Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
21/01332/C Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 21/01332/C Applicant : Mr Christopher Martyn Sharpe Proposal : Additional use of summerhouse as self-catering tourist accommodation Site Address : Greenbank 33 Mines Road Laxey Isle Of Man IM4 7NH
Planning Officer: Mrs Vanessa Porter Photo Taken : Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 07.03.2022 __
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. The proposal does not provide satisfactory amenity standards within itself and as such does not comply with General Policy 2 (h), nor does it take into account community or personal safety in the design of the summerhouse and the space around it which means the proposal would provide a substandard quality of accommodation.
R 2. The proposal would result in a change in character of the residential gardens adding a tourist use which would have the potential to increase nuisance, cause perceived and actual overlooking all to the detriment of neighbouring amenity. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is the curtilage of an existing single dwelling Greenbank, 33 Mines Road, Laxey which is a two storey Manx cottage situated to the West of Mines Road.
1.2 The site itself is a summerhouse situated within the rear of the property which is a steeply sloping hill which goes west to south east.
1.3 There are two car parking spaces available to the front of the dwelling.
==== PAGE 2 ====
21/01332/C Page 2 of 5
PROPOSAL 2.1 The current planning application seeks approval for the additional use of the rear summerhouse as self-catering tourist accommodation, the toilet, kitchen and shower facilities are available within the main dwelling.
2.2 Whilst there are no physical works proposed within this application, retrospective approval is sought for the increase in height of the flue.
PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The summerhouse was initially approved under PA04/01141/B. The summerhouse was moved and then approved under PA05/00011/B. A flue was approved under PA05/00011/B.
PLANNING POLICY 4.1 The site lies within an area zoned as Predominantly Residential of the Area Plan for the East, Map 7 - Laxey. The property is situated within the Laxey Conservation Area but not a Flood Risk Zone.
4.2 When looking at the Strategic Policies, Environment Policy 35 seeks to protect the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, Paragraph 9.5.8 and Business Policy 13 set out a general presumption in support of additional use of private dwellings for tourist accommodation provided it does not compromise the amenity of neighbours. Environment Policy 22 addresses the impact of the flue and Environment Policy 23 addresses changes to neighbouring amenity as a result of development. The general design standards set out in GP2 and the Residential Design Guide 2021 shall also be taken into consideration along with Environment Policy 10 in respect of flood risk and Community Policies 7 and 11 in respect of minimising criminal activity and reducing spread of fire.
REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 The following representations can be found in full online;
5.2 Highway Services have considered the proposal and state "Do not Oppose." (19.11.21)
5.3 Garff Commissioners have considered the proposal and Object mainly due to the lack of facilities within the structure. (3.12.21)
ASSESSMENT 6.1 The matters for consideration in the determination of this application are:
6.2 PRINCIPLE OF THE DEVELOPMENT 6.2.1 When looking at the principle of the tourist unit, in addition to the policies contained in the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, are other material considerations such as the 'Policy on the Development of Non-serviced Accommodation', dated March 2019, adopted by the Department for Enterprise in order "to shape a future development strategy for the sector, help inform planning policy and to guide the Department as to what support mechanisms may be required to maximise the potential benefits of an expansion on non-service accommodation in the Island."
6.2.2 The Policy on the Development of Non-serviced Accommodation is helpful in ascertaining what type of tourist accommodation the Isle of Man is looking for, in the future and states that the focus for the future "will be on the types of non-service accommodation identified as being in shortage within the study, namely; 8.2.1 developments of multiple units; 8.2.2 those that cater for families;
==== PAGE 3 ====
21/01332/C Page 3 of 5
8.2.3 those that cater for individuals with disabilities 8.2.4 proposals which incorporate leisure and entertainment facilities; 8.2.5 high quality, luxury, boutique developments; 8.2.6 clusters or separate small scale units which complement existing tourist acivities or leisure facilities; 8.2.7 glamping units and 8.2.8 those catering for group experiences."
