122149

==== PAGE 1 ====

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 20/00496/B Applicant : Port Erin Commissioners Proposal : Creation of a 30 glamping pod / cabin site with provision for camping and camper vans, erection of a detached welcome centre and detached toilet / shower facilities and the creation of a vehicular access, car parking and landscaping Site Address : Field 411412 Ballafesson Road Port Erin Isle Of Man

Principal Planner: Miss S E Corlett Photo Taken : Site Visit : 25.06.2020 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee

Recommendation

Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 13.08.2020

---

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. The new vehicular access and parking as shown on drawing 1808/03B must be in place prior to the site becoming operational.

Reason: in the interests of highway safety.

C 3. Prior to the first occupation of the site, there must be in place provisions to enable users of the site to access the surrounding area safely and conveniently on foot. These provisions must first be approved by the Department and the development must be undertaken in accordance with these details and these should include:

the installation of an uncontrolled pedestrian crossing adjacent to the proposed site access on Ballafesson Road including dropped kerbs, tactile paving, splitter island and reflective/illuminated bollards and a new uncontrolled pedestrian crossing adjacent to the Ballafesson Road, Bay View Road junction, to provide safe access to local shops and facilities on Bay View Road and beyond to the beach.

Reason: in the interests of highway safety.

==== PAGE 2 ====

C 4. Prior to the commencement of works on site, the applicant must have approved by the Department, a detailed landscaping plan, which demonstrates how the site will be ecologically and visually enhanced together with a timetable for the introduction of the planting and a five year maintenance schedule thereafter.

Reason: the landscaping of the site is a critical element of the success of the scheme to enable it to comply with the relevant Strategic Plan policies.

C 5. 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 camping facilities, whichever is the sooner. Any trees or plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased must be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: the landscaping of the site is an integral part of the scheme and must be implemented as approved.

C 6. No lighting may be introduced within the site unless and until a detailed lighting scheme has been approved in writing by the Department and the development must be undertaken in accordance with these details.

Reason: to ensure that there is no visual or ecological harm from the use of any lighting on the site.

C 7. No development may commence on site until a plan has been approved in writing which illustrates the means by which the users of the site will be satisfactorily protected from use of the adjacent golf course and so that users of the golf course are not adversely affected by the use of the site as proposed. The development must be undertaken in accordance with these details.

Reason: to ensure that the users of both sites are not adversely affected.

Note: the applicant is encouraged to liaise with the operators of the golf course in this respect.

C 8. The development hereby approved shall not be used or occupied other than for the purpose of short-let holiday accommodation and shall not be used as permanent living accommodation. The accommodation hereby approved shall not be occupied by the same person(s) for a single period or cumulative periods exceeding 28 days in any calendar year.

Reason: to ensure that the development is only used and occupied as short let holiday accommodation and to prevent the creation of an unjustified separate dwelling in the countryside.

C 9. If the site should cease being used or required for camping purposes, within one year of the site ceasing to be used as such, all structures must be removed from the site and any hard surfacing dug out and the site returned to a field. Any landscaping may remain.

Reason for approval: It is considered that the development is acceptable as, whilst it is contrary to the land use designation, there are economic benefits to the Island's economy and supports the Government's tourism strategy without significant adverse impact on the environment, highway safety or the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property.

==== PAGE 3 ====

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. It is considered that the development is acceptable as, whilst it is contrary to the land use designation, there are economic benefits to the Island's economy and supports the Government's tourism strategy without significant adverse impact on the environment, highway safety or the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This decision relates to the following drawings:

1808/01 received on 15.05.20 1808:04 received on 15.05.20 1808:05 received on 15.05.20 1808:06A received on 20.05.20 1808:07 received on 15.05.20 1808:08 received on 15.05.20 18TS001-01 received on 22.06.20 1808/02A received on 21.07.20 1808/03B received on 21.07.20.

---

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

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

Manx National Heritage Department for Enterprise

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are 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):

Rowany Golf Club, 2 and 8 Pairk Beg, 9, Magherdonnag and 18, Grammah Avenue as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (2019).

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties 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 6(4):

77, Circular Road 62, Maghergarran Baie Fyn Rose Cottage Carnanes Nab View 30, Church Road

==== PAGE 4 ====

10, Milner Close

as they do not clearly identify the land which is owned or occupied which is considered to be impacted on by the proposed development in accordance with paragraph 2A of the Policy, as they do not refer to the relevant issues in accordance with paragraph 2C of the Policy and/or 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.

---

Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AS THE PROPOSED USE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND USE DESIGNATION AND THE APPLICATION IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL

THE SITE 1.1 The site is a field which lies to the west of Ballafesson Road (A7) bounded to the south west by 21 and 24, Grammah Avenue and 6-11, Pairk Beg. Number 21, Grammah Avenue has its gable facing towards the application site with a flat roofed garage nearest the site and no windows in this elevation of the building. 24, Grammah Avenue has two windows (ground and first floor level) in its gable that faces the site. Numbers 6-11, Pairk Beg all have windows facing the application site with some of the properties having their gables facing the site and others having their rear elevations looking in this direction - the gables having windows at first floor level and those properties facing the site having no upper floor windows.

1.2 To the north west of the site is Rowany Golf Course and to the north east is also part of the golf course with a stone building sitting on the roadside. This part of the course accommodates the 10th tee and the orientation of shots is shown on the proposed site plan (1808/03A) and sits approximately 1.5 - 1.8m lower than the adjacent part of the application site.

1.3 The site's highest point is in its western corner from where the site slopes downward towards the north and east: this fall is 12.5m over the 19m length of the north western boundary and 10m over the 18m length of the south western boundary alongside which sit the residential properties referred to above.

1.4 The boundaries of the site are formed by a combination of stone wall and some post and wire fencing.

1.5 A public footpath runs to the immediate north east of the north eastern boundary from where it continues across the golf course to Bradda.

1.6 The site is devoid of structures and is grassed, used for grazing and informal walking by local residents.

1.7 The site is intended to be purchased by Port Erin Commissioners.

1.8 On the other side of Ballafesson Road are sports pitches and associated facilities being currently being developed in accordance with 15/01320/B.

1.9 There is no footway on the northern side of the A7 across the frontage of the site or in front of the properties in Grammah Avenue, the footpath starting to the north at the north eastern end of the site and to the south west on the southern side of Bay View Road.

==== PAGE 5 ====

THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed layout 2.1.1 Proposed is the development of the site for tourist purposes including the introduction of new structures in the form of:

22 glamping pods 8 luxury glamping pods A welcome centre and Toilet and shower block

2.1.2 Works will also include the creation of a new vehicular access approximately mid-way along the Ballafesson Road frontage and an asphalt surfaced road leading to the centrally positioned welcome centre from where the road narrows and leads to 30 further car parking spaces to service the glamping pods. A further car park accommodating 32 spaces is to be provided between Ballafesson Road and the welcome centre.

2.1.3 A camper van parking area is proposed alongside Ballafesson Road to the north east of the proposed access which could accommodate 21 vehicles each with an electricity hook up point. The road layout for this part of the site will be compacted gravel with a grey water sluicer at the lowest part of the loop road. The camper van parking area will be separated from a tented camping area beyond which is the glamping area, separated therefrom by a new planted hedge.

2.1.4 The luxury glamping pods will be the closest structures to the existing dwellings in Grammah Avenue and Pairk Beg and the nearest property will be 56m from the boundary of the nearest dwelling.

2.1.5 Drainage will be provided by way of connection to the mains foul and surface water sewers in Grammah Avenue and connection to the development will be discussed with the Drainage Division of Manx Utilities.

2.1.6 The proposed site plan shows the orientation of the shots played from the 10th tee and no pods are shown within these areas and the north eastern boundary abutting this part of the course will be provided with a "high mesh fence or landscaped buffer zone" to prevent balls straying onto the application site.

