Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
19/00010/B Page 1 of 13
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 19/00010/B Applicant : SES Satellite Leasing Ltd Proposal : Extension of existing site including the erection of additional telecommunications equipment, erection of small office and welfare facility for maintenance staff, all with associated ground works, landscaping, fencing and video surveillance poles. Site Address : Carnane Radio Site Area Of Land Adjacent To Upper Howe Farm Old Castletown Road Douglas Isle Of Man
Principal Planner: Mr Chris Balmer Photo Taken : 17.01.2019 Site Visit : 17.01.2019 Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 11.03.2019 __
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.
C 2. For the avoidance of doubt, the two metre-high fencing shown on approved Plan ES2-015, date-stamped as having been received 4th January 2019, shall be dark green in colour and retained thereafter.
Reason: In the interest of reducing the visual impact of the fencing in view of its prominent location on this hillside.
C 3. Any hardcore or gravel material used to make up or maintain the access track within the application site shall be formed of local acid rock unless otherwise agreed in advance with the Department.
Reason: In the interest of protecting the heathland habitat in the area, which requires an acidic basis.
C 4. If any of the antennae are no longer required or used for the purpose stated in the application, they must be removed from site and the ground restored to its previous condition within six months of the cessation of use.
==== PAGE 2 ====
19/00010/B Page 2 of 13
Reason: to protect the visual amenities countryside from unwarranted development.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawing reference numbers ES2-010, ES2- 011, ES2-012, ES2-013, ES2-014, ES2-015, ES2-016, ES2-017, ES2-018, ES2-019 & ES2-020, Desktop Ecological Impact Statement and Mitigation Advice prepared by Man Wildlife Trust Dated March 2016 all date stamped as received on 4th, 8th and 30th January 2019. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the following persons 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):
o Manx Wildlife Trust o The Managing Director of BlueWave Communications Ltd, Tower House, Loch Promenade, Douglas o The CEO of Isle of Media Ltd, Mountain View Innovation Centre, Jurby Road, Ramsey o The CEO of the Manx ICT Association, Global House, Isle of Man Business Park, Braddan o The owner/occupier of Glebe Cottage, Maughold
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 and not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy. __
Officer’s Report
THE PLANNING APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND BUILDING CONTROL DIRECTORATE
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is an almost two triangular-shaped parcels of land attached to each other situated immediately south of the shorter of the two towers at Carnane. More recently the eastern most triangular shaped parcel of land benefited from planning approved (16/00266/B & 17/00082/B) for four satellite dishes and associated buildings. Currently two out of the four dishes (outer most dishes) have been installed. The second western most triangular parcel of land is made up of scrub land, entirely open and slopes down in a western direction noticeably but fairly consistently. Elsewhere are the isolated towers operated by Arqiva and the Department for Home Affairs - measuring 77m and 40m in height respectively - for various transmitting purposes, along with small associated buildings housing equipment.
1.2 The site is visible from a number of public locations but from each of these at a fairly significant distance. The closest views of the site are achievable from the nearby Upper Howe Farm, to the southeast, but this as well as the entirety of the access track to the site (from Castletown Road) are within private ownership. Other distant public views can be found along the Old Castletown Road in the area of Quine's Hill and in and around the area of Kewaigue Hill/Cooil Road roundabout (A5/A6).
1.3 Aside from the towers, the building associated with the DHA tower and the two satellite dishes are the most visible of the associated structures in the area. The associated buildings structures tend to be read against the low level vegetation that is found on the edges of the site.
==== PAGE 3 ====
19/00010/B Page 3 of 13
The two outermost satellite dishes (other two dished not installed would be located in between the existing dishes on the site) are also partially apparent, seen mostly by their outlines on the sky's horizon, appearing as circular objects, albeit considerable smaller than the two towers.
1.4 The weather can also have a considerable difference in what can and can't be seen from the views outlined. This is essentially the case with the dishes, as an overcast day they become much more difficult to see, compared to a bright blue sky, where their whiteness (depending of position of the sun in sky) and outline is more visible.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the extension of existing site including the erection of additional telecommunications equipment, erection of small office and welfare facility for maintenance staff, all with associated ground works, landscaping, fencing and video surveillance poles.