6.2.3 Taking into account the above we can see that the proposal does not necessarily fit within any of the accommodation types described above and whilst the proposal could potentially sit within 8.2.7 'glamping units', there are already several sites within the Island which provide both a high standard and a basic standard all season long. The above report continues on to state that "Visit Isle of Man and the Department for Enterprise will actively support the development of non-serviced accommodation which meets agreed high level criteria and serves to complement and enhance the overall proposition for the visitor economy."
6.2.4 When looking at the above in connection with the proposal the supporting information states, "However, we would like to have guest accommodation available where the guests may sleep in the summer house and use the toilet, kitchen and shower facilities in the main house."
6.2.5 Whilst it is understandable that the Island is trying to increase the overall tourist accommodation on the Island, this should not be substandard in its amenity space and it can be seen that proposed tourist unit would be. This is especially notable in the fact that General Policy 2 specifically states that, "(h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself.." There is no amenity space within the summerhouse itself, with the amenity space of a bathroom and kitchen being within the main dwelling and is accessed via a steep staircase which could be dangerous at night. No details on lighting has been given, but it should be noted that having lights on permanently in the rear garden for the tourist unit could be detrimental to the neighbouring properties.
6.2.6 Overall it is deemed that the principle of tourist use within the summerhouse would not comply with General Policy 2 (h) as it does not provide satisfactory amenity space.
6.3 NEIGHBOURING AMENITY 6.3.1 Turning towards neighbouring amenity which is one of the compounding issues with applications such as this. In cases where the proposed tourist unit is situated close to a town centre position there is already a degree of activity in the area that it would be difficult to discriminate between the behaviours of tourists and permanent residents or to differentiate the coming and goings of each minded that it may be no more apparent than those already living in the property and those in the nearby area.
6.3.2 It may be that 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.
6.3.3 Whilst the coming and goings of the tourist might not result in changes beyond the current occupation, there is another factor which could potentially create and issue which is specific to this proposal.
6.3.4 Having looked at the supporting information within this application, it can be clearly be seen that the summerhouse is situated at a higher level than the main dwelling due to the topography of the site, whilst this wouldn't necessarily create an impact with regards to neighbouring amenity if it is used as a summerhouse in connection with the main dwelling.
==== PAGE 4 ====
21/01332/C Page 4 of 5
Using the summerhouse as tourist will add potential impacts with regards to the perceived and actual overlooking to neighbouring properties. Furthermore, unlike a summerhouse where people may retire in the evenings or at night to the main house, this is where tourists would have to spent their evening and nights, resulting in the potential for additional nuisance.
6.3.5 Whilst there is apparently buffer vegetation to the north of the site, there is not to the south of the site, which would create an unnecessary loss of amenity to this property, add in the fact that when standing upon the veranda, there will be views awarded down into the neighbouring properties which would create a feeling of perceived and actual overlooking.
6.4 FLUE 6.4.1 With this application is also retrospective approval for the flue, which was altered at the time of installation to comply with Building Regulations. Generally flues are a becoming a more recent addition to the exterior appearances of houses around the Island and as such whilst the flue will be a noticeable change in appearance, the feature would not have a significant visual impact given its size and given flues are not unusual features to residential properties, as such the flue itself is considered acceptable.
CONCLUSION 7.1 Overall whilst the proposed flue is acceptable and the proposed tourist accommodation is generally approvable the specific proposal here would introduce an additional activity which could detract from the enjoyment of the residential dwelling and would have an impact upon the neighbouring properties though a change in the character of the area, including adding perceived or actual overlooking above and beyond what would be acceptable.
7.2 The overall accommodation proposed does not provide satisfactory amenity standards within itself as per General Policy 2, nor does it take into account community or personal safety in the design of the summerhouse and the space around it which means the proposal would provide a substandard quality of accommodation which would be against the Islands Destination Management Plan and as such the proposal is recommended for Refusal.
INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.
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 above who should be given Interested Person Status __
==== PAGE 5 ====
21/01332/C Page 5 of 5
I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Director of Planning and Building Control in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.
Decision Made : Refused Date : 07.03.2022
Determining officer
Signed : J CHANCE
Jennifer Chance
Director of Planning and Building Control
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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal