DEC Officer Report

Application No.: 20/01010/B Applicant: Department For Enterprise Proposal: Alterations to existing business park estate road, creation of parkland and associated landscaping, external lighting and formation of accesses to two existing development plots Site Address: Ronaldsway Business Park Ronaldsway Ballasalla Isle Of Man IM9 2SE Principal Planner: Miss S E Corlett Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 11.01.2021 _________________________________________________________________

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.

• C 2. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping must be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the completion of the development or the occupation of the dwellings, whichever is the sooner. Any trees or plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased must be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species. The landscaping scheme may not include cotoneaster which is a Schedule 8 species in the Wildlife Act 1990.

Reason: The landscaping of the site is an integral part of the scheme and must be implemented as approved.

• C 3. Prior to the commencement of any works outwith the highways as hereby approved, there must be approved by the Planning Committee a Precautionary Working Method Statement in respect of common lizard by a suitably qualified ecological consultancy and this has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department and that the development shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved mitigation measures and maintained as such thereafter. Reason: to ensure that protected species are protected during the construction.

• C 4. Prior to the commencement of any works hereby approved other than within the highway, there must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department a bat survey including any proposed mitigation and the development must be undertaken in accordance with these details. Reason: to ensure that protected species are not affected by the development.
• C 5. Prior to the commencement of any works hereby approved there must be approved in writing by the Department a lighting strategy which demonstrates how the site and its highway will be lit without adversely affecting the ecology of the site and the development must be undertaken in accordance with these approved details.

Reason: whilst there was a lighting drawing submitted with the Design Access Statement, this was not submitted to scale or at a size which enabled complete legibility.

• N 1. It should be noted that as revised, the proposal does not raise significant road safety or highway network efficiency issues up to the provision of 35,000sqm of target commercial use for research and development or industrial floor space. Above this floor space threshold, further mitigation can be expected to be necessary and would be subject to separate transport assessment (s) and planning application(s). This should be acknowledged in any application for the development of either of the plots referred to in this application.
• N 2. It should be noted that in the Area Plan for the South, the site is designated for Business Park purposes: Business Park development can be defined as land for light industrial purposes, warehousing, new technology companies involved in scientific, commercial, or industrial research or development and office accommodation as the Corporate Headquarters of companies having multiple and diverse interests (but excluding financial/professional services to visiting members of the public); buildings should be set in parkland which should dominate the landscape (taken from Appendix 1 - 'Definitions' - The Isle of Man Strategic Plan, 2007. This should be acknowledged in any application for the development of either of the plots referred to in this application.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.

The works will be largely in accordance with the land use designation and the proposed landscaping will enhance the area ecologically and visually. The proposal is considered to be in accordance with General Policy 2, Employment Policy 3 and Business Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan and the Area Plan for the South including Landscape Proposal 24.

Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to the following drawings 10-00, 1003, 1050, PL442-01 G, PL442-02, PL442-04, PL442-05, PL442-06A, WIE 0700 95 001 A02, WIE 0100 92 001 A02, WIE 0100 95 001 A01, WIE 0100 95 004 A01

• WIE 0100 95 007 A01,
• WIE 0100 95 008 A01,
• WIE 0100 95 009 A01
• WIE 0100 95 010 A01
• WIE 0100 95 011 A01
• WIE 0100 95 012 A01
• WIE 0100 95 013 A01

• WIE 0100 95 014 A01 WIE 0100 95 014 A01 WIE 1100 95 001 A02 WIE 1200 95 001 A02 Design Access Statement Flood Risk and Drainage Strategy Report Stage 1 Road Safety Audit Transport Statement all received on 2nd September, 2020 WIE 0000 95 010 A02, WIE 0000 95 011 A02 and WIE 0000 95 015 A02 all received on

• 07.10.20 Ground mounted solar array additional information received on 15.10.20 SC1561/P/12-10 received on 05.11.20 PL442-03B, WIE 0100 95 002 A04, WIE 0100 95 005 A03 received on 1st December, 2020. _______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are 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):

RLC Engineering as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (July 2018).

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties 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):

Isle of Man Data Centre and Sefton Express Hotel as they have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy. _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report THE SITE

1.1 The site is a parcel of land which lies on the north western side of the A5 Douglas to Castletown Road opposite the Airport. The site includes the estate road, roadside landscaping and all the land outwith the curtilages of the emergency services facility, the hotel (Sefton Express) and the office building (Forrest House). - 1.2 The site is relatively flat with a fall to the south of the hotel (7m over around 65m) with the undeveloped areas laid to grass which is managed in respect of the space between the hotel and the emergency services unit but more natural on the land to the south. THE PROPOSAL

2.1 Whilst there is a lot of information included in the application, in planning terms, what needs permission are alterations to the roadways and the creation of access to two plots

• whose proposed use is consistent with the land use designation in the relevant Area Plan. Also proposed is landscaping although that which is outwith the development areas and associated with the setting out of the plots does not need planning approval. Permission is also sought and necessary for the installation of solar panels, a gazebo and leisure space. Proposed in the submitted drawings are the creation of parkland and associated landscape works, external lighting with solar pv array, battery store and the formation of access to two "existing development plots". They suggest that this will improve the access and landscape environment of the business park and will create the entrance point for the existing plots to be developed. The application proposes the enabling works to facilitate the development of two plots in Government ownership for purposes in accordance with the Area Plan for the South designation. The application site is approximately 3.45 hectares in area and the two proposed development plots 0.5 and 0.45ha. Access to the sites would be via the existing roundabout.
• 2.2 They describe both plots as serviceable in terms of services.

2.2 The plans include the following:

Works compound in an area between Sefton Express and Emergency Services unit of 47m by 37m The introduction of landscaping that encourages wildlife - flora and fauna that enrich the area and create a pleasant location and that is open to the public and links to the Millennium Way. The existing landscaped strip alongside the A5 will be managed, canopies lifted and hedges lowered to allow views into the site A 7m hexagonal gazebo is to be introduced within the area of Public Open Space The creation of a mini roundabout where the estate road currently enters the Ronaldsway Industrial Estate and turns north. Two new accesses from this are proposed to access the two development plots. There are four arms to the new mini roundabout: north east follows the existing estate road, north west leads into plot A, south east leading back to the A5 and south west heads south west towards the Strategic Reserve site (see Planning Policy. The full sight stopping distances cannot be achieved from the access to plot B. The new roads will have footways on the north western side and a part footway on the south eastern side of the entrance from the site to the new mini roundabout Street lighting of the roundabout and along the proposed footpaths/cycleways Solar array which is to be located in the southern end of the site arranged in half of the circular paved area linked in with the path network. Landscaping: a landscaped sward is to be introduced and managed between the estate road and the A5 and additional planting between the Emergency Services building and plot A Pathways - a footpath is proposed parallel with the A5 between it and the estate road, linking the estate road to the link between the pedestrian crossing to the Airport and the Ronaldsway Railway Halt. Additional pathways are proposed on the south western part of the site involving areas of recreational space Sculptures by local artists opportunities for which are shown on the landscaping plans

2.3 A Constraints Plan has been provided which only shows indicative not plotted positions of trees and generic canopy spreads thereof and the position of a construction compound 37, by 47m beside the Emergency Services unit. - 2.4 A phasing plan has been provided to clarify how the roadworks will be implemented. A flood risk assessment is also provided although the site is not within a flood risk zone and the risk of flooding is stated as low. The details of the drainage from the proposed plots are not known at this time and will be provided when the details of the development of these plots is known. - 2.5 The intention is to create two serviced plots which can be marketed by Government.

2.6 There is a considerable amount of information which explains the proposed development however, what requires planning approval is only a small part of this - notably the new paving, gazebo and highways. The landscaping, whilst well thought through does not require planning approval although its approval and implementation will reduce the need for that information to be provided when applications for the development of the two plots are submitted. The land is designated for development so the principle of the creation of the two plots in themselves would also not require planning approval although it is noted that the Design Statement merely refers to the potential users of these plots as "businesses" and the application to "Business Park" as both existing and proposed use. It is important that the users accord with the approved use in the Area Plan (see below). - 2.7 Information is provided within the Design Access Statement including a lighting scheme although not provided to scale and at a size which does not enable easy reading of the text.

PLANNING POLICY

3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the South (2013) as partly Business Park and partly Open Space (not for particular purposes). The site embraces both of these areas as well as small parts of the Tourism (Hotel) designation which applies to the Sefton Hotel site. - 3.2 The Written Statement accompanying the application includes the following references:

Landscape Proposal 19: New industrial or commercial buildings at Balthane and Ronaldsway Business Park and the Freeport, which would be visible from the A5 or the Steam Railway, should be of high-quality, functional design. This proposal will also apply to buildings which would be visible from the by-pass once a route has been firmly determined.

Landscape Proposal 24: Development on the Ronaldsway Business Park should be undertaken such as to improve the appearance of the general estate as viewed from the footpath along the Silverburn and from the railway.

Green Gap Proposal 3 Between Castletown and the Airport/Ronaldsway Business Park (inclusive of Site SR2), development which would erode the separation and detract from the openness between the two areas will not be permitted.

• 6.8.5 Ronaldsway occupies a prominent and well laid out site within the South and as such is considered suitable for Business Park uses. This designation, however, shall not affect the current businesses on the Estate. Other uses may be better directed towards Balthane. Business Park development can be defined as land for light industrial purposes, warehousing, new technology companies involved in scientific, commercial, or industrial research or development and office accommodation as the Corporate Headquarters of companies having multiple and diverse interests (but excluding financial/professional services to visiting members of the public); buildings should be set in parkland which should dominate the landscape (taken from Appendix 1 - 'Definitions' - The Isle of Man Strategic Plan, 2007).

6.8.6 In this context Business Policy 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan is important. This states: "New office floor space should be located within town and village centres on land which is zoned for the purpose on the appropriate area plan; exceptionally, permission may be given for new office space

• (a) on approved Business Parks for Corporate Headquarters which do not involve day to day callers; or
• (b) in buildings of acknowledged architectural or historic interest for which office use represents the only or most appropriate practicable and economic way of securing future use, renovation and maintenance."

Employment Proposal 3: It is proposed that the Ronaldsway Industrial Estate will be designated as a Business Park. As such, it would be a suitable location for light industrial purposes, warehousing, new technology companies involved in scientific, commercial, or industrial research or development and office accommodation as the corporate headquarters of companies having multiple and diverse interests (but excluding financial/professional services to visiting members of the public). Buildings should be set in parkland which should dominate the landscape.

General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan sets out general standards of development which are applicable in this case.

PLANNING HISTORY

4.1 Planning approval was refused for reserved parking within the landscaped area alongside the road (97/01355/B). The hotel was approved under 04/01149/B and 05/01151/B and extended under 0901275/B with a footpath. The emergency services building was approved under 13/091065/B and 15/01108/B. REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1.1 Highway Services state that additional information and revisions are necessary as follows:

Transport Assessment and the Stage 1 Road Safety Audit are not uploaded and required to verify the proposal and the references on drawings to relaxations from standards, such as the traffic levels for the gap acceptance and visibility at the proposed roundabout, interaction between the new roundabout and the one on the A5, and widths of paths. The waste collection vehicle tracking should reflect the size of the local authority vehicle and not a DB32 vehicle and revision is needed. DB32 being no longer an applicable standard (23.09.20).

• 5.1.2 Following the submission of additional information Highway Services raise no objection noting the following:

As the proposed increase in vehicular traffic flow is materially significant and potentially severe, it necessitated a junction assessment. This evaluation indicated that the proposed minroundabout would operate within capacity and enabled an estimate of the likely quantum of development that could be accommodated before queues back from the mini-roundabout to the A5 could arise. This is likely to occur at a floor space threshold of 44,000sqm with 35,000sqm of floor space being the maximum likely keep congestion at a minimum after which mitigation would be necessary. Future developers of the proposed new plots would need to provide demonstrably evidence in the form of transport assessments.

The proposal will improve accessibility and connectivity, particularly for pedestrians and cyclists and encouraging sustainable travel in any future expansion of the business park and as part of travel planning. The aim to provide a balanced approach to competing needs to meet policy and guidance, particularly in relation to cyclists and the interim enabling works. The revised layout of the roads at the mini-roundabout would benefit from further refinement at the detailed design stage. As revised, the proposal does not raise significant road safety or highway network efficiency issues up to the provision of 35,000sqm of target commercial use for research and development or industrial floor space. Above this floor space threshold, further mitigation can be expected to be necessary and would be subject to separate transport assessment (s) and planning application (s).

Accordingly, Highway Services raise no opposition subject to conditions for the highway related works as indicated under the revised submission uploaded on 1 December 2020 with consideration of a floorspace cap and an advisory for an appropriate form of Highway Agreements and construction traffic management plan (18.12.20).

5.2 Malew Parish Commissioners advise that they have no objections to the application (07.10.20).

• 5.3.1 DEFA Ecosystems Policy Officer refers to the omission of a common lizard and bat survey which are essential for the proper consideration of the application. Whilst the protection and enhancement of the area for wildlife seems to be a focus of the application there is no information about lighting which could adversely affect nocturnal wildlife. Cotoneaster needs to be removed from the proposed plan schedule (05.10.20).
• 5.3.2 Following further discussions with the applicant DEFA have had access to survey information which has satisfied them that most of the important ecological features and mitigation for these features have been suitably considered and integrated into the development proposals although a management plan which shows how the various habitats are to be created and maintained in the long term has not been provided and this forms a vital apart of the mitigation. They request a condition which requires the submission and approval of a habitat creation and management plan for the whole site including a mechanism to secure the long-term management of the area past the contractural maintenance period and the management plans shall be adhered to and implemented in full and maintained thereafter.
• 5.3.3 They note that whilst lizard and bat surveys have not yet been provided, from communication with the ecologists who have provided the survey information apart from a few points they are confident that mitigation measures for these species have already been integrated into the design of the site and they are happy for the reports to be provided after determination of the application. They recommend a condition which requires that no works are undertaken until such times as a bat survey has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The report should identify any mitigation measures for bats and this mitigation should be integrated into the site's design and shall be maintained thereafter.
• 5.3.4 Following comments to them from the Manx Wildlife Trust there has been no evidence to prove that common lizards are utilising the site but the main ecological features for lizards are the hedge banks which are mostly to be retained and enhanced. In order to protect common lizard populations they request a condition is attached which requires that no development shall take place until a Precautionary Working Method Statement for Common Lizards has been created by a suitably qualified ecological consultancy and this has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department and that the development shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved mitigation measures and maintained as such thereafter. They also request a condition which secures the lighting of the site in accordance with the Proposed External Lighting Layout drawing (09.12.20).