2.2 As mentioned earlier the site is essentially made up of two triangular parcels of land. The eastern most plot already has approved for four dishes and associated building. The proposal would be to essentially mirror what has been approved, within the western triangular parcel of land and therefore the proposed works include the erection of four 11m diameter satellite dishes on concrete bases with associated building within this western plot. The proposal does also include the two smaller 3.8m diameter satellite dishes located between the existing two satellite dishes on the eastern plot.
2.3 The four dishes are the largest element of the proposal: each would measure just less than 11m above ground level and 12m in their most elevated positions, though because they can (and will need to) be tilted the height is understood to be likely between 10m and 11.9m above ground level. They are shown coloured white. Each would be erected on a roughly 54sqm concrete pads. The four dishes proposed within the western plot would be evenly spaced across a roughly 75m area of land, with the buildings in-between.
2.4 The two smaller satellite dishes which have a 3.8m diameter have a top height in the most elevated (vertical) dish position of 5m above ground level, but when tilted have a height of between 4.5m and 5m above ground level. They are shown coloured white. Each would be erected on a roughly 7sqm concrete pads.
2.5 The satellite dishes are understood to have a lifespan of roughly 15 years.
2.6 An access track is shown on the approach to the land, which would connect to the existing track that services the existing buildings and extends along the northern boundary of the western plot. Also proposed is a 2m-high palisade fence to surround the site; this is described as being "e.g. dark green" in the accompanying Statement. In addition to this there would be some landscaping along the northern and western boundaries of the site. Finally, two CCTV camera/security lighting is shown atop a 4m-high pole at the western edge of the site.
2.7 The proposal includes three new buildings, the largest being proposed is very similar building which was approved previously, having an overall width of 23.3m, a depth of 11.6m and a maximum height of between 4.2m and 6.5m. This would house a generator room, switch rooms, workshop/storage and an office. Two smaller additional buildings (equipment buildings) are also proposed and these would each serve two of the proposed satellite dishes. These buildings would have a width of 8.1m, a depth of 4.6m and a height of 3.9m.
2.8 The equipment buildings would be finished with brick to match the existing DHA building nearby and recently approved buildings associated with the existing satellite dishes.
2.9 Overall, as mention previously the overall proposals (satellite dishes/associated buildings etc) are almost a mirror image of what was approved previously, albeit moved to the west of the existing approved site.
==== PAGE 4 ====
19/00010/B Page 4 of 13
2.9 The submitted written statement explains the need and purpose behind the proposal. They explain the company SES Satellite Leasing Limited (SES SL) is an IOM based affiliate of the Luxembourg bases SES, and the overall group is the world-leading satellite operators providing a reliable and secure satellite commutations solutions to broadcast, telecom, corporate and government customers worldwide. The Group owns and operates 55 geostationary and 16 medium Earth Orbit satellites (both of different types satellite that orbit the world) which enable its customers to reach 99% of the world's population. The company more specifically won an exclusive 5-year contrary to transmit the TT races TV highlighted programs to all international broadcast clients. In terms of further economic benefits to the Island, the applicants explain that with the first phase being successful this has resulted in four additional jobs and are seeking more employees. Further, the existing and proposed dishes will enable less spending from SES for currently using third party earth station services in other jurisdictions to the IOM. The continues investment will also create a new permanent capability to broadcast other Island events on an ad- hoc and lower cost basis compared to rending an expensive SNG van. The applicants also comment that; "SES SL plans to install a new earth station which physically can't be integrated into the current SES SL built out site at Carnane, as it would be blocked by the other already existing antennas and buildings. Hence this future antenna needs to be placed outside the current site which requires the site extensions as applied". They also comment that while there are 2 vacant positions on the existing site (i.e. they have only built two out of the previously approved four satellite dishes); these do offer any more very West looking antennas for which we have a need and an Ofcom license (SES-17 satellite).
2.10 The Statement goes on to explain that the site was chosen because as previously considered, it represents the least visually obtrusive option of those sites meeting the technical requirements of line-of-sight to the horizon. This requires an obstacle-free line-of-sight to the whole horizon, which in turn requires an elevated position as well as a south-facing one on the Island - the hilly centre of the Island would block south-facing antennae in the north of the Island. The application site was chosen because only it and Creg-ny-Baa on the Island benefit from unobstructed views, and the latter was discounted "because of its landmark character and the widely visual presence", in addition to access difficulties during the motorsport events and the lack of a redundant power supply on the site were issues.