2.1.7 The area between the luxury glamping pods and the existing residential properties will be a "landscape zone" with new planting and paths provided - the layout and planting will be discussed with the Manx Wildlife Trust and Isle of Man Woodlands. Trees are proposed to be planted in small clumps so as to create a natural woodland look whilst still maintaining sightlines to distant vistas of the hills from neighbouring properties".

2.2 Structures 2.2.1 The luxury glamping pods will each have a footprint of 8m by 8.75m at the longest lengths arranged in an L shape and accommodating two bedrooms, a shower room and kitchen/living areas with a lobby entrance. These structures will be 2.1m to eaves level and 3.4m to the ridge and the walls finished in timber cladding with the roofs in green profiled sheeting.

2.2.2 The standard glamping pods are differently shaped and smaller - arch shaped in profile and 3m to the highest point also finished in timber cladding but featuring one bedroom, a shower room and kitchen/living area with a decked area off the living area.

==== PAGE 6 ====

2.2.3 The toilet and shower building will have a footprint of 10.4m by 7.5m and will accommodate six showers (three for male and three for female), three toilets for the female users and five urinals and two cubicled toilets for the male users and an externally accessed toilet and shower room suitable for disabled users with ramped access. External taps will be provided on the outer side of the accessible toilet with external sinks and worktop further along the front elevation. This too will be finished in timber cladding and green profiled sheeted roof.

2.2.4 The welcome centre is the largest of the proposed structures with a footprint of 25m by 11.5m at the longest points and with a conservatory on the south western elevation. This building will accommodate a reception area, office, plant room, communal kitchen and a functional kitchen serving function/dining area with storage units on one of the walls and lockers on the other side with three toilets and three showers for female users with three showers, two toilets and four urinals for male users. This building is 2.7m to eaves level and 4m to the highest part of the ridge.

2.3 Supporting information 2.3.1 The application contains supporting information which discusses the design, transport issues, ecological matters, planning considerations, the principle and need for the development and services. They refer to a section of the report being an abridged version of a standard UK Environmental Impact Assessment which considers the matters referred to in the UK legislation, that being population and human health, biodiversity, land, soil, water, air and climate, material assets, cultural heritage and the landscape and the interaction of all of these factors.

2.4 Planning statement 2.4.1 The applicant explains that they are looking to develop the site with a suitable partner who van provide investment into the project and be responsible for the day to day running and promotion of the business including the camp site. The partner will provide the investment to construct the facilities on the basis of a 21 year lease subject to regular review. As part of a previous tendering process Reayrt Vradda Glamping Limited has been approached as the suitable partner and have experience operating the Glen Helen glamping site and in conjunction with Concept Pods for the supply of the glamping pods.

2.5 Principle and justification 2.5.1 The applicant refers to the Department for Enterprise's Non Serviced Accommodation Study of 2017 which encourages glamping developments with 15-20 glamping units and central communal socialising and cooking areas and outdoor activities which would have a strong appear for the family market and for family and friend get-togethers and group holidays and breaks.

2.5.2 They suggest that Visit Isle of Man has guidelines for camp sites and the main points of the policy document are as follows:

Variety - the application aims to provide a variety of accommodation types

Facilities - the welcome centre provides dining, toilet and shower facilities for on site entertainment and catering and the site has sufficient space to provide landscaped play and relaxation space and the golf course is alongside with within easy walking distance, the beach, railway, restaurants and bars.

Layout - the development creates distinct zones of different users with the glamping pods furthest from the road to give privacy and utilising the topography of the site. The location of the camper van area at the front of the site will reduce them having to travel through the

==== PAGE 7 ====

site and a landscaped buffer will be planted to minimise the visual impact of the proposed buildings in the landscape.

Design - the buildings will use sustainable building materials where possible to suit the natural landscape of the site. Should the tourist use not continue at any point their design and construction allows them to be removed from the site.

Market - being close to the facilities available in the village will enable the site to attract visitors who appreciate the natural outdoor environment with the addition of "a little home comfort offered in the high quality pods". They consider the development to be compatible with the Island's Biosphere Nation Status and will create a "go to" destination to attract visitors looking for an outdoor holiday as well as catering for visitors taking part in cycling events and walks on the Island. They draw attention to the access to public transport (bus or train) and they advise that there will be a bicycle hire facility within the welcome centre.

Accessibility - several of the glamping pods and cabins will be specifically designed for access by disabled users and all public areas will have suitable access and facilities to suit all users. Wheelchair friendly raised boardwalks through the landscaped zone will also be provided.

Economic - they suggest that the ongoing loss of hotels in the area has resulted in tourist accommodation being more and more located outwith the village and they consider that the proximity of the site to the village will encouraged tourists back to Port Erin to use the existing facilities for the economic benefit of all. They consider that the rate payers of Port Erin will benefit from the additional income from the lease of the site and directly from the income generated by camping and camper vans using the site.

Viability - they suggest that the application responds to the need for non-serviced accommodation which is identified as a growing market in the report and the application aims to provide accommodation which is needed and create a destination for visitors seeking a different, more outdoor oriented holiday with the added comfort of luxury.

Displacement - they suggest that the development is aimed not only at overseas visitors but also the local market to make Port Erin a viable and attractive "Staycation" option rather than travelling off Island, including Autumn and Winter weekend breaks to extend the normal tourist season. In addition, the welcome centre can offer facilities for private and community events.

Promotion - the applicant explains that the intended operator is already experienced in promoting the Glen Helen site through Visit Isle of Man and various social media and online booking systems. They suggest that the site will also be promoted and supported by the Commissioners as part of the Visit Port Erin branding initiative to attract tourists to the village and encourage a wider range of visitors.

Transport and accessibility - the site is accessible to public transport, the railway and the airport and within walking distance of the village and a number of rights of way.

Location - the applicant explains that the design has aimed to enable the development to integrate with the landscape and advise that details of the landscaping will be confirmed following further consultation with the Manx Wildlife Trust and Isle of Man Woodland Trust to provide environmentally friendly areas to attract wildlife. They refer to a proposed parkland near Ballachurry Nature Reserve into which the proposed landscaping will link. Should the site stop being used for tourism purposes in the future, the timber framed buildings can easily be removed and the site left as a landscaped woodland.

==== PAGE 8 ====

Scale - they explain that the site makes provision for 28 glamping units within a landscaped setting each with access to its own private external seating area. They suggest that the number of units has been considered by the proposed operator as economically viable without overcrowding or unduly impacting on the area.

Occupancy - the lease provided by the Commissioners will prevent inappropriate or quasi- permanent residential use which will be able to be audited through rental booking records which would be capable of being scrutinised by the Commissioners. Conditions imposed through the planning process can also ensure that all units are available for tourist use or have to be removed should the business cease to operate.

2.5.3 The applicant refers to Business Isle of Man (BIOM) and Visit Isle of Man with whom they are working on a branding for Port Erin and they consider the timing of the application to be complimentary to this work. Business Isle of Man have provided a budget of £3,000 for town and villages to use as they see fit to support promotional items for their area in line with the guidelines set out by BIOM.

2.6 Alternative sites 2.6.1 Other sites which were considered include a location at Bradda Glen which formerly accommodated flats but was deemed unsuitable due to difficulties of access and the site has since been sold for residential development), Breagle Glen was considered as having insufficient space to create an adequate buffer zone between the proposed pods and the adjacent dwellings, Rowany Golf Course which was the subject of an unsuccessful application (see Planning History). All other sites in the Commissioners' ownership fail to adequately achieve the balance between suitable location, protection of neighbours' amenities and access.

2.6.2 The site is considered by the Wildlife Officer at the Manx Wildlife Trust as suitable for the creation of a wildlife corridor to link with the Ballachurry site and the sports pitches which they say includes an area for landscaped parkland proposed by Rushen Parish Commissioners.

2.6.3 They refer to other camp sites in the area which were approved on land not designated for development - Glendown campsite on Truggan Road, for example.

2.7 Consultation 2.7.1 They refer to an open day which was held in December, 2018 by Port Erin Commissioners and suggest that on the whole the scheme met with positive reception and of the 34 completed questionnaires the contributors were evenly split between people living adjacent to the site and those from elsewhere in the village. 88% suggested that they were positive about the scheme, 64% were supportive of the plans proposed, 73% supported the range of accommodation included and 63% agreed that the right mix was being proposed. The key concern expressed by 58% of the respondents was the landscape and visual impact of the scheme. Respondents suggested that the scheme should be an environmentally responsible as possible and concerns were expressed about light pollution, loss of privacy for neighbours and a proposed play area in the landscaped area would be unneighbourly. Concern was expressed about the zoning of the site and the potential for further inappropriate development as well as the impact on the golf course, on highway safety - vehicles and pedestrians crossing the road, the rate payers.

2.7.2 In response to the issues raised, the applicant confirms that there will be no access to the site through Grammah Avenue and low thicket and shrubs will be planted to prevent people from using this as a through route to the site. No playground is now proposed in the area between the existing dwellings and the luxury glamping pods.

==== PAGE 9 ====

2.7.3 The applicant has discussed the application with Rowany Golf Club to ensure that provisions can be put in place to protect the enjoyment of the golfers as well as the safety of those on the application site. The golf club have provisionally agreed to relocate the tenth tee to reduce the likelihood of golf balls straying into the application site and this can be reviewed and potentially the tee moved northwards when this strip of land becomes available for lease at the end of 2023.

2.8 Access 2.8.1 A Transport Statement has been provided and Highway Services were consulted early on in the process in particular with regard to the provision of a zebra crossing from the site to the pavement on the other side of the road but Highway Services did not consider that such a crossing would be beneficial here as safe pedestrian access could be available through Grammah Avenue although this is not proposed due to the potential impact on the existing dwellings there. As an alternative the Transport Consultants recommend an uncontrolled crossing with a splitter island close to the main entrance (similar to the arrangement at the junction of Ballafesson Road with the A7 and allows for a defined refuge point without impinging upon the flow of traffic. It also recommends a similar crossing at the junction of Bay View Road and Ballafession Road to assist pedestrians moving from the site into the village centre and to the beach.

2.8.2 The Transport Assessment concludes that the development subject to the implementation of measures outlined would not create any subsequent negative impacts to the safe operation of the highway network or the intended users of the site. Users will have good opportunities to travel by sustainable methods, safe and suitable access arrangements will be available along with sufficient car and cycle parking provision. The development is therefore considered to accord with the relevant planning policy in terms of highways and transportation.

2.9 Services 2.9.1 The majority of services are available underground via the adjacent housing layout with connection at the end of Grammah Avenue and there will be no requirement for overhead cables or telegraph poles. Energy efficient methods will be employed to reduce the reliance on mains services and to keep operating costs to a minimum.

2.9.2 Mains water is available along Ballafesson Road and Grammah Avenue and will be checked to ensure it is suitable sized for the proposed connection and use. A rainwater harvesting system will be buried into the decked area adjacent to the welcome centre and rainwater from the building will be collected for use as grey water to flush the toilets and any watering of the landscaped areas.

2.9.3 Energy efficient lighting will be used throughout the buildings.

2.9.4 Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) will be used to follow good water management practices with the aim to combine modern and natural drainage systems and where possible hard surfaces will be designed so that rainwater can drain freely into the landscape to reduce loading on the mains infrastructure.

2.9.5 Electricity, gas and telecom services are all available from Ballafesson Road and Grammah Avenue.

2.10 Population and human health 2.10.1. They discuss the relationship of the development on the visual impact on the neighbours and the general area and acknowledge that several of the neighbouring properties have views across the site and a good level of privacy in their gardens and that it is important that the proposed development respects this and the proposed landscaped

==== PAGE 10 ====

buffer zone will distance the proposed buildings from the existing dwellings and trees will be selected which not become too overbearing on the neighbours' outlook.

2.10.2 In terms of noise nuisance they advise that the site will be constantly supervised by an on site manager who will ensure that any activities that could cause noise will be carefully monitored to protect not only the neighbours' amenities but also those of other users of the site. The landscape buffer will also help to reduce noise travelling to the existing dwellings from the site.

2.10.3 Impact on the local highway network is discussed and this concludes that there would be no adverse impact on the local highway network.

2.11 Biodiversity - species and habitat 2.11.1 At present they suggest that the site is an open field with no trees and as native trees - hawthorn, wych elm, holly, silver birch, hazel, field maple, oak, cherry, apple and crab apple - will be planted as part of the scheme this will add to the biodiversity of the scheme and link in with nearby nature areas. They suggest that there is no evidence of any plants and the Biodiversity Officer considered that the field was generally ecologically poor with the proposal representing an enhancement for biodiversity.

2.11.2 There are no records of frogs or lizards but several species of bat, barn and long eared owls have been recorded in the local area and appropriate structures - a wildlife tower, bird and bat boxes could be incorporated: the applicant intends to further liaise with the Manx Bat Group and Manx Wildlife Trust to prepare a detailed scheme.

2.11.3 In terms of lighting the applicant advises that external lighting will be at a low level, and according with the Bats and Artificial Lighting in the UK document prepared by the Institute of Lighting Professionals.

2.12 Land, soil, water, air and climate 2.12.1 They suggest that there are no water features that would be affected by the development and the development aims to be as environmentally responsible as possible utilising solar panels, a biomass heating system, external air or ground source heat generation and the timber framed building will all be built to the highest standards of insulation within the walls and with double glazing within insulated frames. They refer to heat exchangers incorporated within the mechanical ventilation units and the use of energy efficient LED lighting and a rainwater harvesting system to collect rainwater to use to flush toilets and water the landscaped areas with a SUDS regime in place.

2.13 Material assets, cultural heritage and the landscape 2.13.1 The nearest heritage asset is given as Cronk Howe Mooar, a 35ft high grassed mound which sits to the north and the development has been designed to be as low key as possible so as not to detract from this.

2.13.2 In terms of landscape, they suggest that the development is more likely to deter permanent residential development here in the future if the site is found to have a use which is acceptable to the community.

2.13.3 In terms of interaction between all of the relevant considerations, they suggest that the additional load on services will be offset by the environmentally responsible approach to the development and the loss of the unused field is balanced against the benefit of a facility that can benefit both tourists and the local community as well as enhancing biodiversity.

2.14 Conditions

==== PAGE 11 ====

2.14.1 They suggest that if the development is found to be acceptable, conditions could be imposed which restrict the occupancy of the units to tourists and not for any long term quasi-residential letting, that if the glamping business permanently ceases all structures should be removed from the site and that part of the site left to be part of a landscaped nature reserve. They also suggest that the new vehicular access, pedestrian crossing point and parking must be agreed with the DoI and in place prior to the site becoming operational and if required additional details of landscaping and lighting be provided prior to works commencing.

2.15 Business Plan 2.15.1 A Business Plan is submitted as part of the application by Reayrt Vradda Glamping which refers to the Destination Management Plan of DfE and outline their experience in operating glamping sites on the Island. They explain that they intend to take possession of the 8 luxury glamping pods followed by 10 standard pods in year one with a further 10 pods in year 2. They suggest that materials will be sourced locally.

2.15.2 They state that there will be day and night staff all equipped with backgrounds in customer service and IOM workers will be sought for all appointments. They explain their marketing strategy and describe the start up costs of £500,000 provide through a combination of self-funding from investment and "DED" [presumably DfE] small business grant, subject to DfE approval. Their sales projections by the end of the first financial year will be £300,000 rising to £600,000 by the end of year 3 with calculated running costs of 40% of income and a net profit of 60% with the Directors not being remunerated until the forecasted year 3 turnover has been achieved and costs controlled in line with the budget: all years 1 and 2 will be reinvested in the business.

2.15.3 They describe the tourist industry and current facilities on the Island and what the proposal will offer which is not currently available in the south of the Island. They confirm that the site will have a maximum capacity for 168 guests in 28 pods [with presumably additional guests in the camping and camper van parts of the site operated either directly by the Commissioners or subcontracted by them to a third party.

2.15.4 They refer to other operations on the Island, Glen Helen, Saba's Yurts (they state there are limitations on the opening periods but this is not the case as the restriction on operating times was removed under 15/00821/B and this has been corrected in a revised Business Plan received on 22.06.20) and note that the site has rudimentary facilities and no electricity. They refer to Knockaloe Beg which they describe as having two glamping pods (14/00460/B granted approval for six pods and a camp site and this too has been corrected in the revised Business Plan) and they note that these are fully booked up for July and August with limited availability in June and September, and they also refer to Ballamoar Campsite has two pods.

2.15.5 They explain that they will be applying for a seven year lease of the site renewable for a further two terms subject to approval by DoI. They have a set of key performance indicators to ensure that the operation meets the objectives.

2.16 Transport Assessment 2.16.1 The Transport Assessment prepared by Dice. They consider visibility splays and vehicle turning radii, parking and accessibility with the proposed development's traffic flows and conclude that a construction traffic management plan should be agreed with DoI but otherwise the Assessment has clearly demonstrated that the proposed development, subject to the implementation of measures including the preparation of a Travel Plan prior to the first occupation of the site, the installation of an uncontrolled pedestrian crossing adjacent to the proposed site access on Ballafesson Road including dropped kerbs, tactile paving, splitter island and reflective/illuminated bollards and a new uncontrolled pedestrian

==== PAGE 12 ====

crossing adjacent to the Ballafesson Road, Bay View Road junction, to provide safe access to local shops and facilities on Bay View Road and beyond to the beach - will not create any subsequent negative impacts on the safe operation of the highway network or the intended users of the site.

2.17 Further information 2.17.1 Following the submission of comments from other parties, the applicant advises that whilst an alternative design, proposing something unique and different may meet with the approval of DfE, they are aware that this approach may well attract objections so would prefer to keep the design of the pods as proposed, which they consider is of a high quality and distinctive in design and have an acceptable impact on the area. They also have been made aware of the National Accessibility Scheme used by Visit Isle of Man and intend to discuss the scheme further with an approved independent accessibility assessor. They add that whilst no independent economic assessment has been provided, they are confident that the scheme meets the main requirements in providing a tourist destination that brings economic benefit to the Island and Port Erin in particular, creating local employment in managing the site and additional service providers - cleaners, laundry services, gardeners, etc and the heated units will provide all year round accommodation. The provider is confident that the information provided is still relevant, despite Covid 19. They add that whilst no marketing plan has been provided, the operator is experienced in promotion including digital marketing and social media, referring to Glen Helen Glamping, the sister company which is proving very successful, particularly following Covid 19.

2.17.2 The applicant addresses issues raised by Highway Services suggesting that there is currently no means of crossing the A7 and this does not appear to cause issues presently. They consider that a crossing point is not essential but acknowledge that at some point in the future, this may be beneficial to visitors and local residents. Port Erin Commissioners wish to defer the construction of the crossing point until such times as the tourist site is fully operational and pedestrian use at the road junction can be more accurately assessed.

2.17.3 The applicant advises that their Transport consultants consider that a path to the northern side is not necessary as there is only a single point of access proposed into the site, interfacing with a footway to the southern side of the internal access road. Should a second footway internal to the site and a northern crossing point be proposed, this will increase the number of pedestrian/vehicle conflict points and for pedestrians to travel towards Barracks Road, the southern crossing point as currently proposed would create only a very minor deviation in the desire line and noting that the site has internally a clearly defined footway on the southern side of the site access road but in any case most pedestrians will be heading the other way, towards Port Erin.

2.17.4 They advise that they are encouraging the single access point across Ballafesson Road and as such a path on the northern side of the site entrance is not considered necessary. They confirm that only 30m of all needs to be removed. They consider that the internal layout is acceptable and complies with recommendations following amendments. They are happy to relocate the bicycle parking and the eastern most motorcycle parking bay. Finally, they advise that an area of reinforced matting to the off season parking area has been identified on the site plan which allows grass to grow through but prevents it being churned up.

2.17.5 The applicant responds to objections from third parties, noting that there are some in support and consider for a development of this size that the number of objections is relatively low and with only one objection from those living immediately adjacent to the site. They suggest that the layout of the site and good management thereof should ensure that there is no noise or other impact on the nearest neighbours. They reiterate that no access will be available through Grammah Avenue. They confirm that lighting within the site

==== PAGE 13 ====

will be largely low level and not floodlighting and that the scheme is designed to be suitably designed for all year round use. They would accept conditions which require, should the site no longer be used for tourism, that it is returned to open space.

2.17.6 In response to the concerns raised by the adjacent golf club, they suggest that they had omitted the relocated 10th tee and this has been redressed in the amended site plan. They confirm that they include substantial planting along the boundary with the golf course but it would be impractical to introduce "instant mature trees" as tree planting should include native species and these need to be planted when saplings to ensure that they acclimatise although a mesh fence will provide instant protection and can be installed at the higher level on the application site side of the boundary and the final height of the fencing will be discussed with the golf club prior to installation. They confirm that they have indicated protective mesh fencing on the boundary in the location of the 6th and 9th greens and the details of this will also be discussed with the golf club prior to installation. All fencing will be provided by the applicant at their cost. They confirm that there is any direct access to the footpath and they hope that the golf club will benefit from the development and as the site borders only a small part of the overall golf course so will not have a significant impact thereon.

PLANNING POLICY 3.1 Section 10(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act states:

"In dealing with an application for planning approval… the Department shall have regard to

(a) The provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application, (b) Any relevant statement of planning policy under section 3; (c) Such other considerations as may be specified for the purpose of this subsection in a development order or a development procedure order, so far as material to the application; and (d) All other material considerations."

3.2 Area Plan for the South 3.2.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South as Open Space not for a particular purpose - the adjacent golf course is designated as Open Space for a particular purpose (Golf Course) and the land across Ballafesson Road as Open Space with a development brief which requires that sufficient land is made available here for sports pitches and associated development and indeed planning permission has been granted for this (see above).

3.2.2 There are no acknowledged constraints on Map 1 of the Area Plan although the Plan identifies the concept of Green Gaps which are required to prevent coalescence of existing settlements:

"3.25 Green Gaps 3.25.1 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan sets out in Strategic Policy 3 and Spatial Policy 7 the requirement to protect settlements from coalescence and enables the Area Plans to identify 'Green Gaps'.

3.25.2 Taking into consideration the findings of the Landscape Character Assessment and in order to support other landscape proposals, the Department has identified the important 'Green Gaps' as being between: Port Erin and Ballafesson Port St Mary and Port Erin Castletown and the Airport / Ronaldsway Business Park built environment

==== PAGE 14 ====

3.25.3 There is no precise boundary to the Green Gaps and any application judged to be located within a Green Gap will be assessed, in part, on its impact on the openness of the area and whether it would lead to greater coalescence between the settlements."

Green Gap Proposal 1 "Between the settlements of Port Erin and Ballafesson built development which would erode the separation and detract from the openness between the settlements will not be permitted."

The need to separate Ballafesson from Port Erin is also referred to in the development brief for the land which has been and is being developed as the Ballakilley housing development and the sports pitches.

3.2.3 The Area Plan incorporates the Landscape Character Appraisal and includes the following in respect of the application site:

"Port Erin and Port St Mary (D15) The overall strategy for the area is to maintain and enhance the character, quality and distinctiveness of the local built vernacular and integrity of the nucleated settlements of Port Erin, Port St. Mary and Ballagawne , the scattered traditional farm dwellings and to maintain the field pattern and semi-upland character of the upper slopes.

Key Views Extensive panoramic views from higher ground on hill slopes along coast to the Calf of Man, inland over the Scarlett Peninsula and up the Southern Uplands and Meayll Hill.

Implications of the Landscape Character Assessment Landscape Type - Incised Slopes Landscape Area - D15 (Port Erin and Port St Mary)

i. To protect the identity of Port Erin by maintaining sufficient green open space between it and the built areas of Port St Mary, Ballagawne/Ballakillowey, and also Ballafesson.

ii. To maintain the field pattern and semi-upland character of the upper slopes of Bradda Head, the Southern Uplands and Meayll Hill. Whilst being important features in their own right they also play an important role in providing a vegetated, undeveloped backdrop to Port Erin."

Landscape Proposal 1: "There should be no further new built development to the west of the existing western edge of residential development on Bradda West."

Landscape Proposal 2: "Additional residential development at the edge of Port Erin, Port St Mary, or Ballafesson should include landscaping which softens the existing hard edges of the settlements and includes substantial tree-planting, such as not only to mitigate the landscape impact of the development, but also to maintain effective separation between the settlements."

3.3 The Strategic Plan 3.3.1 This clearly states that land which is not designated for development will be protected for its own sake (Environment Policy 1) although there are exceptions to a general presumption against development in such areas (General Policy 3). In the section on Tourism the Plan is also clear that per se, tourism developments will not be considered as an exception to the general presumption against development in undesignated areas:

9.5.3 "It is important that a balance be struck between the needs of tourism and the protection of these assets, and that tourism development should be sustainable in

==== PAGE 15 ====

accordance with the objectives of this plan. There is no special reason why less demanding policies should be applied to tourism development than for other types of development in the countryside, and larger scale schemes may have to be the subject of an environmental impact assessment before planning permission is granted, as with any other form of large scale development."

3.3.2 Environment Policy 22 states: "Development will not be permitted where it would unacceptably harm the environment and/or the amenity of nearby properties in terms of:

i) pollution of sea, surface water or groundwater; ii) emissions of airborne pollutants; and iii) vibration, odour, noise or light pollution."

3.3.3 Environment Policy 24 states: "Development which is likely to have a significant effect on the environment will be required:

i) to be accompanied by an Environmental Impact Assessment in certain cases; and ii) to be accompanied by suitable supporting environmental information in all other cases."

3.3.3 Paragraph 7.18.1 states: "Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is an important procedure for ensuring that the likely effects of new development on the environment are fully understood and taken into account before the development is allowed to go ahead. It is a process by which information about the likely environmental effects of certain types of development is collected, assessed and taken into account by the developer (as part of project design) and by the planning authority (in determining the acceptability of the application). In cases where developments are likely to have significant environmental effects, whether public or private, by virtue of their nature, size or location, EIA's will be required and the general principles set out in Appendix 5 should be followed."

3.3.4 Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan states that an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) will be required in all cases where the proposed development comprises a "permanent camp site and caravan site".

3.3.5 Business Policy 1 states: "The growth of employment opportunities throughout the Island will be encouraged provided that development proposals accord with the policies of this Plan."

3.3.6 Business Policy 11 states: "Tourism development must be in accordance with the sustainable development objectives of this plan; policies and designations which seek to protect the countryside from development will be applied to tourist development with as much weight as they are to other types of development. Within the rural areas there may be situations where existing rural buildings could be used for tourist use and Environment Policy 16 sets out the circumstances where this may be permitted."

3.3.7 Business Policy 14 states: "Tourism development may be permitted in rural areas provided that it complies with the policies in the Plan. Farmhouse accommodation or quality self catering units in barn conversions and making use of rural activities will be encouraged but must comply with General Policy 3 and Business Policies 11 and 12. Other forms of quality accommodation in rural areas will be considered, including the provision of hostels and similar accommodation suitable for walkers but must comply with General Policy 3 and Business Policies 11 and 12."

3.3.8 Transport Policy 1 states, "New development should, where possible, be located close to existing public transport facilities and routes, including pedestrian, cycle and rail routes".

==== PAGE 16 ====

3.3.9 Transport Policy 4 states, "The new and existing highways which serve any new development must be designed so as to be capable of accommodating the vehicle and pedestrian journeys generated by that development in a safe and appropriate manner, and in accordance with the environmental objectives of this plan."

3.3.10 Transport Policy 6 states: "In the design of new development and transport facilities the needs of pedestrians will be given similar weight to the needs of other road users."

3.3.11 Transport Policy 7 states: "The Department will require that in all new development, parking provision must be in accordance with the Department's current standards. The current standards are set out in Appendix 7."

3.4 The draft Planning Policy Statement Planning & the Economy (2012) 3.4.1 The weight to be attached to that document would obviously be greater if the review promised in paragraph 26 of the "Initial Summary of Responses" had been carried out, and also if a final PPS had been laid before Tynwald and published in accordance with Section 3(3) of The Act. Further, it has been 8 years since the originally laid before Tynwald and little if anything has been undertaken since. Accordingly, it could be considered as time has gone by, its weight lessens. It is also considered that the weight to be attached to the draft PPS would be greater if paragraph 14 of that document recognised the primacy of the development plan (as required by Section 3(4) of the Act), rather than suggesting a less onerous test than is contained in General Policy 3(g) of the Strategic Plan. Nevertheless, the general thrust of draft PPS remains a material consideration, which reinforces Business Policy 1 of the Strategic Plan.

3.5 Programme for Government 3.5.1 Programme for Government 2016 - 2021 (approved in Tynwald) states the Governments strategic objectives for the next five years and identifies the initial priorities. One of the three main objectives being "An Island of Enterprise and Opportunity"

3.5.2 There are a number of objectives within this document which could be considered relevant to this application, as set out below.

o "We have an economy where local entrepreneurship is supported and thriving and more new businesses are choosing to call the Isle of Man home"

o "We have a diverse economy where people choose to work and invest"

o "We are an Island where people choose to live and visit"

o "We have a planning system which supports sustainable growth"

3.6 Destination Management Plan 2016 - 2020 (Status accepted by Department of Enterprise (DfE) in 2016) 3.6.1 The Plan sets out five objectives, which include "Creating an exceptional visitor experience" and "Championing new investment and product development". The Plan indicates potential growth from UK families who are responsive to amongst other things, "self-catering, including camping at all price points".

3.6.2 The IOM Destination Management Plan is an approved strategy of the Department of Enterprise, as such it is capable of being a material consideration. This is supplemented by more recent and detailed analysis of the tourism market on the Island.

3.7 Isle of Man Non-Serviced Accommodation Futures Study (March 2017) Status accepted by Department of Enterprise (DfE) in 2017

==== PAGE 17 ====

3.7.1 The Study was prepared by "Hotel Solutions" which is a hotel development consultancy, on behalf of the Department of Enterprise (formerly DED) following the recommendation so the IOM Destination Management Plan 2016-2020. The below four points outline the purpose, coverage & use of the Study:

o "The Isle of Man Non-Serviced Accommodation Futures Study seeks to make an objective assessment of the future potential for non-serviced visitor accommodation development on the Isle of Man, both in terms of developing existing stock and new provision if evidenced by market need.

o It covers self-catering holiday cottages, holiday apartments, holiday lodges and complexes, holiday resorts, campsites, touring caravan provision, glamping and youth and group accommodation - hostels, bunkhouses, camping barns and outdoor education centres.

3.7.2 The Study identifies that the IOM is lagging behind UK rural and island designations in terms of provision of most types of non-serviced visitor accommodation and it is missing out on business that could be attracted with a wider, better quality, more contemporary non- serviced accommodation product.

3.7.3 The overall conclusion for the need of Non-Serviced Accommodation of the Study states the following:

"The market research undertaken for the DMP showed that there are significant potential markets that can be attracted to the Isle of Man from the UK and Ireland in terms of the family holiday and break market, empty nesters and retired people coming for short breaks, and people that can be attracted for walking, outdoor activities, star gazing, and bird and wildlife watching. All of these markets are interested in staying in non-serviced accommodation.

Our assessment of the Island's current non-serviced accommodation offer and how it compares to UK rural destinations and other UK islands is that the Isle of Man does not currently have a sufficiently developed non-serviced accommodation offer to attract these markets and compete effectively for them. It has very little weather-proofed non-serviced accommodation, very little family-friendly accommodation, and very little activity-focused accommodation. While the Island has a good stock of generally high quality self-catering accommodation, compared to other destinations, the Isle of Man has:

o Very little high quality glamping, and nothing distinctive in terms of glamping o Only one 4 star campsite and no 5 star campsite;

3.7.4 In terms of this application, the following type of accommodation as listed above have been included in full, being likely to be most relevant when determining the current application.

"Camping Pods A few of the Island's campsites have added camping pods to provide an alternative accommodation offer and help extend the season. They are generally attracting good demand, primarily from on-islanders. This suggests potential for campsites to add a few more camping pods.

There might be scope for camping pod resorts/encampments (15-20 units) with central communal socialising and cooking areas and outdoor activities. Such resorts would have appeal for the family market, family and friend group holidays and breaks, and activity groups e.g. walking, cycling and motorbiking groups."

==== PAGE 18 ====

"Walker, Cyclists and Motorcyclist Friendly Accommodation Growing the walking, cycling, mountain biking, Enduro riding and motorbiking holiday and break market on the Island will require existing and new non-serviced accommodation businesses to provide facilities such as drying rooms, boot and bike wash facilities, and secure cycle and motorbike storage."

3.7.4 The Study is a piece of evidence base rather than a strategy in its own right, but highlights areas of potential action/focus which could help to deliver the Destination Management Plan and has been accepted by DfE on that basis.

3.8 Policy on the development of Non-Serviced Accommodation (March 2019) Status accepted by Department of Enterprise (DfE) in 2019 3.8.1 Following the Non-Serviced Accommodation Study in 2017 the Department of Enterprise (DFE) have now produced a policy/strategy. This report states:

"There is current and growing interest in the development of additional non-serviced accommodation units, as such it is now viewed that the Agency (Visit IOM Agency), and the Department, should clearly articulate their policy in respect of such development."

3.8.2 The document summarises the non-serviced accommodation on the Island which makes up 54% of the overall bed space, with the majority being single units across the IOM. It highlights that there are gaps of:

Complexes, particularly with leisure facilities; 2. Units adapted for those with disabilities; 3. Large units catering for groups; and 4. Luxury, boutique style properties.

3.8.3 It comments that there are 11 permanent camp sites and 21 temporary campsites (Motor cycling events only), with the majority being 3 star quality. There are a small supply of glamping operations, primarily add-ons to campsites, where two operate of a high standard, operating all year round and the remainder are seasonal and basic. It also comments there are no holiday cottages and leisure facilities; holiday resorts; or holiday parks/holiday lodge parks. Again the report comments that the ION is lagging behind the UK in terms of non-serviced accommodation and could be missing out on visitors who could be attracted with a wider range and better quality of non-serviced accommodation offering.

3.8.4 This has been further supplemented by a very recent policy stance by Department for Enterprise on temporary camp sites as follows:

"The Visit Agency Board reviewed the Campsite Policy Paper April 2020 and have agreed with the recommendation (which was noted by Department at its May 13th meeting), however, it should be noted that we are in a different economic environment than we were in December 2019, when this paper was first reviewed:

To suspend the approval of all new campsites for a period of 2 years, with the aim of maintaining the current stock level which is sufficient for the current level of demand and modest growth. For clarity, any campsite currently registered will be able to re-register within this period; it will apply to applications for new campsites only. It is further recommended that exceptions can be made where an application for registration is received for a high quality campsite offering, which meets the criteria within the Non-Serviced Accommodation policy. Applicants wishing to register a site must present a business plan to show how the proposed site will meet high quality standards and/or meet the criteria on the Non Serviced Policy.

==== PAGE 19 ====

3.8.5 The paper included the following appraisal of the situation:

Campsites are achieving an average of 69.4% occupancy at peak times (May / June). Breaking this down, all campsites at TT achieved an average occupancy of 78.5%. Temporary campsites only achieved an average of 79.6%. These averages are based on figures provided by campsites for 2019. This suggests that the Island has sufficient stock of campsites". This position is confirmed in the response by DfE to this current planning application.

3.9 UNESCO Biosphere Isle of Man 3.9.1 UNESCO Biosphere Isle of Man is all about keeping the Isle of Man a special place to live, work and visit. The Isle of Man is the first entire Island Nation in the world to receive this designation.

3.9.2 The UNESCO Biosphere Isle of Man project does not seek to prevent any specific actions, but to promote enjoying and celebrating the Isle of Man to the full, making it an even better place to be and promoting engagement.

3.10 The site is identified on the Agricultural Soils Classification Map as grade 3/2 capability.

PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The site itself has not been the subject of any planning applications.

4.2 A recent and relevant application elsewhere in the village is relevant: 17/00254/B sought permission for the change of use of part of field to campsite including installation of 10 'Glamping' pods and a welcome centre including the creation of a new pedestrian access from Spaldrick Promenade. This application, also submitted by the Port Erin Commissioners was refused for the following reasons:

1. The glamping development proposed would have an unduly harmful impact on the open character and natural appearance of this prominent location, contrary to paragraph 8.7.1 of the Area Plan for the South 2013 and parts (b), (c) and (g) of General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

2. The proposed glamping development would have an unduly harmful impact on neighbouring living conditions, contrary to part (g) of General Policy 2 and part (iii) of Environment Policy 22 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

4.3 This decision was appealed by the applicant. The conclusion of that appeal was that the application was refused for the same reasons given initially by the Planning Committee.

4.4 In that case the site was smaller - 48m by 96m at its longest and widest points compared with the current site which is 192m by 182m and the closest existing dwelling was 23m or so from the nearest glamping pod and where a 12m buffer zone separated the site from the adjacent site which is designated for residential development but for which no planning approval had been sought.

REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Port Erin Commissioners advise on 05.06.20 that they will be discussing the application at their meeting of 09.06.20. They later confirm that they unanimously support the application (26.06.20).

5.2.1 Highway Services consider that the layout is reasonable, but would benefit from an additional path around the northern radius to tie to the shared surface approach 2m beyond

==== PAGE 20 ====

the radius, requiring a revision and also that a Stage One Road Safety Audit has not been provided including the changes to the highway and such should be required by condition prior to the development commencing.

5.2.2 They also suggest that much of the layout is acceptable with direct connections between the zones and strong permeability; although the main path along the access way is interrupted by two car park accesses /egresses and the turning point, making it discontinuous. A rationalisation of the number of openings should be considered to provide a more convenient pedestrian route along the main axis, such as by combining the turning point and a car park entrance/exit, allowing easier parking whilst still achieving access to the recycling bins. A revision would be required.

5.2.3 The aisle width serving the 30 car park spaces for Glamping at north is too narrow and 6.0m is necessary to allow turning to and from perpendicular spaces to meet criteria and general Policy 2(h).

5.2.4 The size for car parking spaces is reasonable; although extra width is necessary for electric vehicle charging points and it would be prudent for a few spaces to be larger to better cater for larger vehicles, such as four wheeled drives and van sized passenger vehicles and those ad hoc servicing vehicles that need to reach the Welcome Building, such as for food supplies. A revision is necessary.

5.2.5 The provision of electric vehicle charging points is considered necessary to at least 10% of the car parking spaces or fewer on demonstrating scalability. 2.6m bay widths are generally required for such to cater for the variants in position of the charging leads; although this can be reduced where shared in similar arrangement to the disabled bays, such as to provide a 1m hatched area with plinth mounted charger unit between 2.4m bays. Revisions are required.

5.2.6 Arguably, for security reasons, the easternmost motorcycle bay should be moved closer to the reception area. Staff and visitor cycle parking should be provided at the Welcome Building. Again revisions are necessary. There is adequate space for bin storage and collection with turning demonstrated by a swept path analysis using a large waste collection vehicle to pick up a the recycling centre; although no details are provided on collection from the other waste bin areas and clarity is sought and advance locational information and adequate roadside signage should be provided to reduce risks of collisions that are known to occur to groups of motorcyclists when they stop suddenly on overrunning campsite site entrances. (12.06.20).

5.2.7 Following the response prepared by the applicant to Highway Services' comments, Highway Services comment further, confirming that their original concerns regarding the main ar park, aisle widths, parking spaces, motorcycle bays and waste collection arrangements. However, Highway Services confirm that the footway around the northern radius of the proposed junction and the pedestrian crossing facilities at Bay View Road are essential elements which would aid pedestrian movements in addition to that proposed to the south of the vehicular access and should be required by condition as off-site works (17.08.20).

5.3 Manx National Heritage's Ecologist notes that the site appears to be agricultural with limited wildlife value save for a small copse of trees adjacent to the Ballafesson Road (these are not within the application site) and that the proposed planting could be of value to nature conservation if of native species and that the proposal in general does not appear to be detrimental to ecology (13.06.20).

==== PAGE 21 ====

5.4 Visit Isle of Man, part of Department for Enterprise are generally keen to support developments of this type as the destination requires diversification of non-serviced accommodation across the Island. However, the Officers are unable to assess elements of the proposal due to limited information within the documents available. They assess the proposal in accordance with the elements in the Non-Serviced Accommodation Study and the proposal meets these criteria other than in respect of the following;

The design of the glamping units replicates those commonly found in other destination markets and does not appear to have unique attributes or feature distinctive Manx-inspired design. The design is also not dissimilar to those on existing glamping sites across the Island and therefore lacks distinction. The Officers would be in favour of designs considered to be unique to the site, offering it a sense of place.

The layout with different zones of camping might also suggest that the cabin design within the site might also vary accordingly.

Given the scale of the development, there is an opportunity to design pods that for instance might be inspired by those identified in section 7.1.

'Overall Conclusions - The Need for Non-Serviced' (Glamping: 7.2.11) within the Non- Serviced Accommodation Study, e.g. the approach taken by Epic Retreats. The Officers are less favourable.

They are also unable to identify whether any of the units are accessible by disabled users, whether the proposal demonstrates significant economic benefit to the Island, particularly in terms of retained local spend and employment over an extended season, ideally year- round, whether it demonstrates long term sustainable market growth, whether it demonstrates a unique proposition and proven ability to grow the overall visitor profile whether it demonstrates through owner capability or operator capability a commitment to promote the proposition to new audiences.

5.5 DEFA's Ecosystems Policy Office welcomes the provision of the wildlife enhancements within the development but advise that no lighting should be installed unless and until a detailed lighting scheme has been approved to ensure that bats are not adversely affected and also that no development should commence until a detailed landscaping scheme has been approved (29.06.20).

5.6 Local residents 5.6.1 An occupant of 77, Circular Road, Douglas represents a client who resides "close to the site" and that they are concerned that the use is not compatible with the Area Plan for the South. No clarification of the client's address has been provided so they cannot be considered for having interested person status (see later) (05.06.20).

5.6.2 The occupant of 9, Magherdonnagh considers that the site is far too close to housing to allow an all year round potential noise disturbance and intrusion. Whilst they consider that the concept is a good idea, the site is not private enough (09.06.20).

5.6.3 The occupant of Carnanes, Surby Road considers that the development will have a detrimental visual impact on the character of Port Erin and the adjacent residential areas. They are also concerned about increased litter and traffic which will have a negative impact (10.06.20).

5.6.4 The occupant of 8, Pairk Beg is concerned about increase noise as their property backs onto the site and notes that there will only be one or two wardens for an occupancy of more than 120 guests at full occupancy and that occupants of the camp site will use the

==== PAGE 22 ====

footpath on the golf course - increasing the use of this - and also that they will try and get through Pairk Beg. They are interested in what lighting will be installed as this could impact adjacent properties and the general area. In addition, they note that the site is exposed and windy and wonders whether this would be somewhere where people would want to camp. They also wonder whether the number of units is over-optimistic and if the business is not viable, whether this would open to door to housing development on the site (16.06.20).

5.6.5 The occupants of 18, Grammah Avenue feel that the number of pods is excessive for the closeness to a residential area and whilst the idea is great it should be on a smaller scale with more landscaping (17.06.20).

5.6.6 Rowany Golf Club confirm that they have held prior discussions with the applicant but still have reservations about the impact of the development on the 10th tee which has been suggested as being moved - and this is not without its own issues, and what has been submitted does not reflect the discussions which were held. They recommend that the height of any fencing alongside the golf course is 8m high, not 6m as shown as required in 15/00308/B. They also require protection of the 6th and 9th green and advise that the Club has limited resources to implement these actions and any safeguarding landscaping or fencing should be at the expense of the applicant, including future maintenance. They recommend that there is no direct access to the golf course from the site. They conclude by saying that there are benefits to the club to be derived from the proposed development but that there are issue to be overcome (22.06.20). They respond to the applicant's additional comments in respect of their original objections that irrespective of planting, golf balls will cross the boundary and enter the field and it is therefore imperative that the proposed units are sited well clear of the boundary and they are of the view that it does not presently do that. They add that whilst the relocation of the competition tee into the paddock is not part of this application, it could be as a consequence of it being approved and the proposed fencing and planting is found to be inadequate and they require guarantees against any costs to the club of remedying this situation (31.07.20).

5.6.7 The owners of 2, Pairk Beg state that they live in the neighbouring estate and have concerns that noise pollution will be significant, on weekends in particular, and during racing events when it is anticipated the site will be at capacity, managing and policing this noise is unrealistic and will be something residents will be forced to live with. They anticipate that this will be throughout the entire summer and would add that they fail to see what the actual location offers in terms of iconic Port Erin views and would suggest it would be better suited either being closer to Port Erin attractions, or further away to benefit from open and more secluded space. The proposed site is located somewhere in between, causing a noise problem for residents, and increased foot traffic through the area by people travelling from the site to the Port Erin attractions (18.06.20).

5.6.8 The owner of 10, Milner Close makes a number of submissions, identifying potential issues with the operation of the golf course if the development is approved and suggesting that the Rowany Golf Management Board objects to the application. He expresses concern at who will pay for the facility, that the site could be better used for a replacement golf clubhouse or extension of the golf course and that no health and safety audit has been undertaken in respect of the operation of the golf course and users of the application site. In respect of the costs, he queries whether all the costs have been included in the financial information provided (he does not think that they have) and notes that there has been no response from Port Erin Commissioners to his queries. He notes that Manx National Heritage have the wrong field in their response. He queries whether the proposal will benefit the rate payers of Port Erin and comments that some of the units appear as permanent dwellings and wonders whether the dog walkers who currently use the field will move onto the golf course. He considers that the trees will take significant time to mature

==== PAGE 23 ====

and take effect and that the proposed highway changes result in limitations for traffic travelling south, that the mesh fencing will be unattractive and out of keeping and that there is no pavement on this side of the road and they query whether there is provision for access for disabled users(12.06.20, 21.06.20, 22.06, 26.06.20).

5.6.9 The owner of 62, Maghergarran objects to the application, commenting that the current smooth edged buffer zone along the edge of the village would be eroded by the proposed development and the separate identities and character of Port Erin and Ballafesson threatened. The placement of buildings and infrastructure on the site, together with provision of parking for motor homes and the density of the proposed woodland screening would adversely mar the open character of the existing landscape with nationally important views to the low lying areas of Fairy Hill, Fleshwick and the surrounding hills. The site appears to be currently zoned as open space, which would suggest that it could have some future recreational value to the residents of Port Erin, whilst the proposed development has minimal value to the residents of Port Erin who are unlikely to use the facilities. There are other redundant/derelict sites within Port Erin, some of which could be used for tourism purposes and which should be developed in preference to a greenfield site. They are concerned that sound will easily travel to the surrounding residential areas and the forecast occupancy levels for the site suggest that it is highly likely there will be considerable noise disturbance to local residents. In addition at peak period or in good weather we can expect air pollution from smoke and unseen particulate matter to drift across the residential areas from the considerable number of BBQ/fire pits causing disturbance and possible health risks to local residents (26.06.20).

In support of the application 5.6.10 The occupant of 42, Nab View in Clitheroe, England is excited about the prospect of being able to take their large family's camping holiday to the Island and whilst they accept that this is selfish, there is added appeal for them as they have relations not too far away and the beach would be a bonus. They are supportive of the application (12.06.20).

5.6.11 The occupant of 30, Church Road - operator of the Trend Gift Shop - considers that the glamping site is a wonderful first step to reviving the village after the closure of most of the hotels in Port Erin and reduced footfall and they wish the applicant all the best for bringing this development to Port Erin (14.06.20).T

5.6.12 The owner of Rose Cottage, Denbighshire supports the application as a regular visitor to the Island and look forward to different places to stay and they consider the development is well landscaped and should not have any significant interference with the neighbourhood (06.07.20).

5.6.13 The owner of Baie Fyn, St. Mary's Road are in support of the proposals to allow a glamping, camping and motorhome site to be constructed. They fully support the proposal as they think this will bring much needed tourism, and a small amount of employment to the village with the a added benefit of an increased income for the local businesses such as shops, pubs and restaurants. The location is ideal as it is only a short walk to all the village amenities and of course, the wonderful beach (26.06.20).

ASSESSMENT Principle of development 6.1 The proposed use of the site is contrary to the development plan and General Policy 3 does not make specific provision for tourism related development as an exception to the general presumption against development in such areas. There is an exception for development considered to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative (subsection g). Business Policy

==== PAGE 24 ====

1 encourages the growth of employment opportunities throughout the Island provided that the development proposals are in accordance with the policies in the Plan.

6.2 The presumption against development is based upon two premises: firstly that the countryside should be protected for its own sake (EP1 of the Strategic Plan and the designation of the site in the Area Plan for the South as well as the numerous references in both to the protection of green gaps) to preserve the visually attractive backdrop to the Island's settlements and for the protection of ecology and secondly to ensure that development is sustainable. There is also a need to ensure that the Island has sufficient land available for the production of its own food supplies.

6.3 Elsewhere on the Island, the Department has taken the view that tourism developments which accord with the Visit Isle of Man strategy can be taken to be acceptable, according with General Policy 3g - applications for camp sites at Ballakillingan Farm, Lezayre (11/01595/B and 18/00010/B), Ballakaighen Farm, Onchan (16/01129/C and 16/01367/B), Knockaloe Beg, Patrick (14/00460/B), Ballamoar Farm, Ballaugh (12/00136/B and 16/00546/B), Glendown Farm, Port St. Mary (14/00800/B and 17/01186/B) to name a few, and some of which were approved at appeal. Very recently DfE have adopted a policy to restrict new campsites except where an application for registration is received for a high quality campsite offering, which meets the criteria within the Non-Serviced Accommodation policy. This follows a period of significant growth in the provision of temporary camp sites which flourish during TT and Festival of Motorcycling periods, potentially taking trade from those permanent camp sites which provide permanent facilities all year round which is what is proposed here.

6.4 In order for such developments to obtain support from DfE there needs to be, inter alia, a demonstration of viability and it would appear that this has not been provided to the satisfaction of that Department. This would not be something that the planning process would usually require to be provided and indeed it is not believed that any of the other camp sites referred to above as having been approved, were required to submit. As such, the absence of such information is not considered to be a reason why the application should be refused. It is relevant to consider whether the proposal accords with the other material requirements which DfE have identified - that the development is high quality and distinctive, that it provides accessible and weather-proofed accommodation and it is considered that this development does this. Whilst the standard pods can be found elsewhere on the Island and are therefore not unique, it would be inappropriate to design something more striking simply to be different, if this resulted in an adverse visual or other impact. There is the opportunity for the larger units to be slightly different, which they are but still sympathetic to the remainder of the development.

6.5 The site is also in a sustainable location and whilst not within the settlement boundary or designated for development, it is within walking and cycling distance of the village and where campers will be likely to utilise the services, shops and facilities within both Port Erin and Port St. Mary whilst staying at the site.

6.6 The creation of a new, permanent camp site which achieves the things identified in the Non Serviced Accommodation Study is considered capable of being considered a material reason for setting aside the land use designation and in this case, the proposal is considered to accord with what the Non Serviced Accommodation Study is trying to achieve.

Visual Impact 6.7 Environment Policy 1 and the Strategic and Area Plan make it clear that not only will land which is not designated for development not generally be developed but also that land which represents green or strategic gap sites - usually separating existing settlements and to prevent visual coalescence - will be particularly protected from built development. In this

==== PAGE 25 ====

case the land falls within some of the green gap separating Port Erin and Ballafesson, supported by the recreation space on the other side of the A7 and the golf course to the north and north west.

6.8 Whilst the development comprises built structures, it also incorporates green space and open spaces within and between the buildings which, other than the main welcome centre, comprise small scale structures with landscaping around them and around the perimeter of the site.

6.9 It is relevant to consider that if the south is to have an additional permanent camp site somewhere within its surroundings, in order for it to be as sustainable as possible, it will need to be as close to the edge of the settlement boundary as possible, making it likely that it will be within a green gap or otherwise physically extending the village beyond its boundary. On balance and considering the nature of the development, it is considered that the potential benefits of the scheme to the economy and tourist industry outweigh the impact on the landscape which it is not considered is so adverse as to warrant refusal for that reason.

Impact on the living conditions of those in adjacent dwellings 6.10 There will be an impact from the development on the living conditions for those in the properties which abut the site which presently look out over an open field. The proposed layout however, incorporates a landscaped buffer zone which separates the buildings from the dwellings and which, together with the topography and the design and size of the structures, should not result in an adverse visual or aural impact. It is not considered that there are any other dwellings which are close enough to be materially affected by the proposal.

Impact on the golf course 6.11 It is vital that this development should not adversely affect the operation of the golf course just as it is important that those using the application site are not adversely affected by the operation of the course through stray golf balls entering the site. The concerns of the golf course operators are very important in this respect. It is clear that there is room for manoeuvre in terms of the relocation of the adjacent tee to the north east and the applicant has made it clear that this will be at no expense to the golf club and neither will be the cost of the fencing required. It is important that the precise height and position of the fencing is known before being erected and as such, this should form the subject of a planning condition and as the applicant suggests, should also be subject to discussion with the golf club before details are submitted (although this cannot be required by the condition as it would require third party compliance which is outwith the control of the applicant).

Impact on highway safety 6.11 The applicant has engaged a Transport Consultant who considers that the application as submitted results in an acceptable impact on highway safety. Highway Services recommend that some alterations to the scheme are required, some of which have been provided.

Impact on ecology 6.12 There is no evidence that the development will result in any adverse impact on ecology, rather, it will be more likely to enhance the ecological value of the site through the proposed landscaping which should form the subject of a condition requiring full details prior to commencement of work.

CONCLUSION 7.1 It is considered that the development is acceptable as, whilst it is contrary to the land use designation, there are economic benefits to the Island's economy and supports the

==== PAGE 26 ====

Government's tourism strategy without significant adverse impact on the environment, highway safety or the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property.

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 in Article 4(2) who should be given Interested Person Status.

8.3 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 it under the appropriate delegated authority.

Decision Made : …Permitted……….... Committee Meeting Date:…24.08.2020

Signed :…………………………………….. 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.

==== PAGE 28 ====

PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 24.08.2020

Application No. : 20/00496/B Applicant : Port Erin Commissioners Proposal : Creation of a 30 glamping pod / cabin site with provision for camping and camper vans, erection of a detached welcome centre and detached toilet / shower facilities and the creation of a vehicular access, car parking and landscaping Site Address : Field 411412 Ballafesson Road Port Erin Isle Of Man

Principal Planner : Miss S E Corlett Presenting Officer M r S Butler

Addendum to the Officer’s Report

The Planning Committee approved the application at their meeting of 24.08.20 subject to the addition of another condition as follows:

If the site should cease being used or required for camping purposes, within one year of the site ceasing to be used as such, all structures must be removed from the site and any hard surfacing dug out and the site returned to a field. Any landscaping may remain.

Reason for approval: It is considered that the development is acceptable as, whilst it is contrary to the land use designation, there are economic benefits to the Island's economy and supports the Government's tourism strategy without significant adverse impact on the environment, highway safety or the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property.