5.4 The owner of Isle of Man Datacentre within the estate advise that their business is based on site (18.09.20) then add to these comments on 25.09.20, stating that they are very supportive of the planning process and have an interest in this application as they are a major telecommunications provider on the Island, key to their interests being that their site provides a major centre for telecommunications supporting a number of online businesses which are key to the Island's digital strategy and cannot afford downtime so need to ensure that all electricity and data services remain intact throughout the proposed development and are concerned that the proposed landscaping could have an impact on the communications infrastructure which needs to be considered as part of the planning process. - 5.5 Representatives of RLC Engineering Group Limited object to the application, expressing concern that the application does not provide information on on-going maintenance of the landscaping or the provision for refuse collection and it is noted that there is no provision for litter bins within the development. Given the location of the site and its secluded position with cycle tracks and seated areas, there is a risk that it may be used out of hours for antisocial purposes noting that there is an ongoing alcohol problem in Castletown. They suggest that the

• installation of wireless CCTV cameras in the lighting columns with associated signage may address this (30.09.20).
• 5.6 Representatives of the Sefton Express Hotel note that landscaping is proposed on land over which they hold a 50 year leasehold and their permission has not been sought (09.09.20).

ASSESSMENT

6.1 Whilst a significant amount of information has been submitted, the scheme proposes relatively few elements which require planning approval and the imposed conditions may only apply to what has been proposed and what constitutes development which is capable of control. The works to the highway in terms of signage and road markings is not development and neither is the landscaping. The changes to the road layout to enable access to the plots is relatively minor and the use of the sites for industrial purposes or business park use is consistent with the land use designation in the Area Plan so itself does not require planning approval. The structures - the solar array and gazebo are modest in relation to the size of the existing and potential buildings and there are no details of the proposed sculptures for consideration.

6.2 The inclusion of Public Open Space within the scheme is contrary to the land use designation which is for industry/Business Park. However, the area is populated by facilities which employ people and which include an hotel, all of which would benefit from leisure facilities such as the seating and pathways. It is unlikely that people would come to the area just for these areas of Public Open Space and as such these areas are considered ancillary to the main use of the sites as industry/business park. As such, the inclusion of non-conforming leisure uses is considered acceptable here and given the likely nature of the users - ie people who are already within the area working or visiting the operations there, it is not considered that there will be a security risk.

6.3 Given that there is no planning requirement for the landscaping, particularly that which is outwith the proposed development plots, it is not considered appropriate to attach any conditions requiring management plans or habitat creation. It is considered appropriate however to add conditions relating to surveys and precautionary working method statements for protected species (lizards and bats) as recommended by DEFA Ecosystems Policy Office.

6.4 The security of services during construction is outwith the planning process and a condition ensuring that electricity and telecommunications are not interrupted throughout the development of these sites would not be appropriate. - 6.5 A condition is considered appropriate relating to the submission of a lighting scheme where the drawing is to scale and information provided which illustrates clearly the height and impact of all proposed lighting. - 6.6 A condition restricting the size of development on the plots, whilst useful and informative would not be acceptable as the development does not include the development of these areas and the application is not an application in principle which reserves for further approval the development of the plots (it would have been possible to apply for the principle of the development of the plots for business park purposes and reserve all but the landscaping, access, drainage etc that is provided within this application but that is not what has been proposed and what may be considered here. As such, a note regarding Highway Services comments about the scale of development should be added as a note, not a condition).

CONCLUSION

7.1 The works will be largely in accordance with the land use designation and the proposed landscaping will enhance the area ecologically and visually. The proposal is considered to be in accordance with General Policy 2, Employment Policy 3 and Business Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan and the Area Plan for the S0uth including Landscape Proposal 24.

• INTERESTED PERSON STATUS
• 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf);
• (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure;
• (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and
• (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

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
• o whether there are other persons to those listed in Article 4(2) 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 can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management 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

Decision Made : Permitted Date : 11.01.2021 Determining officer

Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management

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.