Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
24/91135/B Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 24/91135/B Applicant : Quay Properties PLC Proposal : Installation of rockfall safety netting on the rock face above yards 3-5 South Quay Industrial Estate. Site Address : South Quay Industrial Estate Douglas Isle Of Man
Planning Officer: Hamish Laird Photo Taken : Site Visit : 31.10.2024 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 12.12.2024 __
Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.
Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
N 1. All birds, their active nests, eggs and young are protected and it is an offence to intentionally or recklessly: kill, injure or take any wild bird; take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird whilst it is in use or being built; take or destroy the egg of any wild bird; disturb any wild bird listed on Schedule 1 while it is nest building, or at a nest containing eggs or young, or disturb the dependent young of such a bird. The maximum penalty that can be imposed - in respect of a single bird, nest or egg - is a fine up to £10,000.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. It is considered that the planning application is in accordance with General Policies 2 and 3g); ENV1, ENV5, and ENV28 in the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016; and, the Area Plan for the East (2020), and is therefore recommended that the planning application be approved.
Plans/Drawings/Information; The development, hereby approved, shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans and documents:
Undated covering letter from Quay Properties plc outlining the background to the proposed works; Email dated 5th June, 2024, outlining rockface anchor details; Drawing No. 001 - Site Location Plan showing the site edged red @ scale 1:2,500; Drawing No. 002 - Proposed Site Plan showing the site edged red @ scale 1:500;
==== PAGE 2 ====
24/91135/B Page 2 of 5
Old Gasworks, South Quay, Douglas, IoM Rock Face Inspection Report by GroundSolve Ltd Consulting Geotechnical Engineers - issue date 24/3/23; Details of proposed netting - Technical Data Sheet Rev: 02b, Apr 2018;
All date-stamped received on 4th October, 2024.
__
Right to Appeal
It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal:
Department of Infrastructure Highways - No objection. Douglas Borough Council - No objection __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site forms the rock face of the cliff adjoining yards 3-5 on Douglas' South Quay Industrial Estate, which also adjoin Unit 23. The units lie at the rear of the Estate adjacent to the cliff face and faces north looking out over the Units on the Estate towards the inner harbour.
1.2 The site is accessed via the existing industrial estate road to the south of the site close to the Head Road/South Quay roundabout. This estate road serves a number of industrial business and accesses directly onto South Quay.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application seeks the "Installation of rockfall safety netting on the rock face above yards 3-5 South Quay Industrial Estate." This comprises the direct attachment of the netting to the rockface. The proposed netting would comprise double twisted GalMac® (Zn-Al 5% alloy) and PoliMac® coated steel woven wire mesh produced in accordance with 305/2011 regulation (ex. 89/106/CEE) and in compliance with standard EN10223- 3:2013, having CE marking in compliance with ETA16/0758. It would be coated in a class A Zinc/Aluminium alloy, which would be rust resistant. The wire mesh would be on rolls and would be laced together by stainless steel C-rings around the mesh wires to form the connection.
2.2 In terms of fixing the wires/mesh to the rock face, the applicant in an email dated 5th June, 2024, advised that he: "has allowed for 60 No. 25mm anchors at 2mtrs depth which would be more than enough in my opinion. ... That was for an area around 60m long, 40m high - measured from Google Earth to cover the width of the yards and an estimated height of rockface (down to the smoother parts near the bottom)."
2.3 In a covering letter accompanying the application, the applicant advises:
"South Quay Industrial Estate proposed netting Background Quay properties PLC are the owners of south quay industrial estate, including the rock face and some of the land above. Regular surveys and remedial work have been carried out over the years, most notably in 2007 when the rock-face was de-scaled, anchored and netted where necessary Proposed works Following a survey in 2023 by Groundsolve geotechnical engineers it has been suggested that we should make an effort to mitigate the risk of minor rockfall events. Given that the yards beneath the rock face are occupied by tenants, the safest and most practical solution would be net the affected area."
==== PAGE 3 ====
24/91135/B Page 3 of 5
2.4 The application is accompanied by completed application forms, a Geotechnical Survey Report, site and location plans and details of the proposed netting and rockface anchor correspondence as indicated above.
3.00 PLANNING POLICY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES 3.1 The application site is located in the countryside and comprises land designated for no particular purpose. It lies just outside the area zoned as "Light Industrial" identified on Proposals Map 5 Douglas Town Centre Showing Mixed Use Proposal Areas of the Area Plan for the East 2020. The site does not accord with the industrial estate development designation as it lies beyond the settlement boundary for Douglas in this area. The site is not within a Conservation Area. Given the nature of the application it is appropriate to consider the following planning policies:
3.2 General Policy 2 (where relevant) 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: (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; (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."
3.3 General Policy 3 (in part): "Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of: (g) development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative;"
3.4 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."
3.5 Paragraphs 7.22, 7.23 and Environment Policy 28 "7.22 Unstable Land 7.22.1 The policy set out below aims to safeguard life and property from ground instability such as landslips and subsidence. Therefore, unless mitigating measures can be taken, development will not be permitted where it would be at risk from unstable land or increase the risk of ground instability elsewhere. 7.22.2 It may be necessary for a developer to undertake a specialist investigation and assessment to identify any remedial measures required to deal with ground instability. It may also be appropriate to carry out monitoring after the development has taken place. Ultimately it is the responsibility of the developer to ensure that land is safe and suitable for development. Whilst the Department will try to ensure that a development will not be put at unacceptable risk, the subsequent liability for safe development and secure occupancy of a site rests with the developer and / or landowner."
==== PAGE 4 ====
24/91135/B Page 4 of 5
3.6 Environment Policy 28: "Development which would be at risk from ground instability or which would increase the risk from ground instability elsewhere will not be permitted unless appropriate precautions have been taken."
4.00 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 None of direct relevance to this particular application.
5.0 CONSULTATIONS 5.1 Douglas Council (14/11/24) comments 'No objections'.
5.2 DoI Highways (12/11/24) comments 'Highway Services HDC has no interest (NHI) in: 24/91135/B".
5.3 No third party comments had been received at the time of writing this report (6/12/24).
6.00 ASSESSMENT 6.1 The main issues in this case are: o The principle of development - safety considerations; o Design and visual impact; o Any other material considerations.
The principle of development - safety considerations. 6.2 The site comprises potions of the cliff face located to the rear of and above the existing industrial units 3-5 at South Quay Industrial Estate. The applicant has raised safety concerns as outlined in the submitted Geotechnical Survey Report, and explained in the covering letter which advises that: "Regular surveys and remedial work have been carried out over the years, most notably in 2007 when the rock-face was de-scaled, anchored and netted where necessary." The Proposed works follow on from a 2023 survey by Groundsolve geotechnical engineers ... that we should make an effort to mitigate the risk of minor rockfall events. Given that the yards beneath the rock face are occupied by tenants, the safest and most practical solution would be net the affected area."
6.3 The provisions of General Policy 2 and 3 g) as outlined above are of relevance. Here, it is considered that there is an overriding National Need for the development which is purely safety related in terms of providing protection for life and property. Similar forms of development have been carried out elsewhere in the Douglas area, such as to the rear of the Trevelyan Hotel on Queens Promenade, Douglas, and at other similar locations on the Island. Paragraphs 7.22, 7.23 and Policy ENV28 relate to proposed development on unstable land. In this instance, whilst not directly relevant, the proposed development seeks to install safety netting to existing potentially unstable land and, in reverse, is of relevance to this application.
6.4 Overall, it is considered that the principle of development is acceptable and accords with the provisions of General Policies 2 and 3 g) and Policy ENV28 in the IoMSP 2016.
Design and visual impact 6.5 The design of the mesh netting is considered to be acceptable. It is what it is. It would be subdued in terms of colour against the rock face to which it would be applied, in terms of it being coated in a class A Zinc/Aluminium alloy, which would be of a dull metallic colour which would blend in with the underlying rock and which would rust resistant. The wire mesh would be on rolls and would be laced together by stainless steel C-rings around the mesh wires to form the connection. Similar mesh netting has been applied both in the locality and at other locations on the Island. The appearance of the netting would be visible but not be readily evident. Given that it would be applied directly over the rock face and of a colour that blends in. You would have to make an effort to look for it, and on this basis its visual impact is considered to be acceptable and in accordance with the provisions of General Policies 2 and 3 g) and ENV1 in the IoMSP 2016.
==== PAGE 5 ====
24/91135/B Page 5 of 5
Any other material considerations. 6.6 There would be no adverse impact in respect of wildlife or ecology. Birds and animals suing the rock face would not be adversely impacted by its presence. This accords with the provisions of General Policies 2 d), 3 g) and ENV1 and ENV5 in the IoMSP 2016.
7.0 RECOMMENDATION 7.1 For the reasons outlined above it is considered that the planning application is in accordance with General Policies 2 and 3g); ENV1, ENV5, and ENV28 in the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016; and, the Area Plan for the East (2020), and is therefore recommended that the planning application be approved.
8.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE
8.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted).
8.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to: o applicant (in all cases); o a Local Authority; Government Department; Manx Utilities; and Manx National Heritage that submit a relevant objection; and o any other person who has made an objection that meets specified criteria.
8.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10.
8.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required): o any appellant or potential appellant (which includes the applicant); o the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, the Department of Infrastructure and the local authority for the area; o any other person who has submitted written representations (this can include other Government Departments and Local Authorities); and o in the case of a petition, a single representative.
__
I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status and/or rights to appeal.
Decision Made : Permitted
Date: 17.12.2024
Determining Officer Signed : J SINGLETON
Jason Singleton
Principal Planner
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/customers and archive record.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal