Officer Report

Application No.: 16/00401/B Applicant: Department Of Infrastructure Ports Division Proposal: Installation of three penstocks to bridge Site Address: Apostle's Bridge Castletown Isle Of Man Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken: 18.04.2016 Site Visit: 18.04.2016 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is rectangular in shape and equates more or less exactly to the span of the Apostle's Bridge between the west and east banks of the Silverburn River in Castletown. The eastern bank is bounded by Bridge Street while commercial premises are found on the western side, and the bridge provides pedestrian access only between the two. - 1.2 The bridge itself is sat atop a number of robust pillars, inbetween each of which are rocks that have been permanently fixed. From a distance the appearance this gives a natural appearance to what appears to be the build-up of natural material between the pillars but, closer in, it is evident from the uniform spread / location, size and material of the rocks that they are not in place naturally. These rocks, along with the pillars, provide the Silverburn with a weir. - 1.3 The site also falls within Castletown's Conservation Area.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the installation of three penstocks of the variety formed of gates rather than pipes; these would be located between the second and third, the sixth and seventh, and also the ninth and tenth of the eleven pillars supporting the bridge. They would have handles extending upwards that would be operated from three new platforms created above each; the gates are shown cut into the weir and are described in the application as being needed to "allow a safe means of draining the area of water" to the northeast of the bridge.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 There was a controversial application - ultimately withdrawn - submitted in 2014 seeking approval for "Reclamation of river bank along Qualtrough's Yard side of Siverburn River, creation of two mid-channel islands to be used as habitat for wildlife, construction of viewing platform on the Victoria Road side leading to a riverside walkway". There were a number of concerns raised with the proposal in terms of its impact on riverine wildlife and also flooding in the area and, before the application was presented to an Inspector for their consideration; the MUA noted significant flooding issues arising from the proposal and this was the reason the application was withdrawn, though the other concerns regarding wildlife also appear not to have been addressed.

4.0 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - 4.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South adopted in 2013 as land not designated for a particular purpose and within the Castletown Conservation Area (excluding the river banks and footway alongside Victoria Road). The site also falls within a fluvial and tidal flooding area which extends over the riverbanks into the adjacent Qualtrough's Yard and Victoria Road areas.

4.2 Various Strategic Plan policies apply to a greater or lesser extent: Environment Policy 4 states "Development will not be permitted which would adversely affect:

• a) species and habitats of international importance:

• i) protected species or international importance or their habitats; or
• ii) proposed or designated Ramsar or Emerald Sites or other internationally important sites.

• b) species and habitats or 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 or 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 would 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 states: "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 11: Coastal development will only be permitted where it would not:

• i) increase or transfer the risk of flooding or coastal erosion through its impact on natural coastal processes;
• ii) prejudice the capacity of the coast to form a natural sea defence; and
• iii) increase the need for additional coast protection works except where necessary to protect existing investment or development".

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

Environment Policy 35 states: "Within Conservation Areas, the Department will permit only development which would preserve or enhance the character of appearance of the area, and will ensure that the special features contributing to the character and quality are protected against inappropriate development".

It is to be noted that Castletown's Conservation Area is not accompanied by a Character Appraisal. General Policy 3 makes provision for development on land which is not zoned for such for "buildings or works required for interpretation of the countryside, its wildlife or heritage".

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 Highway Services of the Department of Infrastructure indicated on 18.04.2016 that the proposal has no highway implications.

• 5.2.1 The Fisheries Directorate within the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture offered no objection to the proposal, providing there was to be no adverse effect on the adjacent watercourse. They identify some concern about the potential impact on nearby fish populations during construction through concrete or washings entering the river, and they identify that works within the watercourse should be conducted according to a written method statement agreed in advance with that Directorate. These comments were received on 15th April 2016.
• 5.2.2 The comments could be construed as a request for the imposition of a Planning condition and while one would not necessarily be inappropriate, it is considered that the method statement should properly be submitted to the Fisheries Directorate for their consideration rather than to the Planning team in any case. As such, an advisory note in this instance would be sufficient but also necessary.
• 5.3 Castletown Commissioners offered no objection in comments received 26th April 2016.

6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 There have been flooding issues in the past in this area, and the fact that a recent application was judged likely to result in additional flooding is also noted in the context of the statement of the applicant that the proposal would address flooding issues. It must therefore be concluded that the proposal would have a beneficial impact in this sense, and is thus judged to comply with the relevant Environment policies. - 6.2 The works are fairly minimal in scale and would not harmfully affect the appearance of the bridge, which though a key and strong feature of the area is not particularly attractive. The use of similar materials for the new platforms would help these tie in with the existing bridge, though the loss of some of the stone work is unfortunate. However, this is evidently unnatural in appearance and form and so an objection to this would be difficult to sustain. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to comply with the key wording of Environment Policy 35.

7.0 RECOMMENDATION - 7.1 In view of the beneficial impact in flooding terms and somewhat neutral impact in character / appearance terms, the application is recommended for approval. The advisory note as discussed in paragraph 5.2.2 above should be attached to any approval notice issued.

8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• o The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent;

• o The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested;
• o The Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure, and
• o The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

8.2 In addition to those above, article 6(3) of the Order requires the Department to decide which persons (if any) who have made representations with respect to the application, should be treated as having sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application.

In this instance, it is considered that the Fisheries Directorate of DEFA cannot be granted Interested Person Status as the Directorate falls within the same Department as the Planning & Building Control Directorate.

Recommendation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 11.05.2016 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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

N 1. It is strongly advised that prior to undertaking any work the applicant contact the Inland Fisheries Directorate to discuss a method statement regarding the works hereby approved.

The development hereby approved relates to Drawings 100, 101 and 102, all date-stamped as having been received 5th April 2016.

I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Interim Director of Planning and Building Control in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.

Decision Made : Permitted Date : 11.05.2016 Determining officer

Signed : J CHANCE Jennifer Chance Interim Director of Planning and Building Control

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.