97533

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      23/00988/B                                     Page  1  of  9

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Application No. : 23/00988/B Applicant : Manx Utilities Proposal : Installation of service reservoir and connecting pump station with associated access, boundary fencing and landscaping Site Address : Land West Of Jurby Medical Centre (Former Jurby Camp) Jurby Industrial Estate Jurby Isle Of Man IM7 3BZ

Head of Development Management: Mr S Butler Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 14.11.2023 __

Conditions and Notes for Approval

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

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.

C 2. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved details of the security fencing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. No fencing/walling/gates shall be erected at the site other than in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity and for the avoidance of doubt.

C 3. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved full details of soft and hard landscaping works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department and these works shall be carried out as approved. Details of the soft landscaping works include details of grassed areas and new planting showing, type, size and position of each. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping must be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the completion of the development or the occupation of the dwelling, whichever is the sooner. Any trees or plants which die or

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      23/00988/B                                     Page  2  of  9

become seriously damaged or diseased must be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species.

The hard landscaping works shall be completed in full accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the dwelling hereby permitted. No excavation works or changes to site levels shall be carried out other than in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and ecology.

C 4. Prior to the commencement of development the following details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department and the development shall not take place unless in accordance with those details:

o a species-rich grassland translocation/re-use plan, written by a suitably qualified ecological consultancy, containing a methodology for the removal and re-use of the species- rich grassland turfs on top of the new service reservoir; o a species-rich grassland management plan written by suitably qualified ecological consultancy, detailing how the reservoir area is to be managed going forward for the benefit of its floral interest; and o a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) setting out Reasonable Avoidance Measures (RAMs) for common lizards written by a suitably qualified ecological consultancy, which details the measures that are to be put in place to protect the surrounding habitats from damage during construction and to ensure that lizards and breeding birds are not harmed by construction activities.

Reasons: In the interests of biodiversity, protected species and tree preservation.

C 5. The development hereby approved shall not be bought into use unless the mitigation measures are provided as set out in Section 5.3 of the Flood Risk Assessment by Aecom dated 15 September 2022 and retained as such thereafter.

Reasons: To ensure the flood risk mitigation is implemented

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. On balance it is considered that the proposal does not comply with the existing zoning or the detail of the exceptions in the Strategic Plan, but given the unusual planning policy situation for the site and need for the proposal it is not considered that this is in itself sufficient grounds for refusal. There is strong policy basis (including the Strategic Plan), for supporting housing and employment growth at Jurby, and infrastructure constraints have been identified which this application seeks to address. The potential visual/amenity, flooding and tree impacts have been sufficiently mitigated and no other reasons for refusal have been identified.

Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to the following plans/drawing/information: o A Planning Application Form o Covering letter o Planning Statement and supporting appendices (Appendix A - Strategic Plan 2016 Policy Assessment, Appendix B - Ecological Surveys and Assessments, Appendix C - Flood Risk Assessment and Appendix D - Sites Photos) o JURBY - ACM- ZZ- XX-DR -C- 1001 (P04) - Location Plan and Site Boundary o JURBY - ACM- ZZ- XX-DR -C- 1002 (P05) - SR - Site Layout o JURBY - ACM- ZZ- XX-DR -C- 1003 (P06) - SR - Plan o JURBY - ACM- ZZ- XX-DR -C- 1004 (P06) - SR - Sections o JURBY - ACM- ZZ- XX-DR -C- 1005 (P06) - SR - Elevations

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      23/00988/B                                     Page  3  of  9

Interested Person Status - Additional Persons

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the Motor Museum 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) as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy.

It is recommended that the following Government Departments should be given Interested Person Status on the basis that they have made written submissions relating to planning considerations:

• DOI (Flood risk); and
• CABO (Planning Policy) - if a formal response is received confirming their comments. __

Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO COMMITTEE AS IT IS A DEPARTURE FROM THE LAND USE ZONING

1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The Site is a vacant parcel of land within the settlement and forms part of the former Air Base. It is approximately 5000m2 in area and is located to the northwest of Jurby airfield along the Ballamenagh Road approximately 300m from the A10 Main Road in Jurby.

1.2 The site is relatively flat and fronts onto the A14 Ballamenagh Road opposite the Isle of Man Motor Museum which is located adjacent to an industrial estate containing a variety of commercial and light industrial uses. 1.3 The land surrounding the site is generally open grassland with scattered trees and vegetation and is currently void of built form but contains concrete slabs that form part of the historic airbase use with the wider site accommodating the parade grounds and the barracks associated with this use.

2.0

THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application form indicates that Full Approval is sought and the proposed use is, "Water Reservoirs". The proposal does not involve the creation of floorspace or the creation/alteration of access. No new/amended services are proposed and one parking space is to be provided. There will changes to site levels and there are trees/hedges on the site, but there is no watercourse within 9 metres.

2.2 The Planning Statement has been provided and is summarised below. o Section 1 - Introduction o Section 2 - The Development (Need, Development Description, Design & Access Statement) o Section 3 - Site and Surroundings o Section 4 - Legislative Requirements (including why no EIA) o Section 5 - Planning Policy Context o Section 6 - Proposed Mitigation o Section 7 - Policy Assessment o Section 8 - Conclusion o Appendix A - Strategic Plan 2016 Policy Assessment o Appendix B - Ecological Surveys and Assessments o Appendix C - Flood Risk Assessment o Appendix D - Sites Photos

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      23/00988/B                                     Page  4  of  9

2.3 The Planning Statement's description of the development clarifies that: o the proposed service reservoir would be of 750m3 capacity (22.50m long x 15.50m wide comprising two water storage compartments each with internal dimensions of 14.0m x 7.0m wide comprising a total storage capacity of 750m3 with average water depth in each compartment of 4.5m) with connecting mains and an integral booster pumping station; o it would be a fenced compound with associated hardstanding, access road, security fencing, landscaping and associated site works; o connection measures via A14 Ballamenagh Road; o there would be use of the existing access onto A14, with site roads to be extended to site; o initial high-level cut (approx. 1000m3) and fill (approx. 1600m3) is proposed - no removal of excavated material from site is anticipated;. o once finished, the site will be unmanned except for inspection/maintenance visits o reservoir would have a total building footprint of 350m2, partially buried below ground and with a grass finish (3m above average ground level); o the reservoir would be constructed in reinforced concrete water retaining structure and will house two compartments for water storage, as above; o an additional service compartment would house pipework and fitting connections and include new booster pumps referred to as a valve gallery (14.50m long x 7.0m wide); o concrete hardstanding area is proposed between the reservoir and a new access road within the site, with bitmac access road within the site to connect to the existing developed road on the northeast side of the proposed development to provide internal site access; o a lockable kiosk for ancillary storage is proposed; o soakaway would be on the northeast corner of the site between the embankment and the access road o a 3m wide maintenance access path is proposed around the site perimeter, external to the security fence. o security fence would be around the perimeter of the site (1.8m high green welded mesh security fence with a double leaf paladin security access gate to the northeast of the site); and o landscaping includes retention of 1 tree within red line boundary, grass embankment and green roof, with 5m wide planting strip.

2.4 In terms of alternatives, limited information has been provided within the application but it is understood from discussion with the applicant that: o From technical, operational and cost perspective the site location for the Service Reservoir is in the optimum position, i.e. adjacent to the trunk water supply main which is located in the A14 Ballameanagh Road. The location site also has existing wide and safe vehicle access and egress from the Ballameanagh Road highway, into the ex-RAF Parade Ground. o With respect to locating a permanent Service Reservoir on the Industrial Estate, this was not a preferred Option from the Department of Infrastructure's 'Commercial' perspective as it would have utilised valuable future development land and space. o The objective of all development on the Industrial Estate is to create jobs for the local community and generate income to support it. A relevant fact in discussions with the Fire Authority, was that their major concern related to a potential Industrial Fire at the Motor Museum. The Department of Infrastructure's proposals for a temporary water tank storage farm which were submitted as part of their Planning Application acknowledged that fact. Manx Utilities Service Reservoir site location acknowledges the same concern.

2.5 Following a query about site address this was corrected and consultee/contributors notified.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 Site Designation o Jurby Aerodrome (1982 Development Plan).

==== PAGE 5 ====

                                      23/00988/B                                     Page  5  of  9

o No heritage, ecological or landscape designations affect the site.

3.2 Strategic Plan (2016) o Strategic Policy 1 - Resources o Strategic Policy 2 - Environment o Strategic Policy 3 & Environment Policy 42 - Town & Village Character o Strategic Policy 4 - Heritage, Landscape, Ecology & Environmental Protection o Strategic Policy 5 - Design o Spatial Policy 3 - Service Villages (includes Jurby) o Spatial Policy 5 - Development outside settlement boundaries o General Policy 2 - Development Control Considerations o General Policy 3 - Development outside zoned areas o Environment Policy 2 - Landscape o Environment Policy 4 - Biodiversity o Environment Policy 7 - Watercourses o Environment Policies 10 & 13 - Flood Risk o Environment Policy 22 - Pollution Prevention (including light/noise/emissions) o Environment Policy 24 - Supporting environmental information (including Environmental Impact Assessments) o Environment Policy 26 - Contaminated Land o Business Policy 1 - Job Creation o Community Policy 7 - designing out crime o Community Policy 11 - prevention of outbreak and spread of fire o Transport Policy 2 - Layout o Transport Policy 4 - Safety o Infrastructure Policy 4 - Surface/Groundwater o Infrastructure Policy 5 - water conservation and management measures o Energy Policy 5 - Energy Efficiency

4.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 Other Plans/Documents o Our Island Plan (2022) and the Economic Strategy (2022) both set out ambitions for population growth supported by job growth and infrastructure improvement o Draft Area Plan North & West (2022) - Limited weight but provides direction of travel - i.e. growth at Jurby supported but requires infrastructure - the principle of a service reservoir in Jurby is supported (10.10.1 - 10.10.4). o TAPNW Site Assessment JR011 for the wider area including the site, "Previously developed site (in part) containing remnants of the military parade ground, there are no buildings of any particular architectural merit and the site is without any mature trees. The site is wholly within the existing settlement boundary and any development on site would enhance the built environment of Jurby". o National Infrastructure Strategy (2017) states (2.7.9), "In some areas there is limited storage capacity of treated water and/or water transmission capability in the event of a major unplanned supply interruption. This risk will become increasingly critical as the population grows" (it is understood there have been subsequent monitoring reports to this). o Landscape Character Assessment (2008) o Jurby Village Study (1994) - Non-statutory but capable of being a material consideration. Recognises 1982 zoning out of date. Recommends the area zoned for 'Airfield' reduced in size and area north of the A14 formerly occupied by the army is suggested to be rezoned for residential. The A14 is recognised as a clear dividing boundary with the southern side all zoned 'airfield' and used as an industrial estate and the northern side for predominantly residential purposes and uses ancillary thereto.

4.2 Legislation o Section 143 of the Equality Act (2017) places a duty on public bodies to promote equality, eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations.

==== PAGE 6 ====

                                      23/00988/B                                     Page  6  of  9

o Section 68 of the Flood Risk Management Act (2013) indicates that any published Flood Risk Management Plan and the extent to which the proposed development creates an additional flood risk are material considerations.

5.0 PLANNING HISTORY 5.1 No relevant applications for the site, although other approvals in the area are demonstrate the need for infrastructure improvements.

6.0 REPRESENTATIONS 6.1 Representations are available in full via online services, but in summary:

o Jurby Parish Commissioners have been consulted and made on comments o DOI Highways raise no objection and seek no conditions (30.10.23) o DOI Flood Risk raise no objection and seek no conditions (19.09.23) o DEFA (Ecosystems) raise no objection subject to conditions relating to site grassland translocation and management, protection of lizards and landscaping (03.10.23) o DEFA (Trees) have raised no objection and indicated a tree protection plan is not necessary (10.11.23). o An objection has been received from the Motor Museum which raises concerns about - incorrect site address/cost code, the proposal will be within the settlement boundaries and industrial in appearance which is not appropriate as it is on land reserved for residential, retail, community purposes. The Motor Museum was required to appear less industrial. Application is a sham (connections already installed etc.), potential for alternative site South of A14 not considered (there are more alternative sites) (28.09.23).

6.2 A formal response has been sought from CABO (Planning Policy) but it is understood that: o in light of the Site Assessment for the Area Plan N&W , they note an error in the referenced planning history and confirm that they consider the application site to be Previously Developed Land; o the site is not currently proposed for housing or employment development (no assessment has been made on whether a reservoir would be acceptable within the proposed open space); o there is a recognition of a need for a reservoir but no site identified; o the Area Plan is progressing and other than that, the existing Development Plan and the Village Study no other policy documents are identified; o work is to be undertaken on long term infrastructure planning including plans for the airport and the potential for a safeguarding area/possible runway extension; and o it may be appropriate to clarify whether MU and DOI have discussed/resolved issues relating to suitable locations for infrastructure in light of this.

7.0 ASSESSMENT 7.1 For the planning assessment the key issues are: o Principle of Development; o Landscape and Visual Amenity; o Transport & Access; o Ecology and Biodiversity; and o Flood risk.

7.2 Principle of Development 7.2.1 There is strong policy basis (including the Strategic Plan), for supporting housing and employment growth at Jurby, and infrastructure constraints have been identified which this application seeks to address.

7.2.2 Manx Utilities is a statutory board responsible for provision of (amongst other things) water supply. Concerns have been raised by IOM Fire & Rescue that the current water supply

==== PAGE 7 ====

                                      23/00988/B                                     Page  7  of  9

network may not be able to supply sufficient volumes from existing hydrant main connections to fight a large-scale industrial or warehouse type fire. The feasibility report also considered the need to improve the reliability, resilience and capacity of water supplies in Jurby to enable future residential and commercial development in the area. Therefore, the two main objectives of this project are: 1) To improve water supply volumes to ensure there is sufficient capacity for firefighting; 2) To improve reliability, resilience and capacity of water supplies for existing and proposed future development. The sizing of the service reservoir would give a minimum of 24h water storage (Planning Statement para 2.1).

7.2.3 It is therefore accepted that there is a need for this development somewhere in Jurby, however the question is whether the site is suitable. It is difficult to judge what is an acceptable use on the site as summarised below.

1. The site it not zoned for this development, but it is clear that the situation is now different from when that zoning was made as such the site is no longer needed for its previously intended use (Airfield).
2. The Jurby Village Study and draft Area Plan for the North and West (APN&W) are relevant. The Village Study proposes predominantly Residential with appropriate ancillary to the North and Industrial to the South. APN&W proposed similar approach, but with much of land to the immediately to the North (including the application site) as being open space. In terms of the former a judgement is needed as to whether the proposal could be judged 'ancillary' to housing and in terms of the latter whether it is compatible with open space - on balance it is considered not although the design and landscaping would help to reduce the visual impact. However both of these are of limited weight.
3. General Policy 3(g) could be applied, "development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative". Whilst it is questionable whether infrastructure which is required for one settlement is 'national', there is clearly a local need for the development. The information provided by the applicant to justify the site selection is noted, although limited.
4. If the site is accepted to be previously developed land, General Policy 3(c) may be relevant which supports the reuse of such land but where it, "...a significant amount of building; where the continued use is redundant; where redevelopment would reduce the impact of the current situation on the landscape or the wider environment; and where the development proposed would result in improvements to the landscape or wider environment". It is not considered that the application site would meet these tests.
5. There is a question of prematurity - is enough understood about co-ordination of land use/plans for the area? Is the Area Plan sufficiently advanced/this application sufficiently significant to mean applications which do not accord with the draft are premature and the case should be argued at the inquiry? Who/how/when should the airport be considered? On balance, given the need for the infrastructure, the limited size of the site and its location within existing settlement boundaries it is not considered that this application would create pressure for further development or raise issues that would justify refusal as premature or require its delay until work around the airport can be undertaken.

7.2.4 On balance it is considered that the proposal does not comply with the existing zoning or the detail of the exceptions in the Strategic Plan, but given the unusual planning policy situation for the site and need for the proposal it is not considered that this is in itself sufficient grounds for refusal.

7.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 7.3.1 The following is noted. o Key historical features in the immediate area of the site include: St. Patrick's Church and medieval crosses; St. Andrew's Church and medieval crosses; and Old airfields at Jurby. No cultural heritage designations affect the site. o The landscape character of this area is defined as an "undulating lowland plain" within the Isle of Man Landscape Character Assessment (2008) and the site falls within the Andreas

==== PAGE 8 ====

                                      23/00988/B                                     Page  8  of  9

and Jurby areas (F3). The strategy for Jurby is to conserve and enhance the character, quality and distinctiveness of this rural area. The site is not affected by any local landscape designations and is a vacant land parcel surrounded by a mix of urban land uses. o Jurby Airfield is designated as an Area of Special Scientific Interest (ASSI) but this overlay does not extend north of the A14, so does not directly affect the site.

7.3.2 The applicant's statement includes: o "2.18 The reservoir is designed to integrate into the modified grassed landform, obscuring the majority of the concrete structure from view, with the building largely reading as a well landscaped and green structure and this will inherently limit adverse visual impacts on visual receptors. When viewed within the wider site context of the urban environment and the neighbouring industrial uses, the Proposed Development would not be out of keeping with the local landscape character. 2.19 In addition, the form of the design of the development will reflect the existing World War 2 bunkers that are present within the wider site, therefore would be a consistent feature within the local landscape character". o "7.12 The siting, layout, form and scale of the reservoir building have been designed to integrate into the site and surroundings with landscaping proposed to provide visual screening and enhancement of the service reservoir building and ancillary structures such as fencing. The design has been prepared to take account of identified environmental constraints and surrounding land uses to ensure the reservoir is sympathetic to the local environment". o "7.20 Regarding visual amenity impacts on residents and properties closest to the site, the abovementioned mitigating factors would ensure that visual amenity is maintained as the design effectively integrates the built form into the landscape. At approximately 3m in height and with a small footprint, the reservoir building is low profile and will not read as a prominent development within this mixed use environment. Views would be very limited, due to its landscaped design with the site adequately distant from sensitive land uses to maintain the visual amenity for the residents".

7.3.3 Although the concerns raised by the objector are noted, it is not considered that the visual/amenity impact of the proposal is sufficient to justify refusal, subject to the mitigation (including landscaping).

7.4 Transport and Access 7.4.1. The advice from DOI Highways is noted and relived upon.

7.5 Ecology and Biodiversity 7.5.1. The advice from DEFA Ecosystems is noted and relived upon.

7.6 Flood Risk 7.6.1. The advice from DEFA Ecosystems is noted and relived upon (although a condition may also be appropriate).

7.7 Other Matters 7.7.1 Although the application is one where a full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) would be sought based on the specific wording of the Strategic Plan, given the nature/size of the proposal, site and surrounding area it is not considered that in this specific situation an EIA is required (the applicant's detailed argument in this regard is noted). It is considered that the application as submitted provides sufficient information to be assessed/determined.

7.7.2 The construction impacts/mitigation is noted, but these are not planning issues (other than matters relating to trees/protected species) and any amenity/highways from the construction phase would be a matter for DOI Highways or DEFA Environmental Health.

7.7.3 No other concerns or impacts are identified with regards to other material considerations which would justify refusal.

==== PAGE 9 ====

                                      23/00988/B                                     Page  9  of  9

8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 On balance it is considered that the proposal does not comply with the existing zoning or the detail of the exceptions in the Strategic Plan, but given the unusual planning policy situation for the site and need for the proposal it is not considered that this is in itself sufficient grounds for refusal. There is strong policy basis (including the Strategic Plan), for supporting housing and employment growth at Jurby, and infrastructure constraints have been identified which this application seeks to address. The potential visual/amenity, flooding and tree impacts have been sufficiently mitigated and no other reasons for refusal have been identified.

9.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 9.1 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.

9.2 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

9.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given Interested Person Status. __

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: 20.11.2023

Signed : S BUTLER 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

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.