Planning Statement

Planning Statement In Support Of An Application For The Retention Of Five Containers, Installation Of Decking, Retention Of Artificial Grass Area, Retention Of Stone Chip Access Drive With New Bitmac Entrance, Construction Of Fencing And Introduction Of New Landscaping All At The Black Dub, Glen Helen Road, St.John’S IM4 3NN

Aerial photograph showing the site prior to the installation of the containers, artificial grass and spectator stand

• 1.0 INTRODUCTION
• 1.1 The site sits on the southern side of the A3 TT course between Ballig Bridge and Glen Helen. The site is in three parts: the central area of approximately 0.7acres which accommodates a range of buildings; and with two sections of open land on either side.
• 1.2 The central section accommodates a former mill, a former cottage and shop (now a dwelling) which has its gable to the road and a range of former outbuildings which sit parallel with the road (now converted to dwellings). The section to the south west sits lower than the highway and currently accommodates a series of containers on top of which up until relatively recently, sat a spectator stand, erected for the TT races.
• 1.3 The site has been the subject of a number of applications - see Planning History later.
• 1.4 To the rear of the site runs the River Neb and beyond that is an area of dense woodland. A small millrace runs through the site from and back to the river: the River Neb is designated as a Main River by Department for Infrastructure under the Flood Risk Management Act 2013).
• 1.5 There is a wide vehicular entrance across the central section of the site, there having previously been a fuel filling station accommodated here. The site appeared thus in 2010:

• 1.6 Since then the site has been redeveloped and currently accommodates three cottages and the remains of the mill building with a large hard surfaced forecourt and access onto the A3. The cottages are in the process of being registered as tourist accommodation with Visit Isle of Man.
• 1.7 A grandstand structure was created in the south western area of the site, within a level area where containers were introduced, on top of which a spectator stand was erected for the TT and up to the Manx Grand Prix/Classic TT (MGP/CTT) each year. This had permission for erection for the summer racing period on condition that it was all removed outwith these periods. The containers remain on site along with a levelled area covered in artificial grass with two large umbrellas within it.

• 2.0 PLANNING POLICY
• 2.1 Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982

• 2.1.1 The site lies within an area not designated for development on the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982 which is the only currently adopted plan for this part of the Island.
• 2.1.2 The scale at which the 1982 Plan was prepared means it is difficult to precisely identify sites and in this case, the River Neb is shown to run immediately alongside the A3 with no intervening land use. Either side of the road and river are areas of Woodland - plantations owned by Government - and the area as a whole is also shown as being an area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance on this plan.

• 2.2 Draft Area Plan for the North and West (APNW)

• 2.2.1 Whilst Cabinet Office spent several years preparing an Area Plan for the north and west of the Island, this was ultimately not approved by Tynwald and as such has no weight in the planning process.
• 2.2.2 The draft Area Plan incorporated the findings of the Landscape Character Assessment which was commissioned by Government in 2008. The full Assessment

• as it applies to the site is set out in Appendix One and whose conclusion for the relevant Landscape Character Area in this case is as follows:

"The overall strategy should be to conserve and enhance the character, quality and distinctiveness of the area with its open fields, its roads enclosed by Manx hedges and its scattered traditional farmsteads fringed by woodland."

• 2.2.3 It also notes: "Two A-roads and an abandoned railway are conspicuous man-made linear features."

2.3 Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016

• 2.3.1 This provides generally non geographic policy advice on development on the Island. There is a general presumption against development in undesignated areas unless the development accords with one of the listed exceptions (General Policy 3) and a presumption against development in undesignated areas, which is harmful to the character of the landscape (Environment Policies 1 and 2).
• 2.3.2 Development is generally directed towards existing settlements and sustainable locations (Strategic Policies 1, 2 and 10, Spatial Policy 5 and Transport Policy 1).
• 2.3.3 Development is generally expected to have a beneficial impact on the environment (Strategic Policies 3 and 4).
• 2.3.4 Development which is harmful to ecology is presumed against (Environment Policies 4 and 7) and development which would either increase flood risk or itself be

at unacceptable risk of flooding will generally not be permitted (Environment Policies 10 and 13). The riverside is shown as being at risk of flooding on the national flood risk maps but the site of the proposed development is not believed to be included within this risk area.

• 2.3.5 There are policies which support the conversion of existing rural buildings to other use (Environment Policy 16 and Housing Policy 11) and a policy which supports the redevelopment of previously developed land in certain circumstances (General Policy 2c).
• 2.3.6 There are no Registered Buildings or Registered Trees within the site and it is not within a Conservation Area.

2.4 Our Island Our Future

• 2.4.1 The Government has produced two documents, both titled Our Island Our Future in recent years. One is an economic strategy for the Island for the period 2022-2037. The other is a tourism strategy for the period 2022 - 2032.

• 2.4.2 The Economic Strategy "sets the foundations for investment and economic security for the next 10 years and beyond" and aims to bring more stability to the economy and employment base. Amongst the goals and actions, there is a drive to create a modern, business friendly economy, a more diverse economy with growth in established and new sectors and building on established strengths. There is an ambition to create and fill an additional 5,000 new jobs by 2032 and one of the key strengths is that visitor spending was reported as being up over the decade with an increasing proportion of leisure visitors.
• 2.4.3 The report also aims to enhance the leisure infrastructure and provide more things for people, particularly young people to do so that a younger population is attracted to the Island and those young people who are already here are encouraged to stay. It also states that one objective is to protect, nurture and grow key sectors of the economy, specifically referencing hospitality and leisure and the visitor economy with hospitality and leisure propositions being attractive to people and business. The current visitor economy is identified as being one to maintain or grow with adaptation and modernisation where appropriate. Hospitality is referred to as an enabling sector where the range of hospitality venues should be improved in terms of its quality and range and again, especially aimed at the younger demographics.
• 2.4.4 The Visitor Strategy focuses purely on tourism and identifies ways in which the season may be extended and the value to the island is maximised through greater numbers of people coming to the Island and higher levels of spend when they do.
• 2.4.5 The objective is to grow the annual visitor numbers to 500.000 by 2032 and increase the annual economic contribution to £520m. The Strategy looks at

• o Who we want to attract;
• o What they are looking for from their visit to the Island;
• o How we will deliver an experience for them that exceeds their expectations.

whilst ensuring that "our Visitor Economy is environmentally sustainable, respects and enhances our seascape, coastline, countryside, nature, heritage, culture and communities, and contributes to reducing the impact of climate change on the Island."

• 2.4.6 The strategy encourages the tourism offer to create memorable experiences and making use of our Unique Selling Points, one of which is the TT, suggesting "There is so much more that we can do to make use of these USPs to help us stand out as a destination and get ahead of the competition."
• 2.4.7 Another objective is "The development of a series of unique Manx visitor products that will entice more visitors to come to the Island throughout the year" and referring to the importance of events in attracting visitors to the Island and enhancing their experience when they do come.
• 2.4.8 Both Government Strategies are capable of being material considerations in the determination of planning applications.

• 3.0 PLANNING HISTORY
• 3.1 The site has been the subject of a number of applications as follows:

96/01263/B - extension to the existing forecourt - permitted

00/02263/A conversion of the mill to four dwellings and the erection of six apartments/maisonettes - refused

• 02/00852/B - conversion of the disused mill to a dwelling and erection of a sales office. The former was permitted and the latter refused.
• 03/01403/B - erection of a car sales office - permitted

03/01490/B - conversion of the mill to a dwelling - permitted 08/00966/B - conversion to the tea rooms to two dwellings and installation of a gas tank - permitted 08/01706/B - conversion of a mill to a dwelling - permitted 15/01387/B - conversion of tearooms to create two dwellings and siting of a gas storage tank - permitted

22/00186/B - installation of glass balustrading to Cottage 3 first floor and erection of single storey side extension including viewing platform with associated works permitted on appeal.

19/01057/B - Conversion and extension of redundant mill to create residential dwelling with additional tourist use - permitted.

• 21/00151/B - Installation of stone cladding to dwarf walls of porch and stone cladding to south elevation of Cottage 2 and garage doors replaced with French doors to Cottage 3 (retrospective) - permitted

• 21/01316/B Temporary siting of four storage containers (for food and drink), platforms, scaffolding and spectator seating during the Isle of Man TT and the Isle of Man Festival of Motorcycling races - permitted subject to conditions including the following:

• 2. The four containers, associated supports, platforms, scaffolding and spectator seating may be erected no sooner than one week before the first practice of TT and may remain until one week after the last race in that event, and no sooner than one week before the first practice of the Festival of Motorcycling and may remain until one week after the last race of that event. No approval is granted to the retention of the structures for the period in between the two events.

Reason: To clarify the extent of the planning approval and in the interest of the protection of the countryside.

• 3. The use for food and drink purposes shall be restricted to two containers only and may only be available for use no sooner than one day before the first practice associated with the TT races and up to one day after the last race in that event, and no sooner than one day before the first practice of the Festival of Motorcycling and up to one day after the last race in that event. No approval is granted for any food and drink purposes for the period in between the two events.

Reason: To clarify the extent of the planning approval and in the interest of the protection of the countryside.

• 4. For the avoidance of doubt, the four containers, associated supports, platforms, scaffolding and spectator seating shall not be stored anywhere outside on the site when not in use, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Department.

Reason: in the interest of visual amenity, and such storage would need to form part of a separate planning application.

1. Prior to the first coming into use the permanent and accessible car parking spaces shall be marked out on site and retained thereafter.

Reason: in the interest of highway safety and parking provision.

• 22/00186/B -Installation of glass balustrading to Cottage 3 first floor and erection of single storey side extension including viewing platform with associated works refused initially but permitted on appeal. This is now in situ:

• 22/00757/B Variation of Condition 2 to PA 21/01316/B to retain spectator facilities in situ for the interim period between the Isle of Man TT races and the Isle of Man Festival of Motorcycling and to extend, from one week to two weeks respectively, the periods in which the facilities are erected and dismantled - permitted

24/00154/B - The addition of a fifth container and widened walkway (retrospective) and the variation of Conditions 2 and 4 of PA 22/00757/B, to retain elements of spectator facility on site and in situ - refused initially and confirmed at appeal. The reason for refusal was as follows:

• 1. There is no overriding national need for the facilities on a permanent basis, while their siting for a temporary periods may be acceptable to meet the racing needs, the structures are of significantly poor visual quality which does not make a positively contribution to the Island and negatively detracts from and results in a unwarranted development in the landscape on a permanent basis harming the character and appearance of this tranquil glen and rural setting in the countryside contrary to Strategic Policies 1, 2 and 5, General Policy 3, Environment Policies 1 and 2 of the IOM Strategic Plan 2016.

The inspector considering the appeal, makes the following comments:

46…To that end, even though the majority of the containers are below road level, the five containers and spectator stand come into view when passing in either direction. It is reasonable to assume that view would not be a surprise given many who pass-by will be aware of the TT course and recognise viewing platforms for what they are; much like others found dotted around the course (permanent and non-permanent).

• 47.However, whilst they may not be an unusual sight on the TT course, as confirmed in the LCA which refers to TT Race paraphernalia, they do not have any sense of permanence and appear very-much temporary in nature. Given that, it is also reasonable to assume there would be no surprise that they were not there outside of the racing season. Indeed, it is also not unreasonable to suggest, given the transient appearance, that the expectation would be for them to be removed. The fact that the development was not given permanent permission is not without merit.

• 48.I say that recognising that such seating generally requires a supporting structure to enable views of the course. In addition, some permanent structures will inevitably be above ground level and may not offer the storage capacity that the containers do. I do not have full details of similar structures in the Northern Uplands but note the photographs of the spectator stands, at Creg Ny Baa, appear to be simple open structures in a much different setting to that here. In any event, each case must be decided upon its own merits and particular set of circumstances.
• 49.There is no dispute that having spectator facilities contributes to the objectives of the VES and that contribution outweighs the temporary harm to the landscape. However, if one considered the development without the justification of being on the TT course it would simply be an unacceptable incongruous addition, unlike the built form of the mill buildings, the containers would continue to draw the eye having no relationship to the wooded valley in which they sit. Whilst views from the adjacent footpath may be less, the external utilities that serve the containers add to that harm. Therefore, were the containers sited there permanently, unacceptable harm to the countryside location would occur.
• 50.I recognise landscaping can help soften development but there is nothing before me to suggest that could be done successfully without compromising the fundamental purpose of the viewing platform. I also accept that timber walkways are used in many situations usually for safe egress. Painting the containers green may also reduce the impact. However, I must consider the effect of the development as a whole; the site is not within an area zoned for development; it is an Area of High Landscape Value where the most important consideration is protection of the landscape; and the countryside within which it sits is protected for its own sake.
• 51.For the reasons set out, the development fails to protect that landscape and is therefore contrary to Strategic Policies 1, 2 and 5, General Policy 3 and Environment Policies 1 and 2 of the Strategic Plan.

• 55.I recognise in the 2023 appeal the Inspector found that the development responded to a national need to secure the TT event into the future. Also, the VES recognised the need of both Government and the private sector to invest in building a visitor destination over time. In addition, there is no dispute that other course-side locations have been prohibited for event safety reasons and the land would lie redundant for most of the year.
• 56.However, I must temper the weight I give to the development contributing to securing the TT event. Unlike the 2023 Appeal, the development is not securing better access and response time for marshals in case of emergency. In the same way, whilst I recognise seating is needed for spectators’ enjoyment, it is not essential at this point, that is also unlike the marshals’ tower for which there was no alternative.
• 57.Undoubtedly, the periodic removal of the development will have a financial burden along with environmental and other impacts. Although, that financial burden should have formed part of the appellants’ considerations when choosing to apply for the permission on a temporary basis. Moreover, there is nothing to corroborate the view that the expense of annually erecting and dismantling the development would become prohibitively expensive. Any environmental harm, given the temporary nature of the structures, should be minimal, albeit that weighs marginally in favour of the proposal.

• 60.Having considered all matters raised, I conclude the development would result in permanent harm to the character and appearance of the countryside location in conflict with the aforementioned policies of the IMSP. In addition, given the absence of any Flood Risk Assessment, the development inevitably is at odds with the policies that seek to address flooding matters.
• 61.The reasons put forward to justify the development either on their own, or in combination, are insufficient to outweigh the harm I have found, or to set aside the presumption against development in the AHLV.

• 4.0 THE PROPOSAL
• 4.1 Now proposed is a development which aims to address the previous reasons for refusal but to create a better quality and more attractive facility which can be capable of accommodating spectator accommodation for the TT and MGP periods and retaining facilities for the periods outwith this but with no harm the landscape. We aim to provide sufficient information to demonstrate that there are sufficient benefits of the scheme to justify overriding the presumption against development here and that the works themselves create no unacceptable adverse environmental impact.
• 4.2 The current proposal differs from the previously refused application as follows:

• • The containers are to be clad in timber
• • New landscaping is to be introduced along the frontage of the site in front of the decking and to the south west of the containers
• • The access route down to the artificial grass area is to be stone chipped finish with a bitmac section at the top of the slope
• • The artificial grass area is now larger than previously proposed
• • There are two jumbrellas included within the artificial grass area
• • Two small areas of stone chipping to the rear of the containers are to be retained
• • Erection of new protective timber fencing around the decking
• • Additional spectator stands are to be introduced during racing periods within the car parking area between the former shop and the spectator stand
• • The catering facilities within the containers are to be retained and capable of being operated throughout the year.

• 4.3 Currently, the spectator stand has been removed and what exists on site are:

A stone chip access from the existing public footway Five shipping containers An elevated decked area to the rear of the containers with a set of timber steps leading up to them from a levelled area which is finished in artificial grass Two smaller areas of stone chip surfacing A timber set of steps leading from the stone chip access to the artificial grass

Two jumbrellas positioned within the artificial grass area

• 4.4 During the period between the start of TT and the end of Manx Grand Prix/ Classic TT the main spectator stand will be retained. Outwith these periods the seating stand will be removed, the spectator facilities will be stored off site and the decking area and artificial grass area will be used for additional amenity space for those visiting or staying within the site.
• 4.5 It is the applicant's intention to develop the site into a high quality visitor experience with a combination of accommodation within the converted mill when works are completed, the cottages and former shop. The overall site is dominated by hard surfacing, reminiscent of its previous life as a petrol station and car sales outlet and with little or no meaningful or attractive at grade amenity space although there is grassed space lower down via the sloping access way between the main forecourt and the spectator stand. However, in the permission for the conversion of the mill to residential and tourist accommodation, the rear of the building was to be used for garaging with a bitmac access at the rear leading to a garage. As such, it is not considered ideal for pedestrians to be walking up and down the side lane to access any amenity space at the lower level of the site.

• 4.6 The proposed decking which is to extend over the northernmost container will provide an at grade access to the decking with steps down to the lower artificial grass area and catering facilities which are proposed to be retained throughout the year. The site is visited not only in TT and MGP/CTT periods but at other times of the year with not only TT fans wishing to come to The Black Dub but also other events: for example, there is a hill climb in April which starts from the site. The applicant would wish to have facilities for these events outwith the Mountain Circuit race periods.
• 4.7 The decking could accommodate tables and chairs serving the catering facilities underneath with themed cuisine offered to suit any even that occurs. The facilities can also be enjoyed by those staying in the holiday accommodation on site. The retention of the decking and catering facilities will encourage the use of the site at all times of the year, thus supporting the strategy objectives of extending the tourist season and increasing visitor spend. Without the decking and catering facilities, the site can only realise income from the tourist accommodation - accommodation which has limited amenities.
• 4.8 Whilst the cottages have permission only for permanent residential accommodation, it is the intention to exercise flexibility to use these as tourist accommodation, using the Change of Use Permitted Development Order Class 3(2). The mill, once converted has permission for both types of occupation.
• 4.9 The proposal therefore plays a key part in the development of this facility and the maximisation of the use and value of the site. Without the decking and catering facilities, the site becomes simply a facility with tourist accommodation with limited access to a small amount of amenity space.
• 4.10 The addition of the temporary spectator stand and area of permanent decking and containers which also provide catering facilities, transforms this into an event space which will increase the viability of the development and add to the attractiveness of the site for visitors. Even when the racing is not on and outwith the practice and race periods, people still come to the Island to see the world famous

• race circuit and the proposal will provide an opportunity for people to come to The Black Dub.
• 4.11 The applicant company, Uggly & Co is a family owned company which creates motorsport related clothing and related accessories. The merchandise is themed both for the company name and The Black Dub. It prides itself on the quality of its merchandise. The brand has become a prominent element in the promotion of the TT and MGP/CTT around the world, with a presence at the major motorsport events, thus also promoting the Island from a tourist perspective. The company attends most of the European World Super Bike, International Road Racing Championships and MotoGP events as well as international bike shows such as the Milan Bike Show where the merchandise, including "the home of the black dub" items are promoted, leading people to ask about the Black Dub and the TT. There are numerous instances of these instances leading to bookings for customers at these events to come to the Isle of Man.
• 4.12 The company is sponsoring a motorbike at this year's TT and at the North West 200 which occurs just before the TT each year. The company also sponsors a motorbike at Daytona in the USA (to be ridden by Danny Webb) and WSB rider and former WSB and Moto GP race winner, Danilo Petrucci wears items of clothing provided by the company thus promoting the brand, and the Island around the world.
• 4.13 We consider the applicant to be a significant player in the promotion of tourism on the Island and the Black Dub facilities are the focus of this on the Island. The applicant wishes the Black Dub to offer a range of quality tourist accommodation and facilities and become a destination which those whom he meets around the world, will be pleased to visit when they make the effort to travel to the Island.

5.0 Planning Assessment

• 5.1 The site is not designated for development and there is a presumption against development and particularly anything which has a harmful impact on the character and appearance of the countryside and landscape.
• 5.2 It is highly relevant that a previous and relatively recent application for the retention of containers and spectator facilities was refused and this current application has taken those concerns as the starting point for the redesign of the proposed facilities on this site. The applicant strongly believes that in order for the overall site to be a viable proposition and high quality tourist facility that the containers should be able to be retained on site throughout the year. It is also relevant that permanent spectator facilities were also approved within the site, on the northern side of the cottages, the inspector who recommended that the original refusal be overturned, concluding, "Therefore, the benefits of the proposed scheme to enhance the running, facilities and experience of the TT race in the location of Black Dub and, as part of the wider international race event, would strongly outweigh the limited harm to the character and appearance of the surroundings." The stand was also to provide facilities for marshals as well as spectators of the racing. This facility is a permanent feature.
• 5.3 She also concludes "The appeal proposal would support the approved Island Visitor Economy Strategy and, whilst some conflict to development plan policy has been identified, the recognition of the scheme as a response to an overriding national need and investment in the future of the TT as an Island event, and the lack of other significant harms, justifies the permitting of this proposal."
• 5.4 From this, we take that the TT is an important element of the Island's economy and that development which supports it, and the Visitor and Economic Strategies can be considered to be of sufficient importance to override any policy presumption against development. There are of course other considerations such as the visual and environmental impact of the proposed works themselves.

• 5.5 In terms of the grandstand and containers, the inspector who considered the previous application for these facilities, was concerned on a number of grounds. There was no Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) submitted with the previous application. This current application includes a FRA which demonstrates that the site of the proposed development is not within the flood risk zone and also it is relevant that the level of the artificial grass is some 2m above the level of the riverbed and the level of the containers is around 3.5m higher, noting also that the river is some ten metres from the river at the closest point.
• 5.6 The inspector was concerned with the visual impact of the grandstand and containers. He refers to them as having “a transient appearance” and that they look like things that would only be there temporarily. It is therefore now proposed to clad the containers in timber to reduce their impact and improve their appearance, now appearing like many rural buildings and with a more natural external finish than the metal which forms their main construction. At that time, the site featured scaffolding and a more temporary arrangement for the spectator stand, none of which exist or are proposed now.
• 5.7 The top of the platform formed by the roof of the containers is to be covered in a new timber deck which will have timber post and rail fencing around the outer extents to provide security for anyone using it. The decking and railings can be stained green to reduce their impact on the landscape although the timber will naturally weather and become more silver in colour which we consider would be acceptable here in this wooded setting. There are already low timber railings alongside the footway which we understand were erected by Department for Infrastructure.
• 5.8 The front of the decked area will abut the existing roadside hedge and the existing low roadside hedge is not only to be retained but new low level planting (heathers and possibly broom) will be introduced which will help screen the decking from view from the highway but not grow so high as to obscure the view of those sitting on the stand: the lowest tier seats are approximately 0.6m higher than the top of the existing roadside hedge. The planting will also not interfere with the visibility

• splays for the vehicular entrances into the site bur will provide a screening of the decking and containers from some vantage points and a softening of the impact from others.
• 5.9 We fully accept that the decking will be visible, along with the jumbrellas (which are demountable but extremely heavy with hinges which would not support frequent putting up and taking down). However, what will be seen, we would say would not look out of place and it would appear as a not unattractive amenity area alongside an established building group and its function would be clear to anyone who saw it. Without the containers and decking, what is visible on the approach from the south west is the harsh edge of the parking area which forms an abrupt end to the group of buildings:
• 5.10 As explained previously, this access route has already been established, leading to the approved garaging underneath the mill building. To have users of the site trying to get to the lower amenity area where the artificial grass is currently, would involve crossing this lane and potential conflict with any vehicles driving to or from the garaging. The proposed decking will provide a safer route to this area, with

• better visibility of any approaching vehicles using the lane. It will also allow those with accessibility issues to gain access to the decking, whether the spectator stand is in place or not.
• 5.11 In terms of flood risk, a FRA has been provided which demonstrates that the proposed facilities are not at unacceptable risk of flooding.

Conclusion

• 5.12 The development of the Black Dub as a visitor facility which offers more than just tourist accommodation is important not only to the applicant but also to the TT and MGP/CTT. It also has potential to contribute much more significantly to the visitor economy, thus supporting both Our Island Our Future Strategies.
• 5.13 The applicant promotes the TT, the MGP/CTT and the Island all over the world and when those to whom he recommends a visit, come to the Isle of Man, he wishes to offer them a fuller visitor experience where there are catering facilities, pleasant open space where visitors may sit and where those who stay in the accommodation on site can have more than just a large car parking area to enjoy. The proposals would also improve the facilities and enjoyment of the site for those with accessibility issues.
• 5.14 We believe that the proposed facilities will enhance the enjoyment of the site and at the same time have no unacceptable impact on the character of the site and surrounding area. As is noted in the Landscape Character Assessment, "the two Aroads and an abandoned railway are conspicuous man-made linear features" and this site already has a man made impact through the existence of the mill, cottages, large hardstanding and harsh masonry wall. The proposed facilities will create useful amenity space and accommodate catering facilities which will allow the Black Dub to become more attractive to more people more of the time, supporting the Visitor Strategy.
• 5.15 If the containers and decking are required to be removed, this will of course cost a significant amount of money which would undermine the viability of the site as

a whole with the absence of the spectator stand, decking and artificial grass area and catering facilities undermining this further. This would involve a significant financial cost to the applicant each year including the storage of the containers elsewhere. Below is an estimate of the cost of removing the containers:

• 2 days' crane hire plus 2 staff £2.5k Road closure for 2 days £2k Traffic management £3k HGV hire for 2 days £4k Container storage fee £12k Offloading of containers at storage site £1k Electrics £500 Groundworks and drainage £750 Labour £2k

Total estimated costs £27.75k

• 5.16 Aside from the financial cost, their removal would involve cranes and potentially road closures and disruption to access to and from the site. This is not an attractive proposition for a site which is offering tourist accommodation throughout the year as those staying at the site when the containers are proposed to be moved would not relish being trapped in or out of the site whilst the forecourt is occupied by lifting equipment and low loaders.
• 5.17 The retention of the containers will greatly benefit the operation of the site as a whole and would enable a level and accessible amenity area for users of the site. The ability to operate this and the catering facilities all year round, together with the jumbrellas will enhance the attractiveness of the tourist accommodation on site for longer periods of the year, thus supporting the Visitor Strategy.
• 5.18 We believe that the submission now demonstrates that there are sufficient benefits of the scheme to justify setting aside General Policy 3, Strategic Policies 1,

• 2 and 10, Spatial Policy 5 and Transport Policy 1 and to allow the principle of this development here. Furthermore, it is our view that the amendments incorporated into the scheme following the previous refusal - the incorporation of landscaping, cladding and decking will result in the proposed structures becoming an acceptable part of the landscape. If it is felt that there is any adverse impact, we would submit that the value to the visitor attraction of the site and its contribution to the visitor strategy are reasons to swing the planning balance in favour of the development thus not being in conflict with Environment Policies 1 and 2 or Strategic Policies 4 and 5.
• 5.19 The FRA provided demonstrates that the proposed development is not at unacceptable risk of flooding and as such the development is considered to accord with Environment Policies 10 and 13.
• 5.20 We are not aware of any issues from the development in respect of impact on ecology, highway safety or residential amenity and as such the proposal is considered to accord with the provisions of General Policy 2, Environment Policies 4 and 7 and Transport Policy 4.
• 5.21 We very much hope that this application to enhance the facilities at and attractiveness of the Black Dub as a visitor attraction is considered positively so that the applicant's proportion of the site, the TT and MGP/CTT and the Island more generally is supported.

Sarah Corlett 04.03.26

APPENDIX ONE

Landscape Character Assessment 2008

D8 – PEEL Key Characteristics

• • Dramatic backdrop of the rising Northern Uplands to the north-east and Peel Hill to the west.
• • Predominantly open rural character.
• • Undulating land that slopes gently upwards to the east. Various small but notable rounded hills in the east of the area.
• • Large, open pastoral and arable fields (with few trees) enclosed by Manx hedges.
• • Some heath vegetation on rounded hilltops.
• • Scattered farm houses surrounded by tree blocks, linked by small lanes and tracks.
• • Built-up edge of Peel abruptly abuts surrounding field pattern in places and is fragmented elsewhere by fingers of built development.
• • Two A-roads and an abandoned railway are conspicuous man-made linear features.
• • Open quarry at Poortown.
• • Presence of Manx Milestones.

Overall Character Description Gently sloping land that gets increasingly more undulating near the built-up area of Peel. Notable rounded mounds at Poortown and Cronk Lheannag. This undulating area is covered by large angular pastoral and arable fields. Few hedgerow trees in the Manx hedgerows create a relatively open character. Rougher heath vegetation grows on the rounded hills such as on the mound above the Poortown quarry, where granite and dolerite are extracted from an open face quarry. This, along with two other quarries in the area, are visible from various locations within the area. The area is relatively un-wooded with the notable exception of woodland blocks on some of the rounded hills and around the various small scattered farmsteads. These are accessible via numerous small, sometimes singlelane roads that are enclosed in sections by high Manx hedges with gorse and thorn hedges.

The dismantled railway forms a strong linear element north-south throughout the area with the A1 and A20 Poortown roads that run parallel to one another, forming two noisy and enclosed linear road corridors within the Peel area. The urban edge of Peel is not always clearly defined and had bled somewhat into the surrounding large arable and pastoral fields patterns, enclosing some fields near Peel Clothworkers School and along the A1 and A20 around Ballawattleworth where new development has occurred. Within this area are a number of tumuli, including the ‘Giant’s Cairn’ on top of the mound above Poortown quarry, from where panoramic views over the whole area are gained. The busy road corridors, built development of Peel and the quarries all contribute to a relatively settled and disturbed character, but with an increasing sense of tranquillity in the northern portion of the area adjacent to the less developed Cronk-y-Voddy.

Key Views

• • Open and panoramic views in the higher eastern portion of the area, with distant views over Peel Harbour, the built-up edge of Peel and the Power Station’s tower, up to the tower on Corrin’s Hill and out to sea.
• • On the smaller roads, away from the enclosed road corridors of the A1 and A20, there are glimpsed views through the hedgerows up the Greeba Valley and up to the surrounding upland areas.

Historic Features

• • Remains of Giant’s Fingers Stone Circle.
• • Dismantled railway and associated cuttings and bridges.

Ecological Features

• • Farmland grassland habitats.
• • Mature network of Manx hedgerows with gorse and occasional deciduous trees along field boundaries.
• • Small aquatic and riparian waterside habitats in numerous small drainage ditches and standing bodies of water.
• • Blocks and fragmented deciduous woodland.

• Evaluation of Inherent Landscape Sensitivities
• • Network of narrow rural roads and lanes with distinctive high grassed Manx hedgerows and gorse hedges.
• • Fragmented woodland.
• • Heath vegetation on open rounded hilltops.
• • Scattered traditional farmsteads fringed by trees.
• • Manx Milestones by roadside.
• • Sites of archaeological importance.
• • Moderate sense of tranquillity.

Landscape Strategy

The overall strategy should be to conserve and enhance the character, quality and distinctiveness of the area with its open fields, its roads enclosed by Manx hedges and its scattered traditional farmsteads fringed by woodland.

APPENDIX 2

Strategic Plan policies

• Strategic Policy 1: Development should make the best use of resources by:

• (a) optimising the use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and under-used land and buildings, and reusing scarce indigenous building materials;
• (b) ensuring efficient use of sites, taking into account the needs for access, landscaping, open space(1) and amenity standards; and
• (c) being located so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services.

• Strategic Policy 2: New development will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions(2) of these towns and villages. Development will be permitted in the countryside only in the exceptional circumstances identified in paragraph 6.3.

• Strategic Policy 4: Proposals for development must:

a) Protect or enhance the fabric and setting of Ancient Monuments, Registered Buildings, Conservation Areas, buildings and structures within National Heritage Areas and sites of archaeological interest;

• (b) protect or enhance the landscape quality and nature conservation value of urban as well as rural areas but especially in respect to development adjacent to Areas of Special Scientific Interest and other designations; and
• (c) not cause or lead to unacceptable environmental pollution or disturbance.

• Strategic Policy 5: New development, including individual buildings, should be designed so as to make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island. In appropriate cases the Department will require planning applications to be supported by a Design Statement which will be required to take account of the Strategic Aim and Policies.

Strategic Policy 10: New development should be located and designed such as to promote a more integrated transport network with the aim to: (a) minimise journeys, especially by private car; (b) make best use of public transport; (c) not adversely affect highway safety for all users, and (d) encourage pedestrian movement.

Spatial Policy 5: New development will be located within the defined settlements. Development will only be permitted in the countryside in accordance with General Policy 3.

• General Policy 2: Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:

• (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief;
• (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them;
• (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape;
• (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses;
• (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea;

• (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks;
• (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality;
• (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space;
• (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways;
• (j) can be provided with all necessary services;
• (k) does not prejudice the use or development of adjoining land in accordance with the appropriate Area Plan;
• (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding;
• (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and
• (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption.

• General Policy 3: Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of:

• (a) essential housing for agricultural workers who have to live close to their place of work; (Housing Policies 7, 8, 9 and 10);
• (b) conversion of redundant rural buildings which are of architectural, historic, or social value and interest; (Housing Policy 11);

• (c) previously developed land which contains 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;
• (d) the replacement of existing rural dwellings; (Housing Policies 12, 13 and 14);
• (e) location-dependent development in connection with the working of minerals or the provision of necessary services;
• (f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry;
• (g) development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative; and
• (h) buildings or works required for interpretation of the countryside, its wildlife or heritage.

Previously-developed land is that which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated fixed surface infrastructure.’ The definition includes defence buildings, but excludes:

• • Land that is or has been occupied by agricultural or forestry buildings.
• • Land that has been developed for minerals extraction or waste disposal by landfill purposes where provision for restoration has been made through development control procedures.
• • Land in built-up areas such as parks, recreation grounds and allotments, which, although it may feature paths, pavilions and other buildings, has not been previously developed.

• • Land that was previously-developed but where the remains of the permanent structure or fixed surface structure have blended into the landscape in the process of time (to the extent that it can reasonably be considered as part of the natural surroundings).

There is no presumption that land that is previously-developed is necessarily suitable for housing development nor that the whole of the curtilage should be developed.

• Environment Policy 1: The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. For the purposes of this policy, the countryside comprises all land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 at A.3.6 or which is not designated for future development on an Area Plan. Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative.
• Environment Policy 2: The present system of landscape classification of Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV’s) as shown on the 1982 Development Plan and subsequent Local and Area Plans will be used as a basis for development control until such time as it is superseded by a landscape classification which will introduce different categories of landscape and policies and guidance for control therein. Within these areas the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration unless it can be shown that:

• (a) the development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape; or
• (b) the location for the development is essential.

Environment Policy 4: Development will not be permitted which would adversely affect:

• (a) species and habitats of international importance:

• (i) protected species of international importance or their habitats; or

(ii) proposed or designated Ramsar and Emerald Sites or other internationally important sites.

• (b) species and habitats of national importance:

• (i) protected species of national importance or their habitats;
• (ii) proposed or designated National Nature Reserves, or Areas of Special Scientific Interest; or
• (iii) Marine Nature Reserves; or
• (iv) National Trust Land.

• (c) species and habitats of local importance such as Wildlife Sites, local nature reserves, priority habitats or species identified in any Manx Biodiversity Action Plan which do not already benefit from statutory protection, Areas of Special Protection and Bird Sanctuaries and landscape features of importance to wild flora and fauna by reason of their continuous nature or function as a corridor between habitats.

Some areas to which this policy applies are identified as Areas of Ecological Importance or Interest on extant Local or Area Plans, but others, whose importance was not evident at the time of the adoption of the relevant Local or Area Plan, are not, particularly where that plan has been in place for many years. In these circumstances, the Department will seek site specific advice from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry if development proposals are brought forward.

Environment Policy 7: Development which would cause demonstrable harm to a watercourse, wetland, pond or dub, and which could not be overcome by mitigation measures will not be permitted. Where development is proposed which would affect a watercourse, planning applications must comply with the following criteria:

• (a) all watercourses in the vicinity of the site must be identified on plans accompanying a planning application and include an adequate risk assessment to demonstrate that works will not cause long term deterioration in water quality;
• (b) details of pollution and alleviation measures must be submitted;
• (c) all engineering works proposed must be phased in an appropriate manner in order to avoid a reduction in water quality in any adjacent watercourse; and
• (d) development will not normally be allowed within 8 metres of any watercourse in order to protect the aquatic and bankside habitats and species.

Environment Policy 10: Where development is proposed on any site where in the opinion of the Department of Local Government and the Environment there is a potential risk of flooding, a flood risk assessment and details of proposed mitigation measures must accompany any application for planning permission. The requirements for a flood risk assessment are set out in Appendix 4.

Environment Policy 13: Development which would result in an unacceptable risk from flooding, either on or off-site, will not be permitted.

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