Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
21/00294/B Page 1 of 11
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 21/00294/B Applicant : Haven Homes Ltd Proposal : Removal of Condition 6 of PA 19/01421/B, Erection of 11 units for general industrial/light industrial/storage/distribution with associated parking, concerning no discharging of surface water to adjacent Ronaldburn stream Site Address : Former Gas Storage Installation Balthane Industrial Estate Balthane Ballasalla Isle Of Man IM9 2AL
Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 24.05.2021 __
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. The development shall not commence until a hard and soft landscaping scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. Such scheme shall include details of all walls, fences, trees, hedgerows and other planting to be retained, new walls, fences and other boundary treatments and finished ground levels, planting specification including numbers, density size species and positions of all new trees and shrubs, location of grassed areas, details of hard surface treatment of the open parts of the site and a programme of implementation. All hard and soft landscaping works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved programme of implementation. Any trees or plants which within a period of five years from the date of planting die are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced during the next planting season with other trees or plants of species and size first approved in writing by the Department. All hard landscaping shall be permanently retained.
Reason: To ensure the provision of appropriate landscape setting for the development.
C 3. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or operated until the vehicle parking and turning areas have been provided in accordance with approved plans and the
==== PAGE 2 ====
21/00294/B Page 2 of 11
parking and turning areas shall thereafter shall be kept available for the parking and turning of vehicles associated with the development.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
C 4. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or operated until bicycle storage has been provided in accordance with details first approved in writing by the Department and the bicycle storage shall thereafter be permanently retained.
Reason: To promote sustainable travel in the interests of reducing pollution and congestion.
C 5. There shall be no obstruction to visibility splays higher than 1.05m above adjoining road level forward of a line drawn 2m back from the nearside carriageway edge at the centreline of the access extending 36m in each direction. Such visibility splays shall be provided before the construction of the buildings hereby approved is commenced and shall be permanently maintained free of obstruction thereafter.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
C 6. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or operated until the Primary Drainage Scheme has been provided in accordance with the approved plans (Drawing No. 19- 110/50) and shall be permanently retained thereafter and solely for the purpose of surface water drainage.
Reason: To ensure that there are no adverse impacts on the Ronaldsburn watercourse.
C 7. The development hereby approved shall not be commenced until details of a 'Construction Environmental Management Plan', which details the measures to be taken to protect the watercourse during construction, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department.
Reason: To ensure that there are no adverse impacts on the Ronaldsburn watercourse during the construction phase of the approved development.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. It is considered the application would be acceptable, complying with Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016) and The Area Plan for the South (2013).
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawings reference numbers;
o 1273/200/Rev O o 1273/211/Rev A o 1273/212/Rev A o 1273/213/Rev A o 1273/214/Rev A o 1273/210/Rev E o 1273/216 o 19-110/50 o 19-110/60 o Planning Cover Letter o Planning Statement
All received on 22 March 2021.
==== PAGE 3 ====
21/00294/B Page 3 of 11
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the following organisation 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):
The Derbyhaven Residents' Society Ltd,
as they are 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
It is recommended that the following Government Departments should be given Interested Person Status on the basis that they have made written submissions relating to planning considerations:
Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Flood Risk Management Division __
Officer’s Report
THE PLANNING APPLICATION IS NOT REQUIRED TO GO BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE GIVEN THE PROPOSAL IS CONSIDERED TO BE A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SCHEME
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is the curtilage of the former Bulk Gas Storage Installation, Balthane Industrial Estate, Balthane, Ballasalla located to the south of the Balthane Road and west of JCK Recycling Yard. Until recently there was a small residential property situated to the south of the site. This has been demolished and the site is now used as part of the yard to the south west.
1.2 The site has the Ronaldsburn water course on its eastern boundary which separates the site from the adjacent industrial yard. On the northern boundary of the site tree clusters which helps to enable the site blend with the well landscaped and vegetated adjacent industrial site and field situated about 30m north-west of the site. The existing access is currently gated off with mesh gates set back from the highway.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application seeks approval for the removal of Condition 6 of PA 19/01421/B concerning the discharging of surface water to adjacent Ronaldsburn stream. This condition stated:
"There shall be no discharge of water to the adjacent Ronaldsburn stream. Reason: To avoid adverse effects on the watercourse due to additional flows."
2.2 The applicants explain that: In discharging the condition 6 attached to P/A 19/01421/B the applicant is left with an approval for surface water drainage layout, bypass oil interceptor, sumped manhole, cellular attenuation tank, hydrobrake discharge chamber and reinforced concrete wall (all elements of the approved development) which would be rendered redundant and as such removal of condition 6 is therefore sought.
