would be within acceptable levels. However, the fact is that the nearby residents are understandably concerned about the impact a permanent camping facility would bring to their living conditions and, while it remains the case that proper management of the site is in the tenant's and site owners' interest, it is concluded that the application has failed to demonstrate it would have an acceptable impact on neighbouring amenity levels.

6.16 Accordingly, unless there are material considerations that suggest otherwise, it is concluded that the proposal should be refused because of the harmful impact it would have on neighbouring living conditions, contrary to part (g) of General Policy 2 and part (iii) of Environment Policy 22 of the Strategic Plan.

6.17 It is not considered that the application is objectionable on privacy grounds. Though it is accepted that the nearest pods are proposed at roughly 18m (at the nearest) from the nearest dwelling, it is also understood why people may feel this is too close even if there is a road separating Collinson House from the application site. The site is also higher than Collinson House. However, the separation distance is considered sufficient. 20m is the normal separation distance between residential dwellings, and the pods and the outdoor space have limited opportunity for overlooking Collinson House by virtue of their design and orientation, which would result in the single pair of opening doors facing away from Collinson House. It is not considered that the pods would materially affect any other nearby dwelling in respect of privacy. The impact of the use of the pods is considered the more concerning matter for the reasons already set out.

The adjacent Site 20

6.18 This land zoned as "Predominantly Residential (Proposed)". It is not zoned for low density, high quality housing as indicated in the representation on behalf of the housebuilder with an option to purchase / develop the land - it is solely zoned for Residential use. While it is understood why concern has been raised with respect to part (k) of General Policy 2, in this case this is not considered to be a reason to refuse the application. For the same reasons as local people have

==== PAGE 12 ====

                                                 17/00254/B                                      Page  12  of  15

objected to the application, it is understandable that the putative owners of any dwellings developed on this site may have concern regarding the impact on their living conditions.

6.19 However, the fundamental difference here is that those people would be aware of the glamping site before they purchased the houses, and the impacts associated with the proposed glamping site would not be so significant as to prevent Site 20 coming forward for development.

6.20 Part (k) of General Policy 2 is, generally, considered to be necessary to prevent clear 'bad neighbour' uses from being located next to one another. Notwithstanding the concerns raised earlier in this report, camping and residential uses are not judged to be so fundamentally at odds with one another that, were the glamping site created, this would result in making the principle of residential development on Site 20 being unacceptable.

Other material considerations

6.21 Business Policies 1 and 11 set out support for tourist-related development where such a proposal can be said to comply with the other policies of the Strategic Plan. Clearly, there has been some conflict identified in this regard, and Business Policies 1 and 11 need to be weighed up in the overall planning balance. Moreover, the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 specifically allows "all other material considerations" to be considered in the assessment of planning applications: in this case, the contribution of the development to the tourism industry and Port Erin's and the Island's economy generally would be such a consideration.

6.22 It is not quantified in the application what this contribution - in financial terms - might be. However, it is also true that there would almost certainly be some gain as a result of this proposal. It is also clear that it fits within the provisions of the Destination Management Strategy, as pointed out by the Tourism team in DED - who also note that the existing glamping sites on the Island are often fully booked. There is, clearly, a defined need for such accommodation. Without further evidence to demonstrate exactly what the financial benefit would be, however, it is difficult to give particularly significant weight to this issue, but it is nevertheless a point in the application's favour.

7.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

7.1 The application has been difficult to assess, and the conclusions on the impact of the proposal on neighbouring living conditions and the character of the area. Were there support from local residents, the application may have gone forward with a recommendation to approve. However, as it is, the proposal has proved controversial and worrying to people living nearby and, in view also of the recently adopted zoning for the area and the lack of strong material considerations to outweigh the identified concerns, it is concluded that the application should be refused for the two reasons outlined in the foregoing assessment.

7.2 However, it is acknowledged that this is a balanced conclusion, and the Committee may feel that the proposal is acceptable. With that in mind, conditions relating to:

o Planting; o Opening periods during the year; o The possibility of a temporary period for the approval; o The requirement to return the land to its current grassed state once the use ceases; o The prevention of the use of the land for the pitching of tents.

7.3 In respect of the opening periods and possibility for a temporary approval, the applicant / agent have confirmed that the glamping site is intended to be open all year round, and that to impose a temporary approval period would potentially imperil the financial viability of the scheme.

==== PAGE 13 ====

                                                 17/00254/B                                      Page  13  of  15

8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

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

o The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; o 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; o Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material, which in this case includes the Department of Economic Development; o Highway Services of the Department of Infrastructure, and o The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

8.2.1 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.

8.2.2 In this instance, it is considered that the following persons have sufficient interest and should be awarded the status of an Interested Person: o The owner / occupier of 'Bradda Mooar', Tower Road, Bradda, Port Erin; o The owner / occupier of 'Collinson House', Spaldrick Promenade, Port Erin, and o The owner / occupier of 'Tinsleys', Spaldrick, Port Erin.

The owner / occupier of Bradda Mooar writes on behalf of her father, who owns land adjacent to the application site (that is, Site 20). Collinson House is opposite the application site, while Tinsleys is almost so. It is considered that both of these dwellings are sufficiently near to the application site such that the legitimate enjoyment of their homes may be adversely affected by noise as a consequent of the development.

8.2.3 In this instance, it is considered that the following persons do not have sufficient interest and therefore should not be awarded the status of an Interested Person: o The owner / occupier of 'Reayrt Vradda', Rowany Drive, Port Erin; o The owner / occupier of 8 Erin Court, Rowany Drive, Port Erin, and o The owner / occupier of 'Andes', Rowany Drive, Port Erin.

While it is noted that cars using the car park associated with the glamping site will pass all three of the dwellings on Rowany Drive, and it is also noted that this is a residential street, the associated movements of these in addition to what already occurs is unlikely to adversely affect the owners' enjoyment of these homes. At a distance roughly 120m from the site, it is also concluded that these homes are sufficiently far away to conclude their owners' enjoyment of these would not be adversely affected.

Bradda Mooar is more than 400m away from the application site and could not be said to be materially affected by the development.

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Refused Date of Recommendation: 27.04.2017

==== PAGE 14 ====

                                                 17/00254/B                                      Page  14  of  15

R 1. The glamping development proposed would have an unduly harmful impact on the open character and natural appearance of this prominent location, contrary to paragraph 8.7.1 of the Area Plan for the South 2013 and parts (b), (c) and (g) of General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

R 2. The proposed glamping development would have an unduly harmful impact on neighbouring living conditions, contrary to part (g) of General Policy 2 and part (iii) of Environment Policy 22 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.

Decision Made : ...Refused.. Committee Meeting Date:...22.05.2017

Signed :...E RILEY... Presenting Officer

Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).

YES/NO See below

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.

==== PAGE 15 ====

                                                 17/00254/B                                      Page  15  of  15

PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 22.05.2017

Application No. :

17/00254/B Applicant : Port Erin Commissioners Proposal : Change of use of part of field to campsite including installation of 10 'Glamping' pods and a welcome centre including the creation of a new pedestrian access from Spaldrick Promenade Site Address : Field 411194 Rowany Golf Club Rowany Drive Port Erin Isle Of Man

Presenting Officer : Mr Edmond Riley

Addendum to the Officer’s Report

The Planning Committee further debated the proposal subsequent to their site visit May 15th and the likely effect on the appearance of this part of the village, in doing so noting the concern of Mr Faragher who had registered to speak. Being mindful of the impact a permanent development would have, and being concerned about the appearance of the glamping pods proposed, the Committee voted to slightly amend the wording of the recommended first reason for refusal to include the words 'incongruous' and 'permanent' and also to specifically refer to the pods.

It was also determined that further clarity be given to the reasoning behind the granting of Interested Person Status as follows:

"The owner / occupier of Bradda Mooar writes on behalf of her father, who owns land adjacent to the application site (that is, Site 20). As such, they comply with Article 2(1)(a) of Government Circular 0046/13, which sets out the circumstances in which Interested Person Status is granted. Collinson House is opposite the application site, while Tinsleys is almost so. It is considered that both of these dwellings are sufficiently near to the application site such that the legitimate enjoyment of their homes may be adversely affected by noise as a consequent of the development, and accordingly they comply with Article 2(1)(d)(i) of the aforementioned Circular."

Reason for Refusal

R 1. The glamping development proposed would have an unduly harmful impact on the open character and natural appearance of this prominent location, contrary to paragraph 8.7.1 of the Area Plan for the South 2013 and parts (b), (c) and (g) of General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

R 2. The proposed glamping development would have an unduly harmful impact on neighbouring living conditions, contrary to part (g) of General Policy 2 and part (iii) of Environment Policy 22 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.