Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
25/90431/C
Page 1 of 6
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 25/90431/C Applicant : Mr Wai Man Ho Proposal : Additional use of apartment as tourist accommodation Site Address : Avondale House - Flat 1 9 - 10 Palace Terrace Queens Promenade Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 4NE
Planning Officer: Peiran Shen Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 08.07.2025 __
Reason for Refusal
R.1 This application has no material difference compared to the refused application PA 25/90164/C and therefore the proposal would compromise the amenities of neighbouring residents, with particular regard to noise and security. It is considered that the proposal therefore fails to comply with General Policy 2 (g) (m) and Business Policy 13 of the IOM Strategic Plan 2016.
__
Right to Appeal
It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal: Douglas City Council - No objection Department of Infrastructure - No objection
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given the Right to Appeal as they have submitted an objection that meets the specified criteria: Apartment 6, Avondale House, 9-10 Palace Terrace, Queens Promenade, Douglas Apartment 8, Avondale House, 9-10 Palace Terrace, Queens Promenade, Douglas Apartment 9, Avondale House, 9-10 Palace Terrace, Queens Promenade, Douglas Beresford House Management Limited, 13B The Village Walk, Onchan __
Officer’s Report
THE PLANNING APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT
1.0 THE SITE
==== PAGE 2 ====
25/90431/C
Page 2 of 6
1.1 The site is Avondale House, 9 Palace Terrace, Queens Promenade, Douglas, an apartment building located on the northwest of Queens Promenade, close to its junction with Palace View Terrace. Avondale House abuts other apartment buildings on both sides, which gives the impression of a terraced building. There are parking spaces at the rear of the building, accessible via an access lane to the northeast.
1.2 Avondale House has two apartments on each floor. Apartment 1 is located on the first floor of Avondale House.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The proposal is for the additional use of Apartment 1, Avondale House, as tourist accommodation.
2.2 The applicant proposed access control, noise monitoring sensor and insurance to mitigate the harm to neighbouring amenities, from the refused application in section 3.
2.3 The physical mitigation measures include: o new front door with access control o noise monitoring sensor that sends alerts to renters and the owner
2.4 The contractual/managerial mitigation measures include: o vetting staff o verifying guests o security deposit o rental terms o limit the occupancy rate o house rules o no parking behind the building (unless relating to a mobility issue) o to cover a reasonable increase in insurance premiums.
3.0 Planning History 3.1 Additional use of residential dwelling as tourist accommodation (Class 3.6) was REFUSED under PA 25/90164/C. The reason for refusal is: "the proposal would compromise the amenities of neighbouring residents, with particular regard to noise and security. It is considered that the proposal therefore fails to comply with General Policy 2 (g) (m) and Business Policy 13 of the Strategic Plan."
4.0 Planning Policy Site Specific 4.1 The site is within an area designated as Mixed Use in the Area Plan for the East.
4.2 The Written Statement of the Area Plan (9.11.2) states: "Development types within areas of mixed use generally comprise a variety of different but compatible uses. Appropriate new uses may include a mix of shops and some services (financial and professional), food and drink, office and light industry, research and development, tourist and residential uses, and other uses such as clinics or health centres, childcare or education, community facilities, and places of assembly and leisure."
4.3 The site is within an area with a high risk for tidal flooding in the DoI Flood Risk Viewer.
Strategic Policy 4.4 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered materially relevant to the assessment of this current planning application: o Strategic Policy 5 o General Policy 2 (b), (g), (h), (i), (m), (n) o Environment Policy 10, 13
==== PAGE 3 ====
25/90431/C
Page 3 of 6
o Environment Policy 32, 33 o Transport Policy 7 o Appendix 7.6 o Business Policy 13 - Permission will generally be given for using private residential properties as tourist accommodation, providing that it can be demonstrated that such use would not compromise the amenities of neighbouring residents.
PPS and NPD 4.5 No relevant Planning Policy Statement or National Policy Directive applies to this application.
5.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS Strategy and Guidance 5.1 There is no strategy or guidance materially relevant to this application.
6.0 REPRESENTATION This section is a summary. The original texts of the consultations and comments received are available on the Planning Application Search on the government website. 6.1 Douglas City Council does not object to this application (16.05.2025).
6.2 DoI Highway Services does not oppose this application (07.05.2025). The comment states that there is no significant negative impact on highway safety, network functionality, and/or parking, as the proposed use would have a similar or lower parking demand compared to the existing use.
6.3 Five neighbouring properties were notified. Four comments have been received from the public (13.05.2025 - 27.05.2025). The comments are from the Owners and Occupiers of: o Apartment 6, Avondale House, 9-10 Palace Terrace, Queens Promenade, Douglas o Apartment 8, Avondale House, 9-10 Palace Terrace, Queens Promenade, Douglas o Apartment 9, Avondale House, 9-10 Palace Terrace, Queens Promenade, Douglas o Beresford House Management Limited, 13B The Village Walk, Onchan
6.4 The material planning considerations raised by the comments are: o land use and character of the area o loss of houses o noise o parking o privacy o refuse management o security of tenants o practicality of the mitigation measures
6.5 The non-material planning considerations raised by the comments and during the advertising period are: o setting a precedent o lease and covenant o fire safety o apartment management o value of the property o insurance coverage o competition o market situation
7.0 ASSESSMENT Elements of Assessment 7.1 The key considerations in determining this application are:
==== PAGE 4 ====
25/90431/C
Page 4 of 6
o the amendments made by the applicant and o the decision of the previous application.
7.2 None of the measures proposed by the applicant is related to planning. The noise sensor is not a development and therefore not subject to planning. The access upgrade is not within the red line boundary. The managerial/contractual measures involve third parties over which planning has no authority.
7.4 Measures not related to planning have no material weight in an assessment and cannot be conditioned. Therefore, the proposal is considered to have no material difference from the previously refused application.
7.3 In the meantime, the previously refused application is a material consideration in this application. Given the decision was made by the planning committee, it carries significantly more weight than other material considerations, such as its impact on the character of the area, neighbouring amenities or parking provision.
7.4 Given that there are no material considerations that can outweigh the previously refused application, this application can only be recommended for refusal. No further assessment is necessary from this point.
7.8 In the meantime, as there is no change in planning policy or the impact of the proposed use on its neighbouring properties, the proposal would still be recommended for refusal.
8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 This application has no material difference compared to the refused application PA 25/90164/C. Therefore, the application is recommended for a refusal.
9.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE 9.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted).
9.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to: o applicant (in all cases); o a Local Authority; Government Department; Manx Utilities; and Manx National Heritage that submit a relevant objection; and o any other person who has made an objection that meets specified criteria.
9.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10.
9.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required): o any appellant or potential appellant (which includes the applicant); o the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, the Department of Infrastructure and the local authority for the area; o any other person who has submitted written representations (this can include other Government Departments and Local Authorities); and o in the case of a petition, a single representative.
__
==== PAGE 5 ====
25/90431/C
Page 5 of 6
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to that body by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status and/or rights to appeal.
Decision Made: Refused
Date: 28.07.2025
Signed : Peiran Shen Presenting Officer
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/customers and archive record.
==== PAGE 6 ====
25/90431/C
Page 6 of 6
PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 28.07.2025
Application No. : 25/90431/C Applicant : Mr Wai Man Ho Proposal : Additional use of apartment as tourist accommodation Site Address : Avondale House - Flat 1 9 - 10 Palace Terrace Queens Promenade Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 4NE
Presenting Officer : Peiran Shen
Addendum to the Officer’s Report
The Planning Committee, in the meeting on 28th July 2025, overturned the Case Officer's recommendation for refusal on the basis that it is not considered to have an unacceptable impact on amenities or highway safety. It is considered to comply with General Policy 2, Business Policy 13 and Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan.
C.1 The tourist use hereby approved shall be for a limited period of 2 years from the date of this approval. On or Beyond the expiry of the 2-year period, any future use of Flat 1 as tourist accommodation shall be discontinued.
Reason: A 2-year trial period would provide useful evidence about the effect, if any, that the approved change of use has had on living conditions and amenities to the other residents at Avondale House. __
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal