31633

==== PAGE 1 ====

•• STATEMENT OF THE PLANNING AUTHORITY Isle of Man Government B V » M y £ t tun Va n nui Planning Statement on behalf of Department of Infrastructure Planning and Building Control in respect of a planning application for the: Erection of a collapsible security pole Corner Of Millennium Bridge And South Quay Douglas Isle Of Man Reference 14/00465/B Statement prepared on behalf of DOI Planning and Building Control by Mr Edmond Riley BA (Hons) MA MSc 4 June 2014 14/00465/B Page 1 of 7

==== PAGE 2 ====

Report 1.0 Introduction The Ports Division of the Department of Infrastructure has made a planning application seeking full planning approval for the installation of a collapsible security pole, with closed-circuit television camera atop, at the northeast corner of Millennium Bridge South Quay in Douglas. Tlie application has been submitted by an agent on behalf of the Ports Division; the agent is employed within the Technical Services Section of the Department of Infrastructure. 1.1 1.2 This written statement is intended to assist the Inspector in making a recommendation to the Council of Ministers on what decision should be taken with respect to this application. The statement includes the following information in this order; A description of the application site and the proposal; A description of the proposal; Summary of the relevant planning history; List of the planning policies that the Planning Authority believes are relevant to the consideration of the application; A summary of consultation responses received by the Planning Authority; The Planning Authority's own assessment of the proposal, having had regard to the main issues raised in respect of the proposal; Recommendation as to the decision that should be made on the application; Suggested conditions if planning approval is granted, and Photographs of the site, which are provided at Appendix A. 2.0 Description of the Application Site The Millennium swing bridge is one of the prime highway routes connecting South Quay with the town of Douglas to the north beyond. Three highways connect adjacent to the application site, which is set approximately 0.75 metres below road level and immediately next to the water of Douglas Harbour. It is a small site, currently used for the storage of metal, which is visible from the highway. 2.1 3.0 Description of the Proposal 3.1 Full planning approval is sought for the erection of a pole-mounted closed-circuit television (CCTV) camera. The pole would be collapsible and capable of being stored flat. At its highest, the pole can extend some 12 metres in height, while in its collapsed state it would be 1.5 metres in height. In this collapsed state, the pole would be telescopically reduced in length to 4.5 metres. 3.2 Technical information has been provided, showing that the pole would have secure locking mechanisms. The CCTV camera is shown on the submitted plans, albeit that no technical specifications of the camera itself have been provided. 3.3 The plans and drawings submitted with the application comprise: • A Location and Site Plan, carrying the reference 100; • A plan showing the collapsible post detail, carrying the reference 101, and • Technical details, carrying no reference but with the title AW1697 Cabinet Columns & ACC Telescopic Columns Technical Specification 4.0 Relevant Planning History 4.1 The application site has not been the subject of any planning applications that are considered to be of material relevance to the determination of the current application. 14/00465/B Page 2 of 7 4 June 2014

==== PAGE 3 ====

5.0 Relevant Planning Policy 5.1 It is perhaps first worth reflecting on the need behind the planning application. While some permitted development rights do exist in respect of telecommunications equipment and also within Douglas Outer Harbour, it is not considered that the proposal properly falls into any of the types of development specifically mentioned in the Schedules to the relevant Orders. In terms of Local Plan policy, the application site is located just within an area zoned as 'Harbour Area' in the Douglas Local Plan. No adopted Written Statement accompanies the zoning plans of the Douglas Local Plan. The adjacent zoning, which includes the Millennium Bridge itself and land to the west, is 'Inner Harbour', while the entirety of the land to the south is zoned as 'residential'. 5.2 In addition, the application should be considered against the provisions of General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, which reads (in part): "Development which is in accordance with the land- use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Rian and wiW other policies of this Strategic Rian will normally be permitted, provided that the development: 5.3 (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; (g)does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; 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, and (m) takes account of community and persona! safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around therrf. 5.4 Transport Policies 13 and 14 are also relevant. The former reads:"Development in or around harbours should neither compromise the ability of the harbour to accommodate other commercial or recreational users in a viable manner, nor be detrimental to the character of those harbours of historic interest. 5.5 Transport Policy 14 reads: "Any proposed schemes likely to impact upon the ecology and/or archaeology of a harbour or the nearby a^astiine should be accompanied by an Environmental Impact Assessment. 6.0 Representations 6.1 Highway Services - located within the Department of Infrastructure - do not oppose the application. No other representation of any kind has been received at the time of this Report's preparation, 6.2 which is two weeks after the closing of the statutory consultation period. 7.0 Assessment 7.1 The main issue at hand is that of visual impact of the proposed development, and also how it may affect highway safety, The applicant advised during pre-application discussions that the camera needs to be moved from its current location; the new camera (as the old) will be used to operate the lifting bridge on the swing bridge itself, The pole is, although high, likely to be relatively unobtrusive in the streetscene, especially given the nature of the site and its environs. It would, in its fully-extended form, give the impression of a streetlight, which are not uncommon in the area. Although the land to the south is zoned as residential, this is something of a distraction inasmuch as the land to the south is, topographically, far higher than the application site and it is considered unlikely that the residential amenity of those living to the south would be in any way affected by the proposal. In any case, it seems fairly reasonable to assume the 7.2 4 June 2014 14/00465/B Page 3 of 7

==== PAGE 4 ====

pole will be kept In its collapsed state unless the lift bridge is to be operated such that any negative visual impact arising from the proposed pole would be for short periods only. 7.3 Consideration was given to requiring by planning condition the pole to be kept in its collapsed state unless it was in active use with relation to the operation of the swing bridge. However, reflecting on the nature of the development relative to the number of surrounding streetlights of not dissimilar scale, such a condition was not considered necessary. With respect to highway safety, it is noted that Highway Services have offered no objection to the proposal. The 'reasonable assumption' that the pole would normally be kept in its collapsed state is also noted. Clarification was sought from the applicant as to the orientation of the pole in this state, and it was noted that the site's size and shape is such as to prevent the pole from being stored other than parallel with the South Quay highway; it could not extend out into the highway owing to the presence of railings and, at 1.5m high in its collapsed state, would not extend significantly (if at all) above those railings. On this basis, it seems appropriate to conclude that there would be a limited impact in terms of highway safety. 7.4 Other issues, in respect of the safety of the site or the protection of public views of the sea, are not considered to be seriously affected by the proposal. 7.5 Finally, reflecting briefly on the relevant Transport Policies of the Strategic Plan, it is considered that these policies are more related to larger-scale development than that here proposed. The piece of land comprising the application site is too small and unrelated to adjacent land such that any meaningful developmental opportunity nearby is unlikely - if not impossible. The scale of the proposal is, again, such as to reasonably conclude that any impact in ecological terms will likely be minimal. Indeed, the loss of the existing storage materials to be replaced with the pole proposed (the two could not co-exist) would probably have a net benefit in any such terms given the similarity of the materials being replaced and proposed, and the far lesser scale of the latter. 7.6 8.0 Recommendation and Recommended Conditions It is recommended that the application be approved subject to the normal time limit condition, No other conditions are considered necessary for reasons outlin^ in the Assessment section of this Report, above. Reference should also be made to the approved plans. 8,1 8.2 The following condition is therefore suggested without prejudice in the event that planning approval is granted: Condition 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. 8.3 For the purposes of clarity, the decision notice should make reference to the drawings, plans and documents to which the decision relates, as set out in paragraph 3.3 of this statement. 14/00465/B 4 June 2014 Page 4 of 7

==== PAGE 5 ====

Appendix A Photographs of the application site 4 June 2014 14/00465/B Page 5 of 7