2.11 Following on from this, the applicant has prepared a visual impact analysis of the proposal's implementation from various sites. They conclude that Carnane was chosen as it represents the least visually obtrusive option available. The site is surrounded by private farmland which prevents close up views by the general public and due to Carnane hill top and crest it shields the lower based satellite dish of less than 12m height they can rarely be seen from Douglas Centre, Marina Drive, North and Onchan. While some spots in Douglas West may be seen, they are from a distance. Further they comment that visibility is only possible form the East 1km away and therefore the impact would be negligible.
2.12 Previously when the initial planning application (16/00266/B) was being considered, discussions where had with the applicant and the Department regarding the colour of the dishes. The applicant noted that the antennae will be coloured white. They had dismissed grey because this could make them look old and tired at the outset and also give them the touch of a military facility. They also noted that the sky is always brighter than any object, and therefore the dishes should also be as bright as possible so that when they are read against it the contrast between the two levels of brightness is limited. They also note that there is a significant extra cost to colour the antennae, and that the international standard colour is plain white. Hence the dishes are once again proposed to be white.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The western section of the site itself has not been the subject of applications of material relevance to the current application, though clearly the eastern section of the site has been subject to the following planning applications:
==== PAGE 5 ====
19/00010/B Page 5 of 13
3.2 Erection of four satellite ground antennas with related buildings and security fencing - 16/00266/B - APPROVED
3.3 Erection of four satellite ground antennas with related buildings and security fencing (comprising amendments to PA 16/00266/B) - 17/00082/B - APPROVED
3.4 The additional two adjacent sites have both been the subject of a number of applications over several decades for various telecommunications and other related equipment, with the most recent coming in 2008. None of these, though, is considered to be directly material to the assessment of the current proposal for satellite antennae.
4.0 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 4.1 The site is located within an area zoned as "Transmitting Station Carnane" on the Braddan Parish District Local Plan (South) 3 map. It is on the very southwestern boundary of the zoned land, but even though the Plan is old its zoning remains quite clear and, from the site visit, was clearly related to an existing stone wall and clear landscape features. It is similarly zoned as "Radio Transmitting Station" on the 1982 Development Plan, where it is also designated as being of High Landscape Value.
4.2 The site is also within a designated Wildlife Site. This is not a statutory designation, but is a site assessed for its value and given protection by the Manx Wildlife Trust, who were responsible for the designation in the first place on the basis of a clear understanding of the value of the site. This is discussed further in the Assessment section of this report.
4.3 In view of this, it is considered that the following polices from the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 are relevant in the determination of this application:
4.4 General Policy 2 states: "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."
4.5 Environment Policy 4 states: "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.
==== PAGE 6 ====
19/00010/B Page 6 of 13
(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."
4.6 Environment Policy 5 states: "In exceptional circumstances where development is allowed which could adversely affect a site recognised under Environmental Policy 4, conditions will be imposed and/or Planning Agreements sought to: (a) minimise disturbance; (b) conserve and manage its ecological interest as far as possible; and (c) where damage is unavoidable, provide new or replacement habitats so that the loss to the total ecological resource is mitigated."
4.7 The wording of Environment Policy 2 and Infrastructure Policy 3 are helpful, but it is to be remembered that the site is zoned for the development proposed.
4.8 Infrastructure Policy 3 states: "A balance must be struck between the need for new, evolving communications systems to satisfy residential and business demand and the impact that the necessary infrastructure will have upon the environment. Measures which may help to achieve a satisfactory balance will include a presumption against visually intrusive masts in sensitive landscapes, the encouragement of mast sharing by different operators, and the removal of redundant infrastructure. Exceptions to this policy would need to demonstrate a strategic national need, which cannot be otherwise secured by mast sharing or alternative locations."