==== PAGE 4 ====
21/00294/B Page 4 of 11
The applicant further states that when the application was originally submitted under PA 19/01421/B, the applicants experts submitted that the discharge rate is in accordance with MUA requirements and that MUA had no objection to the application on that basis or any other elements of the scheme. As well, the application site drains into the watercourse, and has always been the case to the knowledge of the applicant.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The application site is within an area zoned as "Industrial" on the Area Plan for the South (Map 4) 2013. The site is also classified as a Major Hazard site on the Area Plan for the South (2013) Map 1: Constraints. The southeast section of the site is considered to have high likelihood of surface water flood risk as shown on the Isle of Man Indicative Flood Risk Maps. Given the nature of the application it is appropriate to consider the following policies of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016).
3.2 General Policy 2 states (in part): "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; (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; (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."
3.3 Section 7.9: Watercourses and Wetlands 7.9.1 A watercourse or wetland, including ponds and dubs, can be affected by building or engineering operations (either during or after completion of works) or new uses of land which are carried out anywhere within the catchment area. New development in the vicinity of such areas can result in pollution, sedimentation or direct deterioration. Land infill and tipping, mineral exploitation, large scale developments and activities which disturb contaminated material are of particular concern. In all but the most minor proposals, consideration will be given to the protection of watercourses and wetland areas which may be affected by a proposed activity. In addition to requiring planning permission, any work on a watercourse, stream or designated Main River (and normally including the banks for a distance of 9m (30ft) either side) requires the permission of the Department of Transport's Land Drainage Engineer, in accordance with the Land Drainage Act 1934.
3.4 Environment Policy 7: Development which would cause demonstrable harm to a watercourse, wetland, pond or dub, and which could not be overcome by mitigation measures will not be permitted. Where development is proposed which would affect a watercourse, planning applications must comply with the following criteria:
(a) all watercourses in the vicinity of the site must be identified on plans accompanying a planning application and include an adequate risk assessment to demonstrate that works will not cause long term deterioration in water quality;
==== PAGE 5 ====
21/00294/B Page 5 of 11
(b) details of pollution and alleviation measures must be submitted; (c) all engineering works proposed must be phased in an appropriate manner in order to avoid a reduction in water quality in any adjacent watercourse; and (d) development will not normally be allowed within 8 metres of any watercourse in order to protect the aquatic and bankside habitats and species.
3.5 Paragraph 7.23.1 There are a number of installations on the Island that represent a constraint on development in the vicinity because of health and safety considerations. Such installations are essential Island facilities such as the petroleum and LPG storage at Douglas Harbour. The type of constraint posed to development varies by facility and therefore there will be a need for the Department to consult with the Health and Safety at Work Inspectorate regarding any development within such zones.
Environment Policy 29: In considering development proposals within Consultation Zones as designated on the Area Plans or published Consultation Zone Maps, the Department will consult with the Health and Safety at Work Inspectorate to determine the appropriateness of the development. In all cases, the health and safety of the public will be the overriding consideration. Developments which would conflict with the requirements of health and safety will not be permitted.
3.6 Paragraph 7.20.2 The practice of reclaiming contaminated land and bringing it back into beneficial use is supported, whether it be suitable in the end for open space or residential development or as deemed appropriate in the Area Plans. It is important that however former contaminated land is utilised, both health and property are safeguarded. Detailed surveys may be required to identify the extent of contamination and how contamination problems can be overcome. On sites where the Department has no control, the developer will have responsibility to ensure that any development site is free of contamination which may constitute a hazard to occupiers or potential users of the development or land. Furthermore, precautions will be essential to ensure that contaminants cannot escape from the site which may cause airborne or waterborne pollution or pollution of nearby land.
Environment Policy 26: Development will not be permitted on or close to contaminated land unless it can be demonstrated that there is no unacceptable risk to health, property or adjacent watercourses.
3.7 In addition to the IOM Strategic Plan, the Area Plan for the South 2013 also contains the following policies and paragraphs which are fundamental in the assessment of this application:
3.7.1 Employment Proposal 1: "All industrial uses, other than small scale light industrial uses considered to be acceptable within the Mixed Use areas, or those uses deemed appropriate by the Isle of Man Strategic Plan Business Policy 7, will be located on the Industrial Estate at Balthane and where appropriate Ronaldsway and the Freeport."
3.7.2 Paragraph 5.23 Hazardous Sites 5.23.1 There are two identified major hazard sites within the Southern Area. One is located within the Balthane Industrial Estate; the other is between the settlements of Port Erin and Port St Mary and surrounds the gas tanks. Both are depicted by concentric circles on Map 1 or what are known as 'consultation zones.' It is likely that these two sites will become non- hazardous in the future with the planned removal of gas storage at Balthane and the cessation of the gas plant usage at Port St Mary. Where development is proposed within these zones, the Health and Safety at Work Inspectorate will be consulted to ensure that there are no health
==== PAGE 6 ====
21/00294/B Page 6 of 11
and safety implications. In these cases, Environment Policy 29 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, 2007, will apply.
3.7.3 Paragraph 6.8.3 6.8.3 There is an identified major hazard site identified at Balthane and within the identified 'consultation zone' it will be essential to ensure that the end users are operating in accordance with the relevant guidance relating to hazard sites (see Environment Policy 29 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, 2007). See also paragraph 5.23 in the previous Chapter.
3.8.4 Paragraph 3.24 (vi) "There is support to improving access to and the generally poor physical environment in Balthane Industrial Estate".
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The application site has been the subject of five previous planning applications, four of which are considered to be specifically material in the assessment of the current application:
4.2 The most recent application for erection of 11 units for general industrial/light industrial/storage/distribution with associated parking, under PA 19/01421/B is considered to be particularly relevant given that approval was granted for the scheme subject to six 6) conditions; including Condition 6 which the current application seeks to remove.
4.2.1 The application was refused by the Planning Committee with the Appeals Inspector upholding the decision of the Planning Authority to refuse the application, although the Inspectors decision was overturned by the Minister on the following grounds:
"the development would not be so detrimental to highway safety or to ecology (or those two combined) that it should outweigh the positive aspects of the development in respect of new jobs, the economic benefits arising from the construction and the general wider economic benefits to the Islands economy at this particular time."
4.3 PA 13/91404/A for Approval in principle for the demolition of existing gas storage facility and erection of 11 light industrial units and associated parking - APPROVED.
4.4 PA 16/00423/A for Approval in principle for the demolition of existing gas storage facility and erection of 11 units for purposes of general industrial or light industrial or storage and distribution along with associated parking - APPROVED by the Planning Committee.
4.4.1 This application with details similar to those submitted under PA 13/91404/A sought to amend condition 2 attached to the previous application with a view to extending the period of permission by a further two years.
4.5 PA 17/00378/B for Demolition of existing gas store, levelling of site and construction of retaining walls. Use of site for the medium term storage of site vehicles, containers and building materials - 10/00587/B - APPROVED
4.5.1 The application details and the works proposed under this proposal are significantly different from those proposed under the previous applications on the site. The site was to house a single facility to be situated on the western section of the site, away from the water course and large sections of the site was to be covered in hard core (not paved); with potential to facilitate percolation and limit the rate of runoff from the site.
4.5.2 Paragraph 2.2 of the Satisfaction of Condition for the above application states thus: "This confirms that no works are to be undertaken to the bank side and that surface water from the site will be diverted into the stream via a petrol interceptor to prevent pollution entering the stream. Waste products will be disposed of in dedicated skips for removal off site
==== PAGE 7 ====
21/00294/B Page 7 of 11
and all hazardous liquid products will be disposed of in appropriate contained into dedicated skips for removal from site".
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 The Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division has indicated that they 'Do no oppose' in a letter dated 2 April 2021.
5.2 Representation from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Flood Risk Management Division confirms that that they 'Do not oppose' in the letter dated 24 May 2021.
5.3 DEFA Inland Fisheries which had previously written in requesting additional information in a letter dated 19 April 2021, has stated that they have no objection to the application, provided that there is no adverse effect on the adjacent watercourse in a letter dated 21 April 2021.
5.4 DEFA's Environmental Protection Officer has stated that the Environmental Protection Unit supports the removal of condition 6 providing an oil interceptor and attenuation pond is installed and maintained to protect the watercourse, given that it is common practice across the island to discharge surface water into the nearest watercourse; with other businesses in the area having various surface water discharges along the Ronaldsburn (21 April 2021).
5.5 DEFA's Ecosystem Policy Officer has indicated support for the application and recommended that three conditions be imposed to cover; i. The provision of a Construction Environmental Management Plan, which details the measures to be taken to protect the watercourse during construction, prior to works taking place. ii. The replacement of soft landscaping; iii. The provision of bird bricks/boxes as mitigation for the loss of nesting habitat on site
5.5.1 They noted that DEFA's Environmental Protection Team and Inland Fisheries Teams are satisfied with the measures which are to be put in place at site to deal with runoff and the removal of Condition 6, and as such they support their decision considering their specific expertise on the matter. They also acknowledged the support of DEFA's Senior Marine Environment Officer who is responsible for the Isle of Man's Marine Nature Reserves, for the scheme (30 April 2021).
5.6 Malew Parish Commissioners have stated that they have no objections to the application in a letter dated 8 April 2021.
5.7 Manx National Heritage has written in to express concerns with the proposed scheme in a letter dated 20 April 2021 for the following reasons:
i. The close proximity of the development (block A being less than 4m) to the Ronaldsburn stream.
ii. The potential for run off, from the proposed development, to enter the water course and cause environmental damage to the riparian zone of the stream as well as sensitive intertidal and marine communities downstream.
iii. The Ronaldsburn discharges into Derbyhaven Bay which forms part of the Langness, Derbyhaven and Sandwick Area of Special Scientific Interest (ASSI). This bay forms part of the Langness Marine Nature Reserve and is an important feeding area for both resident and migrant waders.
==== PAGE 8 ====
21/00294/B Page 8 of 11
iv. The proposed development would constitute an over intensive use of the site and would fail to incorporate the existing topography and landscape features. v. The removal of the trees would result in unacceptable harm to the natural environment resulting in a loss of existing biodiversity and is therefore contrary to General Policy 2b, d and f of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
vi. The development as proposed would also be contrary to Environment Policy 7 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 due the proximity of some of the units to the banks of the Ronaldsburn water course.
5.8 The Derbyhaven Residents' Society Ltd object to the removal of Condition 6 on the following grounds (07 April 2021):
i. The potential for downstream environmental impact arising from any discharge into the Ronaldsburn which discharges into Derbyhaven Bay which forms part of the Langness, Derbyhaven and Sandwick Area of Special Scientific Interest (ASSI).
ii. The discharge of surface water may compromise the quality of water for users of the Derbyhaven Bay -human, marine and avian.
iii. potential for under-capacity of the Ronaldsburn drain running under the airfield (based on the discharge levels).
5.8.1 They suggested that the developer could adopt a SuDS (Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems) approach to surface water drainage and run-off on the development site, in addition to stating that should the development be approved, development does proceed, suitable controls should be put in place to avoid silt discharge into the Ronaldsburn during construction.
5.9 The applicant has provided a response to the representations received which indicates the following (05 May 2021):
i. The concerns raised by MNH at this stage are detail matters that have in any event already been determined and are therefore not germane to the current variation application (21/00294/B).
ii. The application benefitted from pre-application consultation with both Manx Utilities and Inland Fisheries, which informed the approved drainage design and construction methodology and as such DRS suggestion that that no consideration was given to the downstream environmental impact of discharges into the Ronaldsburn is not accepted.
iii. With regard to DRS suggestion that SuD's be used, an attenuation tank, located under ground level, allows us to make use of the space above in a manner in which a retention basin would not; in this instance by satisfying parking requirements of the development (also set by policy). A SuDS, as put forth by DRS, would still have to drain into the adjacent watercourse and, without removal of the contrary provision of Condition 6, would remain entirely ineffectual.
iv. DRS comment on flood risk: DoI flood maps are prepared with the benefit of a LiDAR topographical survey, itself only prepared to a certain specification. On this basis, it is reasonable that the DoI (like the MUA) only treat their flood maps as indicative and subject to certain limitations. Furthermore, as the approved development involves level changes to the site (as was also noted in the engineer's statement), the approved development itself supersedes the information upon which the flood maps are prepared; particularly in relation to surface water to which we assume the DRS representation refers).
==== PAGE 9 ====
21/00294/B Page 9 of 11
6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 With the current application, the main considerations are: i. whether the removal of the condition (condition 6) would increase the likelihood for detrimental impacts on the quality of water discharged into the watercourse; and ii. whether the downstream sections of the watercourse fall within the remit of the current application.
6.2 Condition 6 was initially imposed to ensure that there are no impacts on the Ronaldsburn watercourse as a result of discharge from the application site should the application be approved at appeal. This is hinged on the fact that discharge schemes fail and present challenges that have long term impacts on nearby water courses, particularly for developments in industrial areas. It has, however, been established that other sites within the estate currently discharge surface water into the water course (as suggested by the Environmental Protection Unit) and as such it would be difficult to provide a justification for the exclusion of the application site, given that its operations would not be at variance with that acceptable within the area which is industrial, in addition to the fact that approval has already been granted for the scheme which includes the surface discharge element.
6.3 Whilst it is important to ensure that the surface water discharge does not introduce harmful substances into the Ronaldsburn watercourse (as is the intention of Condition 6), it would also be vital to ensure that appropriate mitigation for likely flood impacts in the future are averted via proper flood attenuation given that the southern sections of the site are considered to have high likelihood of surface water flood risk (as shown on the Isle of Man Indicative Flood Risk Maps). Therefore, since approval has already been granted for the development of the site with the increased hard surfacing and built-up element increasing the propensity for increased surface water discharge, it would be important for the approved surface water discharge management scheme (approved under PA 19/01421/B) to be implemented by allowing discharge into the watercourse, provided the proposed mitigation elements (which includes the bypass oil interceptor, sumped manhole, cellular attenuation tank, and hydrobrake discharge chamber) are properly installed and monitored for their efficiency and effectiveness.
6.4 It is, however, worth noting that a condition would be imposed to ensure that the drainage plan which was previously submitted under PA 19/01421/B is implemented prior to the operation (use) of the industrial units. As well, a condition would also be imposed to ensure the protection of the water course during the constructive phase (as requested by the Ecosystem Policy Team in their representation dated 30 April 2021); considering the potential for this element of the scheme to introduce environmental impacts associated with the discharge of sediments via run-off/leaching of bare soils as has been identified as a concern by the Derbyhaven Residents' Society Ltd (DRS) in their objection to the scheme. These conditions would ensure that any impacts on the watercourse would be minimal or at levels that would be judged not sufficient to warrant refusal of the application.
6.5 Another factor that weighs in favour of the removal of the condition is the fact that the development has already been approved, with the surface water discharge management scheme integral to the development and as such cannot be detached from the extant approval. Besides, any new measure or alternative discharge scheme other than that currently obtainable within the estate would be at variance with the approved scheme which was assessed and considered acceptable by the Minister. This is also the case for the suggested conditions related to the introduction of bird bricks/boxes as mitigation for the loss of nesting habitat on site by the Ecosystem Policy Team and the introduction of SuD's by the Derbyhaven Residents' Society Ltd (DRS) as these would be introducing completely new elements to an application that has already been approved. The suggestion of for the inclusion of a condition to secure the replacement soft landscaping is also not applicable given that condition 2 attached to the approval for PA 19/01421/B would achieve the same purpose as it clearly stipulates that a hard
==== PAGE 10 ====
21/00294/B Page 10 of 11
and soft landscaping scheme shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Department before the development shall commence on the site.
6.6 Turning to the issue of flood risk raised by the Derbyhaven Residents' Society Ltd (DRS) in their representation, it is noted that Manx Utilities Drainage has not raised any concern with flooding as no comments have been received from them in regard to the application and as such it is not considered that there are concerns in this regard (as with PA 19/01421/B). Moreover, DOI Flood Risk Management Division has also indicated that they do not oppose the application which suggests that flooding is not a concern. Besides, there are measures within the Flood Risk Management Act for which the MUA are custodians to manage flood related matters.
6.7 Other matters related to downstream impacts on the Sandwick Area of Special Scientific Interest (ASSI) and Langness Marine Nature Reserve situated downstream (which are not directly related to the site given their remote locations from the site) are not matters for planning control as they are the subject of other regulatory controls such as the 'Discharge Licence'. As such, these would be better addressed via the appropriate instruments under the remits of Environmental Protection.
6.8 Reference made to the over-intensive use of the site, removal of trees and the proximity of the development to the water course are also noted. However, these have been addressed under PA 19/01421/B, with the current application only seeking to remove condition 6 which relates to the discharge of water from the site. Thus, the current scheme cannot be expanded to assess maters which have been previously accessed and for which decisions have already been made in the previous application.
OTHER MATTERS 6.9 It should be noted that the current application seeks to only remove a condition of the approval (condition 6) and as such the same conditions (C 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5) which relate to the original approval are still relevant to the approval and as such included again. The exception being a new condition 6 which relates to the provision of a Construction Environmental Management Plan to ensure that the construction works which would precede the installation of the approved surface water discharge management scheme (approved under PA 19/01421/B) do not have detrimental impacts on the watercourse, as well as an additional condition (Condition 7) to address the implementation of the surface water discharge management scheme which shall be installed prior to the use of the units. It should, however, be noted that the original application is still the "main" application; albeit this current proposal will issue a new decision notice and have a new expiry date.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 Accordingly, given the reasons stated it is considered the application would be acceptable, complying with Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016) and the Area Plan for the South (2013) and therefore the application is recommended for an approval.
8.0 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
==== PAGE 11 ====
21/00294/B Page 11 of 11
(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 above 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 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.
Decision Made : Permitted
Date: 26.05.2021
Determining officer
Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett
Principal Planner
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