Belfast landlord using house as tourist accommodation refused retrospective permission

An East Belfast landlord using a residential house as short-let tourist-style accommodation without permission has been refused a retrospective planning application.

At the January Belfast City Council Planning Committee meeting (January 19), elected representatives unanimously rejected a retrospective change of use from a three bedroom residential dwelling to short-term let at 28 Dunvegan Street, Belfast, BT6, just off the lower Ravenhill Road. Council officers will now look to using enforcement to back the decision.

The applicant name is 'Love Rooms', at the same address. The property has been operating as a short-term let, without planning permission, which the application sought to regularise. Short-term let is deemed an alternative form of tourist accommodation.

READ MORE: A "series of mitigation measures" will tackle odour at Belfast waste incinerator, councillors told

READ MORE: South Belfast to see unique robot 'city tree' experiment

The application proposal involved two of the three rooms to be utilised for short-term let use and one remaining room to be retained for permanent residential occupation. No external changes were proposed.

While there were no objections to the application from any statutory bodies outside the council, there were five third-party objections, two letters from the applicant in response to those objections, and one letter of support from a local business.

Officers recommended refusal for the application. The council planning report states: “The proposal has been assessed against prevailing policy and fails to meet two key criteria, in that the proposal is not within a tourism cluster or within 1200m of a visitor attraction and, that the management arrangements are not sufficiently robust to mitigate the potential impacts of the proposal on the amenity of residents.

“Having regard to the development plan and other material considerations, the proposal is considered unacceptable. It is recommended that planning permission is refused. Delegated authority is sought for the Director of Planning and Building Control to finalise the wording of the refusal reasons.”

The report states: “The applicant/agent has not provided a list of attractions they consider to be within 'close proximity' to the application site.”

Objectors raised issues such as loss of residential property, and stressed that buildings on the terraced street were suited for family homes, not short-term let. One objector said there was not enough demand for this type of use as hotels “are only at 80 percent capacity”.

Objectors said there was already “unauthorised” use at the property, and there was no “valuable engagement” with neighbours, residents and the wider community. Some complained about the potential noise, disturbance and loss of amenity, while others said the sole purpose was “to maximise profit”.

Also among objections was the argument that rental rates were driving up property prices, discouraging long-term homeowners, and the proposal would lead to “inconsiderate parking causing issues” on the street.

At the council Planning Committee, Alliance Councillor Tara Brooks said: “It sounds like the owner has consistently not been engaging terribly well.”

A council officer said: “We do have an open enforcement case on this, and if we were to make a refusal, depending on the members’ decision, we would immediately refer this decision to our enforcement team, and it would be up to them in terms of their enforcement powers to discuss the cessation of the use.

“That will usually involve some discourse in the first instance, to see if we can reach a resolution on an informal basis. If that wasn’t possible on an informal basis, they have a number of formal options available to them.”

In June 2024, the High Court ruled in favour of Belfast City Council and quashed two Planning Appeals Commission decisions on two applications in the city centre. Mr Justice Humphreys held that the PAC misinterpreted policy in allowing retrospective change of use for two flats to short-term let accommodation.

The final judgement confirms that the council’s Local Development Plan Policy HOU3 applies to any “established residential area,” including those which are in Belfast City Centre. In addition, the judgement clarifies the meaning of “property” in the context of Policy HOU13.

The part of that policy that refers to the protection of existing residential accommodation states that: “There is a general presumption in favour of the retention of residential stock for permanent occupation.

“Within an established residential area or fronting onto a city corridor outside of a designated centre, planning permission will be granted for the change of use of existing dwellings for other uses where: a. It is considered complimentary to surrounding residential uses and will not result in any adverse effects on existing residential amenity, or b. The proposal is for community infrastructure considered necessary within the residential area.”

For all the latest news, visit the Belfast Live homepage here and sign up to our daily newsletter here.