4.9 Environment Policy 2 states: "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."
Other Material Planning Considerations 4.10 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" 4.11 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"
==== PAGE 7 ====
19/00010/B Page 7 of 13
o "We have an infrastructure which supports social and economic wellbeing"
o "We have utilities that support our Island communities and businesses"
o "We have a planning system which supports sustainable growth"
4.12 In terms of policies within this document, those set out below could be considered relevant.
o "Create an environment that allows businesses to thrive and flourish"
o "Continue to invest in and support businesses at all stages of growth and work to attract new enterprise"
o "Maintain our reputation at the forefront of innovation and emerging technologies and respond quickly to new business models"
o "Ensure we are a digital Island, ready for new technologies like 5G, so we remain competitive now and in the future"
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Braddan Parish Commissioners stated they had no objection (18.01.2019).
5.2 Highway Services do not oppose (04.03.2019).
5.3 The Ecosystems Policy Officer (DEFA) recommended liaison with the Manx Wildlife Trust on 23.01.2019. Following this, the applicant resubmitted (31.01.2019) a report which was commissioned into the wildlife value of the site in March 2016 prepared by Manx Wildlife Trust. The report's findings are discussed in the Assessment section below, but the MWT offered no objection to the proposal on its basis. Further the Ecosystems Policy Officer makes the following comments (21.022019):
"I have looked at the original desktop ecological impact statement produced by the Manx Wildlife Trust in 2016 and I agree with the applicants that this document and its recommendations are still relevant.
The recommendation to allow the heath to naturally regenerate is entirely appropriate.
Further to this I would request that machinery and materials are stored on the areas of bare ground to the east of the exiting site during the work to limit damage to heath.
The supporting documents make reference to the potential for the planting of a line of bushes or small trees along the northern edge of the development site. I don't think this is necessary due to the site location, trees are not really in keeping with the area. Trees and shrubs could also readily spread into the heath area if left unmanaged. I would recommend that heath is encouraged to establish where appropriate."
5.4 Manx Wildlife Trust comment on the application (07.02.2018):), including a citation for the Wildlife Site which covers the site involved in the above planning application. They comments that the likely ecological features include lowland heathland and scrub along with their bird and invertebrate interest.
5.5 Department of Enterprise makes the following comments supporting the application (11.03.2019). They also comment that they may provide additional comment before the Planning Committee Meeting. If these are received then the comments will be surmised orally at the Planning Committee Meeting;
==== PAGE 8 ====
19/00010/B Page 8 of 13
"We note the land is zoned for Telecommunications within the current (1998) Douglas Local Plan and that the previous application 16/00266/B for the erection of four satellite ground antennas with related buildings and security fencing was approved, is now constructed and operational. This application builds upon the success of the initial phase and creates further opportunities for the Island's industries that utilise such telecommunications.
The application delivers on a number Programme for Government Aims and Objectives. Of the five themes; Enterprise and Opportunity Island is particularly pertinent, with the following outcomes;
'We have an economy where local entrepreneurship is supported and thriving and more new businesses are choosing to call the Isle of Man home'
The following Policy Statements also seek to nurture and support:
o Create an environment that allows businesses to thrive and flourish o Continue to invest in and support businesses at all stages of growth and work to attract new enterprise o Work with our business sectors to understand, support and contribute to the quality and professionalism of our business sectors o Maintain our reputation at the forefront of innovation and emerging technologies and respond quickly to new business models o Continue to diversify our main financial services economy
'We have an infrastructure which supports social and economic wellbeing'
o Ensure we are a digital Island, ready for new technologies like 5G, so we remain competitive now and in the future
One of the actionable outcomes of the Responsible Island is to;
o Modernise the Telecommunications Act and work with industry to review associated mechanisms so that consumers are better served
The National Telecoms Strategy, approved by Tynwald in October 2018 delivers on this. Chief Minister's foreword in that strategy states; 'This strategy will support growth and productivity and give everyone the opportunity to engage in a modern connected world'.
The Strategy further identifies as its goal that the Island is a 'world leader in telecoms which supports the Isle of Man as a special place to live and work.' The Strategy's stated Vision is that; 'The Isle of Man will be recognised as being at the forefront of telecoms innovation. A fully connected Island with access to choice, value and sustainable telecommunications infrastructure delivered in a partnership approach'.
It is considered that this application goes some way to delivering on the outputs of the Programme for Government and The National Telecommunications Strategy. The Department therefore lends its support to this application."
5.6 The Managing Director of BlueWave Communications Ltd, Tower House, Loch Promenade, Douglas supports the application (05.02.2019) which can be summarised as; this further communications infrastructure on the IOM we feel will only benefit the Islands technology infrastructure and further position the Island as a technology leader.
5.7 The CEO of Isle of Media Ltd, Mountain View Innovation Centre, Jurby Road, Ramsey supports the application (22.01.2019) which can be summarised as; to attract world class business to the island we require world class infrastructure; SES is one of the worlds leading communications, satellite, distribution and technology business and there investment should be welcomed; it will bring additional employments, communications capacity and hopefully act as a
==== PAGE 9 ====
19/00010/B Page 9 of 13
"pull factor" to other businesses looking to locate in out and other complementary sectors; this long terms investment should be viewed as an endorsement by SES in its commitment to the IOM; and the application delivers positives across many of the key economic drivers not just today but for many years.
5.8 The CEO of the Manx ICT Association, Global House, Isle of Man Business Park, Braddan supports the application (10.01.2019) which can be summarised as; the teleport site supports the Island aspirations as a Digital Island; any enhancement to this capability should be encouraged as it is a development that is not currently matched in within our economic competitors and it potentially spawns a number of greater opportunities in the media and broadcast sectors; whilst we appreciate that we should not develop without due care and attention being paid, we believe that due to consideration has been made to aesthetics and environmental impact and the site is ideally suited for this purposes (as with the current use); and we strongly recommend that permission be granted and that every encroachment be given to a global enterprise such as SES choosing to expand operations in the IOM.
5.9 The owner/occupier of Glebe Cottage, Maughold comments on the application (12.01.2019) which can be summarised as; sort of a scaled down Jodrell Bank; presumably this is more domestic in its activates and we have to have it to get satisfactory T.V. and radio reception on the Island; and if this is the best site then I suppose we will have to put up with it, it can't be so noticeable or I would have known of it.
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The key issues to consider when determining the application are; the principle of development on the site; the potential visual impacted the development; potential impact upon the Wildlife Site.
THE PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE 6.2 As outlined within the policy section of this report the site is within an larger area of land designated as "Transmitting Station Carnane" and therefore given such land use designation; the site has been designation as this for over 36 years and given the previous planning approvals for similar/the same schemes, it is considered the principle of the development is acceptable. However, this is not an automatic reason to approved the application. The additional material planning considerations previously outlined need to be considered also.
6.3 Comments made from the Department of Enterprise and representations from a number of local businesses are noted. The proposal would also meet some of the Polices and Objections of the Programme for Government 2016 - 2021.
THE POTENTIAL VISUAL IMPACTED THE DEVELOPMENT 6.4 The applicant's statement shows from where the site is currently visible from public positions: these are generally from a significant distance and, as noted at the outset of the report, are such as to mean that the buildings and existing satellite dishes at Carnane are not especially visible while the towers themselves are, and have been, a feature of the landscape for decades.
6.5 The existing larger towers which have been in place for a number of decades are essentially sited on the top of Carnane. The recently approved and constructed satellite dish/buildings (eastern part of site) are sited partially behind the crest of Carnane with the ground level sloping in a southerly direction towards the sea. The western part of the application site, where the four new and associated buildings would be located are on westerly downward slope of Carnane, essentially more to the side of Carnane, compared to the existing easterly part of the site which is more on rear side of Carnane (or southern side). Accordingly, it is likely the proposed works from a northern and western views are likely be more apparent than the existing. It is noted that the proposed dishes ground levels and therefore over height is below that of the existing DHA building (building associated with the smaller of the two towers) and this is a useful guide when considering the proposals.
==== PAGE 10 ====
19/00010/B Page 10 of 13
6.6 It is considered the following areas are some of the key public views of the proposals;
Marine Drive/Port Soderick - east, south and southwest of site 6.7 Currently from a small part of Marine Drive (northern section before road is closed to traffic) the tops of the two towers are noticeable, albeit none of the associated buildings are apparent. Accordingly, it is not considered the proposal would be apparent from this location of Marine Drive. Again from the rest of Marine Drive given the topography of the land, none of the buildings/structures on top of Carnane are visible. Further to the south along Marine Drive (near Port Soderick) only the upper sections of the two towers are apparent, albeit it is not considered the proposal would be noticeable, given none of the existing dishes/associated buildings are noticeable. Overall, views of the site from these locations/areas are very unlikely; if at all, given the topography of the land between the site and these locations. Accordingly, the visual impact of the development form these views would be acceptable.
Old Castletown Road -west of site 6.8 Views when travelling along the Old Castletown are mainly screened given roadside mature trees/hedge line and/or the topography of the land between the site and road. The main achievable views which are again intermittent by vegetation and existing built development (i.e. dwellings), is from either side of Quine's Hill where the existing satellite dish are apparent. They are not features which are especially apparent and are likely to be structures that if you were not aware of them or where not searching for them, your eyes would not be drawn to them. They only become more noticeable because they break the skyline and appear as small circulate objects. The advantage of the proposal are that while the amount of built development are potentially more likely to be potentially seen from these views, they would unlikely break the skyline given they are located lower down the slope compared to the existing. Therefore, it is likely that the potential for your eye to be drawn to them would be less compared to the existing structure in the area, including the two much larger towers. Overall, it is considered there would not be significant visual harm by the development.
Kewaigue Hill/Cooil Road roundabout (A5/A6) - northwest of site 6.9 Arguably this is the location where they will appear most apparent, or at least the area where the majority of people could notice them from. It is likely the proposals will have a similar appearance as the existing satellite dishes, views main being of the rear of the dishes, albeit being lower down the hillside there is potentially less chance of them breaking the skyline, or at least the majority of the dishes would be below the skyline. There is the potential to see the upper sections breaking the skyline.
Pulrose Estate - northwest of site 6.10 Views are limited given existing vegetation, orientation of road and existing built development within the estates. However, from certain limited locations (Springfield Road/playing fields) there are potential areas where the proposal would be apparent; likely to appear has little humps on the skyline. From this location the two larger towers, with their associated buildings and partial views of dishes are noticeable. Further there are tree copses also breaking the skyline on Carnane.
Richmond Hill - west of site 6.11 From the majority of Richmond Hill the site would not be apparent (travelling from the South to Douglas), given the topography of the land along the road and vegetation between the site and road. Views would be mainly achieved when travelling down Richmond Road, viewing toward the site just before the Home of Rest for Old Horses site. Views would mainly be of the sides of the satellite dishes and appearing in a staggering formation up the hillside. It is less likely from this location that the dishes would break the skyline, and the backdrop would likely be the existing satellite dishes/buildings and the hillside of Carnane. Further, the persons view in this direction is also more likely to be drawn towards the Energy for Waste Plant (EWP) which is closer and taller and more stark in appearance compared to the proposal. Accordingly, while there is likely to be views of the proposals on this site and an increased in the amount of built
==== PAGE 11 ====
19/00010/B Page 11 of 13
development; it is considered the views achieved would be limited, distant and more likely to be distracted by the EWP.
Douglas Promenade, North Quay & Athol Street - north/northeast of site 6.12 Along North Quay and the southern section of Douglas Promenade views of the proposal would unlikely be achievable given the topography of Carnane and position of the site. Currently, only the upper sections of the larger tower are noticeable and no other structures on the top of Carnane area. Towards the north end of Douglas Promenade and towards Port Jack views are more likely to be apparent, albeit very distant views. However, the current dishes are not apparent, and therefore it is not considered the proposals would either. If they were, then it is likely to be a collection of small bumps on the skyline. This would not be a unique feature as a number of tree copses arguably already give this impression in a similar line of sight. There are of course the two larger towers which are partially apparent, as well as an older second world war structure, Douglas Head Apartments building, Manx Radio mast, The Point Apartments and Douglas Lighthouse all of which already break the same skyline, most more so then the proposal would. This is of course if they were visible, but at this time they are considered they would be.
6.13 Along Athol Street namely the southern end; opposite the red brick clock tower entrance to Douglas Station, The larger of the two towers is visible, albeit the existing dishes are not. It is not considered the proposal would be apparent from views from Athol Street.
Sea Views - south of site 6.14 One area from where visual impact has not been assessed in the Statement is from the sea: the ferry navigation route brings it fairly close to the coast and the site is certainly visible from here (when south of site). Views would be less for instant when entering Douglas Harbour or approaching the Island from the east. However, and similarly to the above, the distances involved as well as the existing structures are such that an objection on this point would be difficult to sustain.
Visual impact Conclusion 6.15 The fact the proposals are sited on the side of a hill side and their size and design; as identified with this assessment, it is likely from certain locations they will be noticeable. It is of course very difficult to pin point every single position where they could or couldn't be viewed from. However, it is considered the above locations are likely to be the main public vantage points and certainly in terms of where the majority of people would view them from, given they are in the main settlement of Douglas and from views along the main roads into Douglas.
6.16 What is clear the public views are all from distant views and if they are apparent they would either be seen partially breaking the skyline or be read against the backdrop of Carnane itself/existing dishes. It is also noted that the skyline of Carnane is already broken by built structures i.e. two larger towers and associated building, tree copses, and other buildings highlighted in paragraph 6.10.
6.17 It is also noted that for a number of decades the site is associated with masts and more recent with satellite dishes. Therefore it could be argued that such structures given this association and the number of years they have been in place essentially blend in with the landscape, even though the two towers especially, are two of the largest structures on the IOM.
6.18 Overall, the fact that the new proposals will, when viewed, largely be seen as sitting in between the existing towers/dishes and associated buildings is such that the site will not be perceived as 'spreading out' and instead will remain satisfactorily 'contained' in visual terms.
6.19 In view of the above, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in visual impact terms and will consequently not unduly affect the character of the countryside in this location; it therefore is concluded to comply with General Policy 2 as well as Environment Policy 2.
POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON THE WILDLIFE SITE
==== PAGE 12 ====
19/00010/B Page 12 of 13
6.20 In terms of the impact on the biodiversity offer on the site, a report has previously been commissioned (2016) from the Manx Wildlife Trust by the applicant to quantify this. This report was accepted with the previous approved schemes and relates to this application site as well. The report identifies the heathland habitat as being fairly limited in quality here, although the potential (in respect of invertebrates and reptiles) is quite high. At present, however, the MWT seem fairly comfortable with the proposal, with their report concluding that the "the proposed development is unlikely to seriously impact the ecological interest of the lowland heath here". They also suggest that the access track should be of acid rock rather than recycled aggregate or limestone. This is something that should be controlled by condition since the acid rock will be more appropriate to the landscape and also the heathland, which requires an acidic basis on which to establish.
6.21 The report highlights that the proposal would not affect the wildlife value of this site, while also recommending some management techniques appropriate for the site as a whole. While these would fail the lawfulness tests required of Planning conditions, the statement that the access track offers an "important area of open habitat in the heathland", and as such the application comes with something of an in-built mitigation measure by adding to this openness a little. As such, it is considered that the proposal would therefore comply with Environment Policies 4 and 5, subject also to a condition relating to the finish of the access track. The Report and its findings are also accepted by the Ecosystems Policy Officer (DEFA).
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 It is therefore considered the case that the application proposes a sustainable form of economic development on the Island in a well-considered location. The support from other business owners in respect of what the proposal can offer is not altogether surprising yet does highlight the economic development benefits that may very well arise from the scheme. This is an important material consideration and helps give the application extra weight in its favour. The proposal would also meet some of the Polices and Objections of the Programme for Government 2016 - 2021.
7.2 Turning to other matters, the submitted plans include reference to a number of small, man-made and natural landscape features - retaining walls, fencing, landscape strips - and there is limited detail on this within the application. However, the visual impact of the site has been concluded to be such, in addition to the fact that the height of these features are shown, that a condition seeking further details on this would be unnecessary in this instance. Were public access more readily achievable nearby, such a condition would almost certainly be sought. Requiring the fencing be green unless otherwise agreed in advance with the Department would be appropriate, however, in view of the fact that what is proposed is significant in
7.1 In view of the favourable findings as outlined above, it is recommended that the application be approved subject to the conditions discussed above.
8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 (Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; (b) 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; (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
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
==== PAGE 13 ====
19/00010/B Page 13 of 13
o whether there are other persons to those listed in Article 6(4) 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: 18.03.2019
Signed : C BALMER 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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal