Loading document...
Application No.: 21/00999/B Applicant: Mr Alan Capon Proposal: Variation of condition 2 to PA 19/01284/C to extend opening hours of restaurant for non resident customers Site Address: Athol Park Guest House Athol Park Port Erin Isle Of Man IM9 6EX Planning Officer: Miss Lucy Kinrade Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 05.11.2021 _________________________________________________________________
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The application is acceptable in accordance with Environment Policies 22 and 23 and General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to Site Location Plan, Floor Plans and Planning Statement all date received 23/08/2021. _______________________________________________________________
Additional Persons
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 4(2):
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 4(2):
THE APPLICATION IS BEFORE PLANNING COMMITTEE DUE TO THE NUMBER OF OBJECTIONS RECEIVED AND IT BEING RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.
1.0 SITE - 1.1 The application site is a three-storey building, dating from about 1900, on the south side of Athol Park, a mainly residential street in the built-up area of Port Erin. This property is currently used as a guest house; the submitted drawings show a dining area with eleven tables, sitting room, kitchen and toilet facilities on the ground-floor with ten bedrooms for guests on the upper floors. The building is within a mainly residential terrace. It has a small front garden, and there is a flight of steps leading from the street to its front door. - 1.2 The property was approved under PA 19/01284/C for the additional use as a restaurant. This application was approved at appeal subject to the standard 4 year condition and two other conditions one relating to the operating hours and stating no customers to remain in the building after 2100hours and no operation as a takeaway (C2), and another stating no consumption of food in the front garden (C3).
"C2. No non-resident customer of the restaurant shall be permitted to remain within the building after 2100 hours on any day; and, for the avoidance of doubt, the premises may not trade as a takeaway facility. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt.
C3. No meals shall be served or consumed in the front garden of the premises. Reason: In the interest of residential amenity."
2.0 PROPOSAL - 2.1 The current application now seeks to vary C2 to seek that all non-resident customers leave the premises by 2215hours. - 2.2 Information provided by the applicant for the application indicates the reason for the change stating that "The Planning Appeal into application 19/01284/C changed Condition 2; with non-resident Customers having to leave the premises by 21:00, instead of stopping serving Customers at 22:00. This revised time ends up with all cooking having to be completed by 20:30 (or earlier)"…" having all customers leaving by 21:00 is difficult to achieve & severely restricts our business, due to the time we have to stop serving. This application proposes that all non-resident customers leave the premises by 22:15. We believe that this would be in line with other Restaurants / Public Houses in Port Erin, who stop taking orders for food at 21:00. After being open for three months, we believe this is workable without causing a nuisance to either our neighbours or staying guests." The application seeks to alter this change introduced by the appeals inspector.".
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 Aforementioned in 1.2 the property was approved at appeal for an additional use as a takeaway under 19/01284/C. This application originally sought permission for meals to be served up until 2200hours and with no restriction on guests leaving the property. The applicant's reasons for stopping meals at 2200hours was not only to reduce impact on neighbours but that they also did not want to upset their own paying and staying guests. The application was approved at Planning Committee with a condition to this affect stating no meals to be served to the public after 2200hours, but this decision was appeal. The subsequent appeal was later considered and determined by the Minister and the application approved with the standard 4 year condition and two further conditions relating to food service:
"C2. No non-resident customer of the restaurant shall be permitted to remain within the building after 2100 hours on any day; and, for the avoidance of doubt, the premises may not trade as a takeaway facility. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt.
C3. No meals shall be served or consumed in the front garden of the premises. Reason: In the interest of residential amenity."
3.2 The Inspectors report for the appeal states the reasons for the conditions: "Residential Amenity
A similar application for a variation to C2 was submitted under PA 21/00056/B but later withdrawn, the reasons for this withdrawal are understood from the applicants submissions to be because they wanted to trial the restaurant and the appeal conditions prior to making any changes so that they could show their neighbours that they could operate without causing issue to their amenity.
4.1 The site is within a wider area of residential use on the Area Plan for the South 2013 and within the proposed Conservation Area. Given the established principle and operation of the current restaurant facility, it is perhaps most relevant in the assessment of the application to have regard to Environment Policies 22 and 23 in respect of the potential adverse impacts of the proposed changes to existing neighbouring amenity, along with those general standards towards acceptable development set out in General Policy 2. - 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 Port Erin Commissioners - in support (15/09/2021).
5.2 Department of Infrastructure Highway Services - Do not oppose (03/09/2021). - 5.3 A number of comments have been received from neighbouring properties, these have been summarised as follows and categorised in to those in 'support', those in 'objection' and general 'comments': - 5.4 IN SUPPORT:
5.5 IN OBJECTION:
6.1 The current application seeks an increase to the time that customers are allowed to remain within the building from 2100hours to 2215hours. Minded that the approval of 19/01284/C has already established an acceptable principle in having a restaurant here for non-resident customers, the key considerations in the assessment of the variation of condition would be whether or not the 1hour 15minute increase to the time non-resident customers can remain within the building would have an acceptable impact on the amenity of the neighbours and whether or not it would have an acceptable highway safety impact.
6.2 The Inspector for the previous application referred to the changes of use allowed under the Permitted Development (Change of Use) Order 2019. This order was introduced to help facilitate an increased flexibility in the change of use of premises within designated town centres without the need to submit a planning application and in supporting the Island's economic growth. The order stipulates a time limitation to changes of use undertaken in line with the order stating that no customers shall remain in the building after 9pm. The introduction of time limitations to the PDO sought to offer some degree of control in the change of use developments, and of course should any want to operate outside of these limitations they would need to submit an application and have the differences assessed as part of a planning application, just as the case here.
6.3 The Inspector of 19/01284/C felt that the 2100hours curfew seemed to be a "legitimate requirement, which would help protect neighbouring residents from disturbance, at a time when they may reasonably expect peace and quiet" and saw "no good reason why a less stringent restriction should apply to a proposed restaurant in a predominantly residential area" but that such a restriction "should apply only to non-resident customers". - 6.4 It is clear from comments received on the application from those living in nearby properties that there is a difference in opinion in the operation of the restaurant by nonresident customers. At present non-resident customers must leave by 2100hours which the applicant has indicated can mean that some customers have to rush to finish their meal to make sure they're out by 2100hours even though guest house residents can still be sat on neighbouring tables enjoying their evening meals to an unrestricted time which In reality might feel a little unfair on all parties. - 6.5 Some objectors indicate that other long established restaurant facilities in the nearby area cease cooking meals between 2000hours and 2030hours but with no time limitation on when these customers need to be left the premises which allows for a more relaxed eating experience. On the contrary nearby public houses are serving customers long into the evening hours. Most reasonable restaurant operations have a closing time to the public which subsequently allows for staff to clean up and prepare for the next day's operation. A guest house may operate slightly differently with potential for room service dining offered at anytime throughout the night. Of course being a staying guest would naturally reduce the coming and goings to the building, but odours and smells from cooking could still be expected and without restriction any time after 2100hours. Given this situation, it is perhaps not the smell and odours of cooking that is the key issue here on the amenity of the neighbours but rather the potential coming and going of non-resident customers to the site between 2100hours and up until 2215hours. - 6.6 The restaurant seats approx. 30 covers, in considering a scenario here the current restaurant could allow for two dinner sittings, one at 1700hours and departing at 1845hours and another at 1900hours and departing at 2100hours, with potential for up to 60people coming and going from the site. It may be that an extension of time could allow a third sitting between 2100 hours and 2215hours with the potential of a further 30 people coming to and from the site. In reality however, and as outlined in the applicants' statement, what is perhaps most likely is not so much an increase in people visiting the site but rather an elongation of the time customers spend at the site with a more a more relaxed and unrushed dining experience
7.1 The application has been carefully considered, taking into account the assessment and conclusions of the previous Inspector and the site specific context of this application premises and the proposed time increase to the condition of the original approval. On the basis that the 1 hours and 15minute increase to the time non-resident customers can leave the building is not expected to result in any significant adverse harm to the amenity of the neighbours beyond what is already permitted that the proposed variation of condition in this case is considered to be acceptable in line with Environment Policies 22 and 23 and General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
7.2 As such it is recommended that the condition be reworded to:
C2: No non-resident customer of the restaurant shall be permitted to remain within the building after 2215 hours on any day; and, for the avoidance of doubt, the premises may not trade as a takeaway facility. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of neighbouring and highway amenity.
8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
8.2 The decision maker must determine:
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.
Decision Made : Permitted Committee Meeting Date: 15.11.2021
Signed : L KINRADE Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See below
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown