Nixon Response

Corlett, Sarah

From: Buster Nixon <[email protected]> Sent: 28 February 2018 14:56 To: DEFA, Planning; Corlett, Sarah Cc: Cregeen, Graham Subject: 16/00405/B - Management Plan Response - Attn Sarah Corlett Attachments: Management Plan Response.docx

Buster Nixon Mill House Silverdale IM9 3DS

Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer DRFA Murray House Mount Havelock IM1 2SF 28/2/18

Dear Miss Corlett Re: 16/00405/B – Management Plan Response Thank you for forwarding the submitted management plan for comments. Firstly I would ask that DEFA (as Landlords) as well as Planning Dept should look at any management plan and ensure that it would be enforceable. The only realistic way I believe this to be effective would be to incorporate it into the Head Lease. Clause 8.7 of the lease allows for an annual management plan. Any Planning ‘Management Plan’ I feel must be incorporated to the Head Lease as part of the operation. I am aware that Ms Corlett deals with ‘Planning Matters’ but I suggest that the Landlord (DEFA) should integrate this management plan as part of the lease so that it could become effective and more importantly, enforceable. Please forward this letter to the contact at DEFA who would be responsible for the head lease. I have notes made on the areas as per the proposed management plan. Please see below. Car Parking: I notice the use of the words by Mr Kearns at the Inspector’s / appeal hearing meeting relating to car parking management were considerably more robust than that submitted in the proposed management plan. Those at the meeting were led to believe that there would be direction by signage, plus hostel staff along with onsite management from hostel personnel to ensure that the ‘hostel users’ cars were not left in the lower car park. At that meeting Mr Kearns used words such as ‘a requirement’ , ‘rules of the hostel’ and ‘terms and conditions of staying in the hostel’ relating to directing hostel residents to the use of the Ballamodha car park. The Inspector specifically mentioned that it was normal for establishments of this nature to have rules and conditions of use and this was agreed by Mr Kearns that there would be terms and conditions imposed. The inspector mentions this in

clause 32 of his report, ...whilst those staying in the accommodation would be obliged to comply with the requirements of the letting agreement and park in the main car park.

Mr Kearns was quite clear on this matter, and Ms Corlett, if you recall the gentleman from DOT wholeheartedly supported these proposed ‘parking requirements and rules’ and pronounced that if it were a requirement of hostel use, that he had to use the upper car park and he was a guest, that he would use that car park regardless of even returning to Silverdale ‘just to take a shower’ and definitely would not park in the lower car park. If you recall he was questioned on his ability to conform to this parking protocol in inclement conditions – (the rain at the day of the hearing was used to emphasize the point - if you remember it was teeming down) – but he wholeheartedly agreed that he would definitely park in the A3 car park, if it were a condition of hostel use.

I am concerned that these ‘terms’ have now been ‘watered down’ on the proposed management plan to ‘requested to use the designated car parking’ with a leaflet supplied on the day and no attempt to pre-advise hostel clients that it will be a requirement for them to use the upper car park. This is not acceptable and will certainly lead to problems unless there is complete disclosure. As it stands this is a very weak proposal and needs to be robust and leave NO doubt to hostel residents where they are to park.

The Inspectors report, 15. ...to enter into, and implement, a Site Management Plan to include overnight guest supervision and to promote the use by guests of the public car park and not the parking areas at the Silverdale Complex itself.

The Inspectors report, 31. Those staying in the proposed accommodation would be more likely than day visitors to park in the new car park, as part of their agreement to stay at the site.

I suggest the following regarding car parking incorporated to the management plan:

• 1. DEFA designate and sign the car park as NO Overnight Car Parking.
• 2. DEFA to sign car park as 30 minute drop off / pick up for Hostel residents on arrival / departure days only.
• 3. A webpage on the Hostel Website showing the correct A3 Ballamodha car park to be used by hostel residents and its access. Statement that ‘Drop Off / Pick Up’ at lower car park limited to 30 minutes for arrival / departure days.
• 4. Pre arrival confirmation of ‘where to park’ and the rules of the hostel to be emailed / posted in advance as part of the ‘letting agreement’ (referred to by the Inspector in 32 of the report.
• 5. Hostel management reserve the right to ask people to move their vehicles to the upper car park.
• 6. Hostel guests to sign booking form agreeing to hostel rules.
• 7. Permanent Internal signs of A3 or larger to be erected at all exit points from the hostel and on the hostel notice board and in the cooking communal area stating ‘Short Stay Maximum 30 Minutes Drop Off and Pick Up’ at Lower Car Park for Hostel Users.
• 8. Permanent internal signage at exits and on the notice board and communal areas showing the route to the Ballamodha car park.
• 9. Sight of the rules and conditions of the ‘letting agreement’ as part of the management plan.
• 10. Sight of the proposed signage with dimensions as part of the management plan
• 11. Sight of the hostel uses ‘pre-information’ regarding parking as part of the management plan.

Mr Kearns is obliged to manage the traffic and parking generated by the Hostel residents effectively. It is my belief that the parking Silverdale could be difficult IOM resident families and toddlers due to no easy child friendly buggy access /parking available as it will be clogged up by hostel residents or staff. There could well be an adverse reaction to this and it will not be in DEFA interest to allow a management plan with NO substance to be accepted.

Noise The Inspector considers one of the main planning issues would be ‘the living conditions of local residents with respect to noise and disturbance’. Inspector Report 68.

NOTE: The Inspector did not make his determination and recommendations regarding an outdoor seating area, BBQ area or odour nuisance. It was not on the plans or application. Therefore the inspector did not make an assessment on an outdoor seating area and BBQ area and neither did the Council of Ministers. A new planning application needs to be made so this development can be considered specifically that of noise disturbance to nearby properties and also odour problems. The outdoor seating area designated in the management plan extends to just 25m from Mill House bedroom window giving concerns about noise and odour disturbance.

• 1. The potential for outdoor dining was specifically mentioned by both myself and Ms Hughston at the Inspectors meeting as a potential cause for disturbance and it was swept aside by Mr Kearns saying that there was no plan for outside dining and Mr Kearns refused to acknowledge the ‘draw’ of dining around the lake and therefore it was not considered fully by the Inspector.
• 2. At the Inspectors meeting I specifically stated that for ‘5 Star hostel’ Mr Kearns would require a BBQ area and offered to show the UK Tourism Details of the ‘Hostel Star Rating’ requirements as evidence. This was refused. Mr Kearns said he wasn’t aware of any requirement and there was no BBQ area planned. In fact Mr Kearns hadn’t any idea of what the requirements were for a ‘5 star hostel’ and had not seen the star rating system and specification from UK Tourism. I can only assume that he possibly has now seen the requirements of the 5 star hostel rating and wishes to integrate an official BBQ area.
• 3. Any outdoor dining / BBQ area adjacent to the building would have implications on noise disturbance to local properties, odour, fire risk, correct and responsible coals disposal, litter generation, cleansing frequency, glass close to children’s play area.
• 4. Coals could be emptied into the lake and surrounds and pollute causing problems for wildlife, plant life and fish.
• 5. There is a potential fire hazard of a designated BBQ area close to the building.
• 6. There is no on site warden who can directly manage / control any BBQ and open flame close to the building.
• 7. Encouraging outside evening dining in the lakeside area will encourage alcohol consumption adjacent to the play area with associated glass breakage.
• 8. Any BBQ’s should take place in the open paddock away from the building and play area.
• 9. There should NOT be a designated BBQ area adjacent to the building – this should be expressly forbidden in the ‘letting agreement’ and by internal signage.
• 10. I would remind you that in the Head Lease in 4.18.1 (see below) there is a noise and nuisance clause regarding disturbance to neighbouring properties.

I suggest the following regarding noise incorporated to the management plan:

• 1. Signs at all exit doors ‘No outside noise after 9pm – Respect our neighbours’.
• 2. Internal sign on notice board stating No Noise after 9pm – residential neighbourhood.
• 3. DEFA (or Tenant) to place sign ‘NO BBQ’s / Fires Around Lakeside’
• 4. A webpage on the Hostel Website showing the terms and conditions relating to noise and prohibited use of outside fires / BBQ’s around the lake/ adjacent to the building.
• 5. Pre arrival confirmation of ‘where is acceptable to eat outside’ and the rules of the hostel to be emailed / posted in advance as part of the ‘letting agreement’ (referred to by the Inspector in 32 of the Inspector’s report).
• 6. Hostel management reserve the right to ask people to picnic in the paddock

• 7. Hostel guests to sign booking form agreeing to hostel rules.
• 8. Permanent internal signage on the notice board and communal areas showing the designated ‘picnic area’ in the paddock.
• 9. Sight of the rules and conditions of the ‘letting agreement’ as part of the management plan.
• 10. Sight of the proposed signage with dimensions as part of the management plan
• 11. Sight of the hostel uses ‘pre-information’ regarding prevention of noise and disturbance as part of the management plan.
• 12. (Cafe Covenants) 2.0 Outdoor Seating Area.
• 13. The potential for noise disturbance if people utilise the tables around the lake in the ‘outside seating area’ could be high. DEFA has the right in the lease in 2.2 to request the tenant to move the tables in the evening. Moving the tables could prevent people sitting 25m from Mill House bedroom window.

Complaints Procedure

In the Management Plan there is one mobile telephone number for contact. It would give comfort if there were a fixed home line number that one could call out of hours also in case the mobile phone is turned / not charged / no coverage. Please note that it is a Head Lease requirement (see 4.3 clause of head lease below) that two home address / telephone numbers ‘out of hours key holder’ contact numbers are provided to Police and the Landlord. There obviously is a rationale for needing 2 numbers and this should be extended for any incidents / complaints.

The stages of procedure of dealing with unruly guests should include termination of stay as procedure 3 not just a threat. Police involvement should come in at 4.

The timings of complaint received to timing of staff arrival on site should be made a maximum at 45 minutes from complaint time.

Enforcement Failure to Deal with Complaints Effectively The Landlord (DEFA) should add conditions to the management clause in the Head Lease to ensure that complaints are dealt with effectively. There also needs to be an ability to vary the management protocols to ensure a successful outcome of any incidents / complaints.

To ensure that the Tenant is motivated to respond in a timely and effective manner the Landlord should enter a clause into the head lease (see 8.7 of Head Lease) so that if there are more than 3 complaints / incidents that are unsatisfactorily dealt with, in any 12 month consecutive period, it would be accepted that ‘remote supervision’ is no longer effective. After this determination, an ‘on-site duty manager’ would be required to sleep on the premises - but only whilst guests were in occupation.

Clause 8.7 of the lease allows for an annual management plan. Any ‘Management Plan’ considered and accepted by the Planning Department should also be considered and accepted by the Landlord . It MUST then be incorporated to the Head Lease as part of the management operation. I suggest that the Landlord (DEFA) should integrate this management plan as part of the lease so that it could become effective and enforceable.

Yours sincerely Buster Nixon cc. Graham Cregeen MHK