78 Flat 2, Harrowside, Blackpool, FY4 1LR

78 Flat 2, Harrowside, Blackpool, FY4 1LR — Blackpool Borough Council — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 4 June 2024 by H Senior BA (Hons) MCD MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 29th July 2024 Appeal Ref: APP/J2373/W/24/3336502 78 Flat 2, Harrowside, Blackpool FY4 1LR • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr David Cherry (Cherry Property Investment Limited) against the decision of Blackpool Council. • The application Ref is 23/0750. • The development proposed is use of premises as self-contained letting accommodation (sui generis use). Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2. I have used the description of development from the decision notice as both parties have agreed to this change, I have however omitted retrospective from the description as this is not an act of development. 3. The decision notice has five reasons for refusal. The Council has confirmed that reason 5 was the standard statement required by the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 – Part 6, Article 35 and was numbered in error.

78 Flat 2, Harrowside, Blackpool, FY4 1LR — Blackpool Borough Council — Appeal Decision I have therefore not referred to this reason for refusal in my determination of the appeal. Main Issues 4. The main issues are: • whether this is a suitable location for self-contained letting accommodation having regard to the development plan; and • whether the proposal provides satisfactory living conditions for occupiers; and • whether the development secures an appropriate contribution towards the provision of trees; and • the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, with regard to noise and disturbance. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

78 Flat 2, Harrowside, Blackpool, FY4 1LR — Blackpool Borough Council — Appeal Decision I have therefore not referred to this reason for refusal in my determination of the appeal. Main Issues 4. The main issues are: • whether this is a suitable location for self-contained letting accommodation having regard to the development plan; and • whether the proposal provides satisfactory living conditions for occupiers; and • whether the development secures an appropriate contribution towards the provision of trees; and • the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, with regard to noise and disturbance. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

78 Flat 2, Harrowside, Blackpool, FY4 1LR — Blackpool Borough Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/J2373/W/24/3336502 Reasons Location 5. The premises subject of the appeal is a 2 bedroomed ground floor flat within a terraced property, the upper floors of which are in use as permanent residential accommodation. It lies within a predominantly residential area. From my observations and from the evidence before me it does not appear that there are other self-contained short-term letting properties in the vicinity of the appeal site. 6. Policy CS21 of the Blackpool Local Plan Part 1 Core Strategy (CS) seeks to focus leisure and business tourism facilities, including new visitor accommodation, in the town centre, resort core and defined holiday accommodation areas, unless exceptional circumstances justify a peripheral location outside these areas. Harrowside is not within the areas specified. 7. Even if the occupiers of the flat were not holidaymakers, it would be occupied as a short term let and the policy does not distinguish between the types of short-term occupation. Moreover, I have not been referred to any measures that could be employed to ensure that the accommodation would be occupied in a different manner to any visitors that may be holidaying. 8.

78 Flat 2, Harrowside, Blackpool, FY4 1LR — Blackpool Borough Council — Appeal Decision I note there is a possibility that the use of the flat as self-contained letting accommodation may have taken place for some time before the submission of the appeal. However, as the appeal relates to an application for planning permission, I have not considered the lawfulness or otherwise of the use. Whilst the regeneration of Blackpool is an important consideration, the appeal proposal is not close to the areas identified as appropriate for self-contained letting accommodation. On this basis, these factors would not amount to exceptional circumstances to support the provision of such accommodation outside of the areas required by the development plan. 9. I conclude that the site would not be a suitable location for self-contained letting accommodation having regard to the development plan. It would therefore conflict with Policies CS1 and CS21 of the CS which together amongst other matters seek to ensure that development supports the regeneration of the town. Living conditions for occupiers 10. The layout of the letting accommodation means that the access to the front bedroom is through a second bedroom and room containing a toilet.

78 Flat 2, Harrowside, Blackpool, FY4 1LR — Blackpool Borough Council — Appeal Decision There is another door to this bedroom, however this opens into the communal entrance hallway that is used by all residents in the building. 11. I saw on my site visit that there were high quality fixtures and fittings, and the front bedroom looks out over the landscaped front garden of the property. I also accept that the premises is regularly let with the existing configuration of the rooms. However, the access to the front bedroom through another does not result in practical or good quality accommodation. 12. I conclude that the proposal does not provide satisfactory living conditions for occupiers. It conflicts with Policy CS21 of the CS and Policy DM5 of the Blackpool Local Plan Part 2 Site Allocations and Development Management https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

78 Flat 2, Harrowside, Blackpool, FY4 1LR — Blackpool Borough Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/J2373/W/24/3336502 Policies which together amongst other matters seek to ensure that units are fully self-contained. Tree planting 13. The Greening of Blackpool Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) explains how the requirements of Policy CS6 of the CS are to be met. It requires that all new non C3 residential development (including change of use) catering for three or more residents will be required to provide 1 tree for each resident. In addition, it also requires that all new non-residential development (including change of use) will be required to provide one tree for each 100 square metres of floorspace. If the full provision of tree planting cannot be provided on-site, a financial contribution towards tree planting off-site will be required. 14. There is disagreement between the parties as to whether the proposal should be considered as residential development. However, even if the proposal is not considered to be a non C3 residential development, the planting of at least one tree would be required to accord with the guidance in the SPD. 15.

78 Flat 2, Harrowside, Blackpool, FY4 1LR — Blackpool Borough Council — Appeal Decision There is no planting shown on the application drawings and although I cannot be certain of the number of trees that would be required, there does not appear to be sufficient space at the front of the property for tree planting, bearing in mind the space required for future growth. 16. I have also not been provided with a planning obligation. I cannot therefore be certain that there is an appropriate mechanism to ensure that the development would secure the necessary contributions to make the scheme acceptable in planning terms. Planning conditions are not a suitable or enforceable mechanism to do so. 17. I conclude that the proposal does not secure an appropriate contribution towards the provision of trees. It would therefore conflict with Policies CS6 and CS11 of the CS which amongst other matters seeks to ensure that development proposals incorporate new or enhanced green infrastructure of an appropriate size, type and standard and where this is not possible financial contributions will be sought. It would also conflict with the guidance in the SPD. Living conditions for neighbouring occupiers 18.

78 Flat 2, Harrowside, Blackpool, FY4 1LR — Blackpool Borough Council — Appeal Decision While the flat has previously been in use for self-contained letting accommodation and there is no evidence before me of any occurrences of noise or disturbance to neighbouring occupiers, there is potential for this to occur in the future. Moreover, the Council points to occupiers of short-term accommodation being likely to have more comings and goings than permanent residents, particularly at later hours. 19. Although planning permission runs with the property, I acknowledge that the property is currently managed, including with the use of CCTV. Hence, together with the details of the work undertaken regarding noise suppression measures, it would also be possible to secure a management plan by condition, were the appeal to have been allowed. This would provide greater certainty that future changes of management would not result in harm through noise or disturbance. 20. I conclude that the proposal would not cause harm to the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, with regard to noise and disturbance. Hence, it accords https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

78 Flat 2, Harrowside, Blackpool, FY4 1LR — Blackpool Borough Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/J2373/W/24/3336502 with Policy CS7 of the CS which amongst other matters seeks to ensure that the amenity of nearby residents is not adversely affected by development. Other Matters 21. I note the appellant’s concerns regarding the Council’s handling of the case. However, this is a matter that would need to be taken up with the Council in the first instance. In determining this appeal, I am only able to have regard to the planning merits of the case. Conclusion 22. Whilst I have not found harm in relation to living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, I have identified significant harm in relation to the location, living conditions of future occupiers and tree planting. Therefore, the proposal conflicts with the development plan and the material considerations do not indicate that the appeal should be decided other than in accordance with it. For the reasons given above the appeal should be dismissed.

78 Flat 2, Harrowside, Blackpool, FY4 1LR — Blackpool Borough Council — H Senior INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4