89023 — 23/00168/B | Planning Portal IoM | Isle of Man Planning Portal

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  1  of  19

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. 23/00168/B Applicant : Dandara Commercial Limited Proposal Erection of 45 industrial/storage & distribution units in four separate blocks Site Address Vacant Land Between Balthane Park Industrial Estate And New By-Pass Road Douglas Road Ballasalla Isle Of Man

Case Officer :

Mr Jason Singleton Photo Taken :

Site Visit :

Expected Decision Level Planning Committee

Recommendation

Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation 26.06.2023

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. Notwithstanding the meaning of development in Section 6 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 or any act revoking or re-enacting that Act, no mezzanine floor shall be constructed without a further application for planning approval being submitted and approved.

REASON: the parking provision is considered acceptable on the basis of the floor area of the proposed units as shown in the submitted plans and on only one floor of accommodation per unit.

C 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2019 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), the units hereby approved shall only be used for General industrial (Class 2.3) and/or Storage/distribution (Class 2.4) and for no other purpose at any time.

REASON: The Department has assessed the impact of the proposal on the basis of the specific use and any alternative uses within the same Use Class will require further consideration.

C 4. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or operated until the pedestrian and vehicle arrangements have been provided in accordance with the approved plan (APL_310 P4). Such areas shall remain free from obstruction thereafter and remain available to the users of the corresponding industrial unit.

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  2  of  19

REASON: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for off-street parking and turning of vehicles, and pedestrian movements in the interests of highway safety.

C 5. The development shall be implemented strictly in accordance with the drainage plans/details referenced; ADR_500 Rev.D. No part of the development shall be occupied until the agreed drainage strategy has been implemented. The drainage system shall be permanently retained thereafter in accordance with the submitted details

REASON: In order to ensure that adequate drainage/flood control measures/facilities are provided, and retained, in the interests of the amenity of the area.

C 6. 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 parking and turning areas shall thereafter be kept available for the parking and turning of vehicles associated with the development.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety.

C 7. 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 8. The external cladding shall be as per drawings referenced; BSA_APL_322 P3; BSA_APL_323 P3; BSA_APL_324 P3; BSA_APL_325 P3, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

REASON: To ensure a uniformed high quality appearance throughout the development.

C 9. All planting shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details in the next available planting and seeding seasons. Any tree or shrub which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the landscaping works, is removed, or becomes seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with another similar size and species, unless the Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.

REASON: To enhance the character of the area

C 10. No items of machinery or any equipment or other goods shall be kept outside of any buildings and all activities shall be undertaken within the buildings unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority.

REASON: To protect the neighbouring amenity and parking areas

C 11. No external lighting shall be permitted except that as approved as part of a lighting scheme to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority.

REASON: In the interest of the neighbouring amenity

C 12. The buildings shall be used only from Monday to Saturdays inclusive and no business shall be carried out therein on Sundays or Bank Holidays unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority.

REASON; To safeguard the character of the area

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  3  of  19

C 13. Noise levels from any plant, processes or equipment at the proposed industrial development measured at neighbouring residential premises including gardens, between the hours of 0700 - 2000 hrs (day-time) shall not exceed 50 dB LAeq, 1 hour; and noise levels from any plant, processes or equipment at the proposed industrial development measured at the external facade of neighbouring residential premises, between the hours of 2000 - 0700 hrs (night-time) shall not exceed 45 dB LAeq, 5 minute.

REASON: To safeguard the residential amenity of the neighbouring properties.

C 14. All existing hedges shown on the site as being retained must, prior to the commencement of any excavation or building work on site, be protected by the erection of protective fencing. During construction no building, storage, or excavation may be undertaken within the protected areas unless authorised in writing by the Planning Authority.

REASON: In the interest of the visual amenities of the area.

C 15. Prior to the commencement of development a boundary plan showing how the open spaces to the front of the parking (north) is to be secured between the buildings shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.

C 16. The proposed wildflower grass seed mix as detailed on drawing referenced APL_330 RevP6, shall now use the amended see mix labelled "the woodland wildflower mix" as specified in the applicant's email of 20th June.

REASON: In the interests of improved grassland and Biodiversity encouragement.

N 1. The new accesses and footway works will require a separate permission from Highways under a s109(A) Highway Agreement with a S4 for the adoption of the proposed footway after grant of any planning consent.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The development complies with Employment Proposal 1, and Landscape Proposal 19 of the Area Plan for the South, and with General Policy 2, Strategic Policy 6, Strategic Policy 10, Business Policies 1 & 5 and Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This decision relates to drawings received on 10 February 2023, referenced;

APL_300 location plan APL_305 P1 site as existing APL_310 P4 site plan as proposed APL_330 P6 landscape BSA_APL_322 P3 Block L BSA_APL_323 P3 Block M BSA_APL_324 P3 Block N BSA_APL_325 P3 Block X APL_331 P3 bat & bird boxes APL_332 P2 cycle storage APL_335 P2 refuse tracking APL_336 P2 articulated tracking

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  4  of  19

ADR-500 D drainage layout A Planning Statement A Transport Assessment

Interested Person Status - Additional Persons

It is recommended that the following Government Departments 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):

DoI FRM DfE Enterprise MUA Drainage Manx National Heritage

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

34 Alberta Drive, Derby Haven Residents Association CABO- Planning Policy

as 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; 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; as they do not refer to the relevant issues in accordance with paragraph 2C of the Policy and 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 APPLICATION IS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE AS THE LOCAL AUTHORITY OBJECT TO THE APPLICATION WHICH IS RECOMMENDED FOR AN APPROVAL.

Addendum 1.1 Following the committee meeting of 10 July 2023, the application was deferred for a site visit and to seek additional information that was raised by a late representation from the Derby Haven Residents association regarding drainage from the application site and potential pollution of Derbyhaven Bay that is a SSSI and protected.

1.2 A site visit was carried out on 13th July 2023 by members, with Mr Young acting as Chair in lieu of Mr Ashford. The committee was joined by the applicant's representative from Dandara, members from the Derbyhaven residents association and DoI Highways representative.

1.3 The site visit was conducted in two areas, one to review the application site and the setting from the Balthane Industrial Estate and then from the new bypass to review the attenuation pond that would receive the drainage from the site and the proposed bus stop layby its location.

==== PAGE 5 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  5  of  19

Further information has been received since the initial committee meeting to address those concerns and have been updated online (only brief summaries contained below).

Derbyhaven Residents Association 2.1 Additional comments were received dated Monday 17th July from the Derbyhaven Residents association following the site visit. Also a copy of a letter sent to the DEFA Environmental Protection Unit (dated 11th July) expressing their concerns of pollution to the Derbyhaven Bay via the Ronaldsburn River. In their submission they reiterate their strong concerns regarding the drainage and seek to prevent any further pollution of the Ronalsburn stream and its wider impact upon Derbyhaven bay (ASSI). They question the effectiveness of the current silt prevention procedures and seek greater controls as a preventative measure.

2.2 "DRS requests that attention is focused by the Applicant and the appropriate regulatory bodies in ensuring that a fully effective plan/strategy is put in place to prevent silt discharges into the Ronaldsburn"..."It would be far preferable for surface water to be dealt with at source by the Applicant providing permeable paving to the proposed industrial units hard surfaced areas".

Dandara (Applicants) 3.1 The applicants have provided further information by email dated 14 July 2023 that explains their understanding of the '25m buffer' as discussed on the site visit and also the SUDS measurers regarding the attenuation basin. This is reinforced with a drainage plan (ref;ADR_502-A) and a cross section plan (ref; APL_340-P2) of the site and the bypass and the residential dwellings opposite. The agents also refer to a previous approval on site and seeks to make the Committee aware of PA 12/00534/A (AIP - for development to create a builders and timber merchants premises on Land adjacent to Car Showroom, Balthane Ind. Estate) which they also refer to in their online Planning Statement;

3.2 "DB3 3 goes on to suggest that development will not normally be permitted within 25m of the line of the by-pass, but that this may be amended once the detailed ground levels have been determined. This was the case with PA 12/00534/A, which sought approval in principle to create a builders yard on part of this land and which was approved subject to conditions. It should be noted that condition 5 of that approval did not seek to prevent development from taking place within 25m of the by-pass, it sought to restrict the erection of buildings within that area if they would be occupied for long periods of the day (e.g. offices) and went on to suggest that uses such as storage or parking would be acceptable on that part of the site".

3.3 Additional drawings for 'petrol and oil interceptors' An additional drainage plan (ref; ADR_502-A) was submitted from the applicants which shows the locations of the petrol and oil interceptor. This was circulated to Environmental Protection, and Manx Utilities for comment who confirmed by email 01/08/23 with no objection.

3.4 It is noted the petrol and oil interceptors are only draining the hardstanding areas outside the units and not the unit roofs which is the correct arrangement. The rain water good from the roof are separate drainage.

Planning Policy (Cabinet Office) 4.1 In terms of the issue raised concerning the wording from Area Plan for the South written statement, concerning the development brief for the site and the '25m buffer'. The planning Policy team were asked to provide further clarity to this aspect and is to be read in conjunction with the case officer's report at paragraphs 6.4-6.10 "Siting". In an email from Planning Policy dated 04/08/23 they have provided commentary on the Development Brief for the site and with reference to the quoted figure of '25m of the line of the Ballasalla By-pass' that allows a degree of flexibility in the design of the surrounding lands either side of the bypass.

Manx National Heritage

==== PAGE 6 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  6  of  19

5.1 14/07/13 - further commented on the impacts of poor drainage and silts entering the water course and its impacts under the Wildlife Act and further seeks that the application; "should demonstrate how run off from this proposed development will be dealt with in a manner which will not facilitate the transportation of silt into a freshwater course or onto an ASSI"

Highways 6.1 A query was raised regarding the use of the proposed bypass for bus routes and the proposed layby and associated infrastructure. Richard Webster (Highways) confirmed (by email 14/08/23) that; "when the bypass is completed (waiting for the developer to construct it), then daytime services Monday-Sunday can be split so some go down the A5 and some go down the bypass. Nightime and off-peak services would remain on the A5 as these services are less frequent and need to cover a wider catchment".

Case Officers Conclusion 7.1 Further consultation was had with Government Stakeholders (Danielle McIntosh (Environmental Protection), Aisha Singer (MU Drainage), Sophie Costain (Ecosystems Policy), John Ward (Inland Fisheries)) regarding the SW drainage from the site and any adverse impacts upon the Ronaldsburn Stream, and two further conditions as worded below were suggested and those DEFA stakeholders were in agreement for these conditions to be applied to the application to safe guard the water course and control surface water drainage on and off site. Following this, those stakeholders have confirmed they have no further issues with the application and content with the wording of the proposed conditions (below). It is further noted Malew commissioners do not object (10/07/23) and the application is still recommended for approval subject to the inclusion of the two additional conditions.

o Construction Method Statement Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved a Construction Method Statement (CMS), to be provided to the Department for written approval prior to any works, including clearance and enabling works, taking place. The CMS will need to contain details of controlling any offsite pollution of the Ronaldsburn River, including sediment control measures to prevent any run off from the site during periods of adverse weather/rainfall during the construction process. The works will be carried out in accordance with the approved details. REASON: To prevent any contamination downstream of the Ronaldsburn River.

o Oil/ petrol interceptors Prior to the occupation of any of the units hereby approved, a plan showing details and the location of the petrol and oil interceptors shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details and maintained as such thereafter. REASON: To ensure no site pollution entering the water course.

In terms of IPS - The Derbyhaven Residents Association would not meet the criteria as set out in the 2021- Operational Policy on Interested Person Status.

Original Case officers report below as submitted to Committee.

THE SITE 1.1 The application site is located on the southern side of Ballasalla, between the Balthane Park access road and the by-pass road approved under PA 19/00137/B (which is currently under construction). It has an area of approximately 1.6 ha and is comprised predominantly of

==== PAGE 7 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  7  of  19

the remaining part of field 434090 along with part of field 434089. The site is relatively level and consists largely of bare ground, with a low bank and a row of relatively young trees adjacent to part of the western site boundary. An existing electricity substation is located within the site.

1.2 The existing industrial units and access road within Balthane Park are immediately to the south east of the application site, with a commercial garage/car sales business adjoining the south west site boundary. The northern site boundary follows the line of the by-pass road approved under PA 19/00137/B which is currently under construction.

1.3 The red line which encloses the site on the submitted location plan allows for the provision of a phase of industrial/storage units along with a landscaped "buffer" between the units and the by-pass road. It also allows for the provision of new bus-stop laybys on both sides of the by-pass road. An area of approximately 1 ha immediately to the north east of the proposed units is not included within the application site in this instance; it is reserved for a future phase of industrial development and its development will form the subject of a separate planning application.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application seeks detailed planning approval for a further phase of 45 industrial/storage units (Classes 2.3 & 2.4) at Balthane Park, located on vacant land between the Balthane Park access road and the new by-pass road.

2.2 The proposed buildings will have a total floor area of 5232 sq.m and will be of similar form to the existing phases at Balthane Park, with units arranged in 4 blocks which are separated by access and parking provision. Vehicular access is to be taken from the existing Balthane Park access road.

2.3 A raised landscaped buffer will be created between the proposed units and the by-pass road to the north. Additionally, the application proposals include a landscaping bund between the development and the Ballasalla bypass. Furthermore, there are to be installations of a Toucan crossing, cycle and pedestrian links, plus two bus laybys and associated bus infrastructure on the bypass.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is identified on the Area plan for the South where; half the site is within the land use designation of 'Industry/ business Park' and the other half as 'Proposed Residential, Industrial, Public Open Space, Community Facility' on the Ballasalla Map 4.

3.2 Within the Development / Site Brief 3 for part of this proposed site (starts on page 47) highlights some of the limitations on development here that could be applicable.

3.3 Page 47 of the written statement, references limitations on use to; "Employment uses limited to Class 5 (Research and Development/Light Industrial) and Class 6 (Storage or Distribution) set out in Schedule 4 of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012".

3.4 Page 48, says; "Development will not normally be permitted within 25m of the line of the Ballasalla By-pass as measured from nearest roadside channel (this may be amended once the detailed ground levels have been determined)".

3.5 The site is not within a conservation area, nor are there any registered buildings or registered trees on site.

==== PAGE 8 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  8  of  19

3.6 Within the adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, the following policies are considered to be relevant in the determination of this application:

Strategic Policy 1 Efficient use of land and resources 4b Protection of the landscape and biodiversity 4 (c) No environmental Pollution 5 Design and visual impact 6 Major employment to designated areas 7 Protection of industrial land 10 Sustainable transport

General Policy 2 General Development Considerations (a-n)

Environmental Policy 22 Protection from Statutory nuisances

Business Policy 1 Growth of employment opportunities 2 Provision and regards to Industrial development 5 Limitation on industrial land for storage and distribution and limitation on retail

Transport Policy 1 proximity to existing public transportation services 2 layouts to link to existing systems 4 Highway safety 7 Parking provisions * Appendix 7*

Energy Policy 5 Need for an Energy impact assessment

3.7 Within the strategic plan paragraph 9.2.3 defines industrial buildings as follows; "industrial building" means a building (other than a building in or adjacent to or belonging to a quarry or mine and other than a shop) used for the carrying on of any process, for or incidental to any of the following purposes, namely:- a) the making of any article or of part of any article; or b) the altering, repairing, ornamenting, finishing, cleaning, washing, packing or canning, or adapting for sale, or breaking up or demolition of any article; or c) without prejudice to the foregoing paragraphs, the getting, dressing or treatment of minerals; being a process carried on in the course of trade or business other than agriculture, and for the purposes of this definition the expression "article" means an article of any description, including a ship or vessel.

3.8 Such buildings are sub-divided into light industrial, general industrial and special industrial buildings, each defined as follows:

3.9 The strategic plan defines "general industrial building" means an industrial building other than a light industrial building or a special industrial building;

3.10 "light industrial building" means an industrial building (not being a special industrial building) in which the processes carried on or the machinery installed are such as could be carried on or installed in any residential area without detriment to the amenity of that area by reason of noise, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, soot, ash, dust or grit, or undue generation of traffic or parking of vehicles; the use of light industrial buildings for research and development of products or processes is permitted by the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2005.

==== PAGE 9 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  9  of  19

3.11 "special industrial building" means an industrial building used for the carrying on of processes (including storage) which may be particularly offensive by reason of noise, smell, vibration, smoke, soot, ash, dust, grit, or fumes, or dangerous by reason of the storage or use of dangerous or inflammable material, or inimical to public health by reason of vermin or other causes.

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 12/00534/A - Approval in principle for development of site to create a builders and timber merchant's premises. Approved.

4.2 Land to the south of the site has gained the following approvals for industrial units; 04/00024/B - Development of land to provide 56 Industrial Starter Units including access, parking and landscaping. Approved. At a later date the sizes of the units amended over time in order to meet changing demand under; 12/00062/B - Erection of 20 industrial units (amendment to 04/00024/B) 17/00325/B - Erection of block of 12 industrial units (revision to 12/00062/B) 18/01110/B - Erection of 15 industrial units in two separate blocks. 19/01108/B - Erection of 20 industrial units in three separate blocks. 21/00746/B - Erection of 20 industrial/storage units in two separate blocks

4.3 The land immediately to the north and north east of the application site is currently being developed with a by-pass road, new housing and a neighbourhood centre (PA 19/00137/B, PA 21/00262/B). Recent planning application PA 22/01147/B, which is yet to be determined, proposes 23 dwellings on a site which is a short distance to the north east of the application site.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS (in brief, full reps can be read online) 5.1 Malew Commissioners commented (23/05/23) to object: "The Commissioners are concerned that the proposal is an over intensive development with a reduced buffer zone towards the new housing development and believe that there should be at least a 25m buffer. There are also concerns over the drainage of the site, which has been identified by the DOI as suffering from surface water flooding, it is important that this is dealt with. The Commissioners were led to believe by DOI Transport Division that buses would continue on their current routes and not serve the new by pass and therefore question the addition of these in the application. As acknowledged in the applicants Transport Assessment, there are existing bus stops closer to the application site than the proposed ones".

5.2 Highways Services have commented at length (03/05/23) with no objection; "The proposal is satisfactory in highway terms with suitable accesses and internal layout. There is unlikely to be traffic capacity or road safety issues. There would beneficial gains from new bus, cycle and pedestrian infrastructure along the bypass and at the site frontage to provide linkages and facilities for non-car based travel. Separate agreements are necessary with DOI Highways Services to take forward the proposed new public infrastructure after grant of any planning consent".

5.3 MUA Drainage commented (17/05/23) stating; "Further to the above planning application please be advised that although consultation has taken place to date with the applicant over this development, MU request that the latest surface water calculations are submitted for the development which must demonstrate that the attenuation pond at Reayrt Mie is capable of receiving these flows together with the new and proposed adjacent housing development and existing industrial units. It is known that this surface water network has been modelled by the applicant therefore MU will require this submitted as part of the application. In addition MU will require details of the proposed foul flows into the new pumping station from the similar areas".

==== PAGE 10 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  10  of  19

5.4 DFE Enterprise commented (27/04/23) in support on the merits of the application, confirmed the specifics of the proposal and the wider support for business opportunities for 'start up' opportunities.

5.5 Eco systems Policy officer commented (04/05/23); "The Ecosystem Policy Team can confirm that we are content with the ecological mitigation measures detailed within this application, which includes a low bank with tree, understorey and wildflower planting, the erection of 11 bat boxes and 11 bird boxes and the protection of the hedge in the south west of the site. However, we would request that the bird box types are slightly updated to include boxes suitable for swifts. Should this application be approved we request conditions". As noted on their submission.

5.6 DoI Flood Risk Management (24/04/23); "FRM propose that the buildings are built with flooding in mind and that flood resilient materials are used. The site should be adequately drained".

5.7 34 Alberta Drive commented (24/04/23); "This should application should be rejected without question. Stop destroying the IOM countryside. Leave that area as green space. It is not appropriate to build those kind of units in this location".

6.0 ASSESSMENT Principle Siting Design & Visual Impact Neighbouring amenity Highway Safety Ecology Drainage & Flood Risk

PRINCIPLE 6.1 The application site sits outwith of the defined village of Ballasalla, and could be broadly in accordance with the Area plan for the South (APS) noting half the site is within the land use designation of 'Industry/ business Park' and the other half as 'Proposed Residential, Industrial, Public Open Space, Community Facility' on the "Ballasalla Map 4". The site is further identified for development as Site 3 on the APS and is accompanied with a Development brief (pages 47- 49 of the written statement). The broad principle of the use of the site identified in red for the use of industrial units could be broadly supported in land use terms.

6.2 The Employment Land review in 2015 would be read in accordance with SP6 and BP1 which seeks employment opportunities on zoned land. As the proposal could potentially offer employment opportunities to this area, this aspect would further be compliant through BP1 and is encouraged. The sites proximity to existing industrial units, could allow for labour and on an integrated transport network ensures the use is in accordance with SP6.

6.3 Therefore the principle for development of this site would be acceptable. Where the proposal is read in accordance with the land use designation / area plan, General Policy 2 as noted below narrows the material planning tests with other policies.

SITING 6.4 The siting of the proposals has raised concerns by the Commissions regarding development within 25m of the by-pass. This figure comes from the guidance given in the Development Brief 3 where on Page 48 of the written statement it says at No.3 ; "Industrial development may be permitted on land between Colas Drive and the Ballasalla By-pass route

==== PAGE 11 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  11  of  19

(in fields 434090 and 434089) but applications must demonstrate that the route of the proposed Ballasalla By-pass will not be compromised. Development will not normally be permitted within 25m of the line of the Ballasalla By-pass as measured from nearest roadside channel (this may be amended once the detailed ground levels have been determined)".

6.5 In terms of this, when scaled off the submitted plans the closes part of the proposed buildings (gable ends) would be approx. 12m when scaled of the submitted landscape plans Section. This is significantly less than the 25m quoted figure. However the applicant has noted in their planning statement at para 36;

"The by-pass road is approved and currently under construction, and the drawings submitted with this application demonstrate that the development as now proposed will not compromise the route of the road. DB3 3 goes on to suggest that development will not normally be permitted within 25m of the line of the by-pass, but that this may be amended once the detailed ground levels have been determined. This was the case with PA 12/00534/A, which sought approval in principle to create a builders yard on part of this land and which was approved subject to conditions. It should be noted that condition 5 of that approval did not seek to prevent development from taking place within 25m of the by-pass, it sought to restrict the erection of buildings within that area if they would be occupied for long periods of the day (e.g. offices) and went on to suggest that uses such as storage or parking would be acceptable on that part of the site"... Para 37 "In this instance the proposed units will not be sensitive receptors in terms of traffic noise, and whilst the northern-most units will be within 25m of the by-pass they will be separated from the highway by a raised landscaped buffer which will provide visual and acoustic screening. There is no practical reason why the positioning of the units as proposed would result in unacceptable disturbance to users of either the development or the highway. Amendment of the 25m distance is allowed for in DB3 3, and is acceptable in this instance due to the nature of the proposed industrial/storage uses and the treatment proposed for the roadside buffer".

6.6 In terms of the prescribed distance between the highway and the building, whilst it is less than 25m from the stated figure in the Design Brief, the applicant relies heavily on the previous 2012 approval in principle (12/00534/A) and an interpretation on condition 5. However, this was just in principle and did not proposed any buildings.

6.7 Condition 5 of the approval 12/00534/A noted; "The application for reserved matters must demonstrate that the route of the proposed bypass through the land to the north west will not be compromised. This should be secured through the layout not involving within 25m of the line of the bypass as shown in the Department's submission at the Southern Area Plan Inquiry (PC129 and DOI 30) the erection of buildings or facilities where it is likely that personnel will be stationed for long periods of the day (e.g. offices). This area may be used, inter alia, for storage or car parking".

6.8 This would indicate the reason for the figure of 25m is to prevent any noise nuisance for those working in buildings (e.g. offices- as noted in the condition) and that sufficient distance is allowed so as not to prejudice the route of the then proposed by-pass.

6.9 The issue could still arise where the end units have an office element to the business use and could be inconvenienced by noise from the bypass. One other aspect could be the visual impact of the units being in close proximity to the bypass. Visual impact is assessed separately below.

6.10 Balancing the above narrative, and the ambiguity of the wording of the DB3 "not normally" allows some interpretation but it does seem to allow an element of flexibility and a way to assess the distance requirements on their merits given all proposed layout and design aspects. In looking at this predicament, we now know all the design details for this proposals, the route of the bypass and the residential development opposite that includes the ground

==== PAGE 12 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  12  of  19

levels which were specifically referenced. Given this, there is substantial detailed information to be able to fully assess the impact of and need for a buffer zone/distance between any proposed buildings (for which the use is now be much clearer) and the highway itself, taking into account the need for pavements, services, drainage, landscaping and any other infrastructure.

DESIGN AND VISUAL IMPACT 6.11 The scale of the development would be proportionate to the site and the individual buildings or blocks of buildings have been designed to serve that specific purpose in terms of size, height and appearance.

6.12 The scheme would feature modern commercial buildings designed specifically for an industrial use and finished in a utilitarian appearance to reflect this. The lower proportions of the buildings would be;

o "rendered block construction to lower walls with grey paint finish" and above this,

o "kingspan micro rib profiled pressed metal cladding (to walls) colour - silver (ral 9006)" and "powder-coated pressed trims & flashings colour adventura (ral 7000)" and

o "powder-coated pressed metal rainwater gutters & down pipes colour - adventura (ral 7000)"

o Each unit to its front would have; "powder-coated industrial roller shutter door with integrated pedestrian pass door colour - obsidian (ral9007)"

6.13 This level of finish would be an improvement on the older parts of the industrial units and seeks to ensure the proposed units would be of a higher quality than those existing and surrounding industrial units and would achieve the aim of Landscape proposal 19 from the APS on page 27 where it states;

"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".

As such the proposed buildings and the listed schedule of material finishes would be acceptable in this instance which requires a higher standard of finish and can be conditioned as such.

6.14 Whilst the units would be visible from the bypass and the dwellings to the north, as a reference the difference in level between the crown of the Bypass and the ground level of the site would range between; 450mm (section A-A); 450mm (Section B-B); 200mm (section C-C). The bund between the two parts of the site is shown at 2m high when measured from the site "Yard" and 6m wide of landscaped banking. For reference the buildings measure 6.4m to the ridge.

6.15 From the highway the upper proportions (approx. 4.0m to the ridge or 3.2m to the eaves) would be visible and whilst landscaping with trees (silver Birch and Blackthorn) at a height of 2m-2.5m would not adequately screen the buildings but in time, may (if successful), ameliorate the visual impact, the closeness of the buildings to the highway could be seen by some to have a negative impact. The impact here would be of the gable ends (again maybe only the upper proportions) between the proposed landscaping when passing.

6.16 The spaces between the buildings to the north of the site at the edge of the block paved courtyard has not been identified as how this will be finished but it is assumed it will be left open, where the visual appearance could be of parked cars or HGV's. As such this is not desirable, when viewed from outside of the site. As such as this is not a strong enough reason

==== PAGE 13 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  13  of  19

to refuse the application however a boundary detail plan that shows how this section between the building would be secured off to prevent any access or storage on the landscaped apart of the site. This could be successfully achieved with a blockwork wall and finished to match the lower parts of the buildings to give a uniform appearance, which if high enough (approx. 2.0m) could also help to attain any noise and would be a substantial structure to prevent access and effectively secures this part of the site and assists to screen this part of the site. A suitably worded condition could seek a plan that is submitted to the department prior to the commencement on site. This would also serve to protect the landscaping and prevent any access from within the industrial estate where development creep could occur and be visible from outside of the site.

6.17 On the flip side, when viewed from Balthane Park Industrial Estate, the general appearance would echo that of the existing industrial units to the south and would be read in that context without appearing as an incongruous feature.

6.18 The positioning and layout of the proposed units would be considered to be in keeping with the character and appearance of the wider area, and deemed to be an acceptable form of development that is proportionate to the site that complies with those sections of GP 2(b)&(c).

NEIGHBOURING AMENITY 6.19 The nearest residential dwelling houses are to the north of the site namely, across the Bypass and on the newly constructed residential estate. The nearest property is referenced C32 and would be side onto the application site with no direct views and approx. 60m away. Those properties facing the site as referenced C26-C31 and would be facing the site but approx. 9m away. As such they amenity is not considered to be impacted by the proposal given the intervening distances.

6.20 In terms of use of the units and any statutory nuisances that may arise affecting the residential amenity of those properties opposite it is important to consider the uses are proposed to be Class 2.3 which is General industrial and class 2.4 which is Storage or distribution. As such these uses are not generally known for being noisy and disruptive uses of buildings that could cause a statutory nuisance and then considered to have a detrimental impact upon the residential amenity opposite. In any case conditions can be applied to ensure the use, hours of operation is appropriately managed in this instance.

6.21 Given the intermediate distances, the design, scale and massing of the buildings are not considered to harm the enjoyment of the neighbouring dwelling houses or considered to harm the neighbouring amenity through any overlooking, leading to a loss of privacy or loss of light through the building having an overbearing impact or any considered to harm the residential amenity through the buildings general appearance. This aspect would be considered compliant with those sections of General Policy 2(g) and Environmental Policy 22.

HIGHWAY SAFETY 6.22 Access to the units will be from main Ballasalla round about and into the Balthane Industrial Estate via Balthane Road and onto the (unnamed road) highway that currently serves the existing units to the south of the application site. The four blocks of units will connect onto this highway (unnamed road) by way of 4 no. junctions that provide access to the units car parking and vehicle circulation areas.

6.23 The submitted Road Safety Audit (RSA) and Designers Response follows the UK guidance and best practice which has identified those aspects of a road design, access and landscaping areas of the proposals that could give rise to road safety concerns and, where possible, have suggested modifications that would improve the road safety of the resultant scheme. This has resulted in the proposed scheme. These junctions have been designed in such a way that they will be able to accommodate those movements of articulated / refuse vehicles and would allow enough space when entering or exiting of the site for the individual

==== PAGE 14 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  14  of  19

units with adequate visibility spays of 2.5m x 90m in either direction (This being in excess 2.4 x 43m that is required).

6.24 The comments from the Highways Development Control are heavily relied upon for their technical assessment of the following submitted Transport Assessment and Stage 1 Road Safety Audit. The proposed design would ensure compliance with modern highway standards (Manual for Manx Roads) that will provide an efficient and safe junctions for all users.

6.25 As part of the proposal is to construct a toucan crossing, cycle and pedestrian links from the residential areas to the industrial units, plus two bus laybys serving either side of the highway/ new bypass with their associated bus infrastructure.

6.26 The bus layby would enable an alternate bus service pattern between Douglas, Ballasalla, airport and beyond and with the Toucan crossing of the bypass seeks to link the housing and commercial sites on each side of the bypass. Whilst the comments from the commissioners on the bus routes on the bypass are noted, the DoI do not object to this and the design of using a Toucan crossing and two bus laybys on the Bypass has been subject to a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit in accordance with the guidance in MfMR. The installations of a Toucan crossing and associated bus infrastructure on the bypass, have already been designed in accordance with and received the technical approval from the DOI Highway Services and would be acceptable.

6.27 The inclusion of the bus layby and pedestrian crossing would ensure the two sites are better connected and more accessible to users of non-car modes. Pedestrian access from the by-pass to the site could be achieved via the proposed 3m wide link cycle/footpath between the respective developments. This provision of the new footways with shared cycle and pedestrian routes crossing the bypass will ensure better connectivity and would help meet Transport Policies 1 and 2 of the IOM Strategic Plan and Government's Active Travel and Net Zero objectives.

6.28 In terms of parking provision, the proposed development will provide 124 external parking spaces, which satisfies the IoMSP standard for industrial development (5232 sq.m of total floor area, 1 space per 50 sq.m). Storage and distribution uses require 1 space per 100 sq.m (as noted in Appendix 7 of the IoMSP) and as such the use of any units for storage purposes would not result in inadequate parking provision. This is further echoed by Highways Services who note; "The parking provision is more than adequate and unlikely to give rise to overspill. Additionally, extra spaces would allow for mobility impaired and van parking as and when required". Additionally the utility services for the development have been designed to facilitate the provision of EV charging points to each unit where required, and the development allows for secure cycle storage in the form internal wall mounted type storage which is to be positioned within the units.

6.29 From a planning perspective and having considered the highways safety aspect and the use of the proposed accesses in a safe and appropriate manner, it would not be considered to have any adverse impact on the wider existing highway or upon those users entering and exiting the site. As such the proposal would be considered to align with the principles of Gp2 h&I and TP1,2,4,7 and SP10 and the relevant design guides (MfMR) and best practice guidance.

ECOLOGY 6.30 In terms of the proposals, it is important to note the comments from the ecosystems policy team and that they; "are content with the ecological mitigation measures detailed within this application, which includes a low bank with tree, understorey and wildflower planting, the erection of 11 bat boxes and 11 bird boxes and the protection of the hedge in the south west of the site"... "However, we would request that the bird box types are slightly updated to include boxes suitable for swifts". Their general support on this application is welcomed and they have

==== PAGE 15 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  15  of  19

suggested a number of conditions to secure the proposed planting; bird and bat boxes; tree and hedge protection; No exterior lighting; site containment measures to prevent any pollution of the surrounding habitats.

6.31 For future reference they also note; "We also note that there is an area of land immediately to the east marked as a 'future development phase subject to separate planning application'. We would like to recommend to the applicants that as well as the continuation of tree and understory planting to the north of any development, additionally tree planting should be considered in the location highlighted in green to the west of the future development site". As this is outside of the application site, it would be for the next application to have consideration to this but is noted here for future reference.

6.32 On balance, the proposed landscaping element do provide the required density and diversity to make an effective screen and wildlife corridor on this part of the site (north) as noted in the planting schedule and would be seen to comply with the aforementioned conditions proposed by Ecology would be acceptable in this instance and would comply with STP4b&c.

DRAINAGE & FLOOD RISK 6.33 The site has been prepared as part of the wider development of the residential development and the Ballasalla bypass, the capacity for drainage (foul and surface water) has been accounted for and demonstrated though

6.34 The proposed surface water from the roofs will be taken into the existing surface water sewer which runs the length of the existing Balthane Park estate road. A separate system picks up flows from each of the car park areas, which will pass through a petrol/oil separator before connecting to the proposed drainage system. The existing surface water sewer beneath the Balthane Park access road has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed flows, which will be taken to the existing attenuation basin to the east of the application site. This attenuation area has been sized to accommodate surface water flows from the residential uses, industrial uses, and the by-pass road which constitute the overall development.

6.35 In terms of foul effluent, each of the units will have foul connection that will connect into the existing foul sewer within the Balthane Park. The existing system drains into the recently built Balthane Park pumping station, which has been designed to accommodate the flows from the proposed industrial development. As such these surface water and foul drainage aspects would be acceptable.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 For the above reasons, it is concluded that the planning application would not harm the use and enjoyment of neighbouring properties or the highway network and would comply with aforementioned planning policies of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, and is recommended for approval.

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:

==== PAGE 16 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  16  of  19

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 6(4) who should be given Interested Person Status.

The following paragraph should be included if relevant (i.e. if representation from another part of DEFA):

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 Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to the it by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.

Decision Made : ...Permitted... Committee Meeting Date:...21.08.2023

Signed :...J SINGLETON... 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.

==== PAGE 17 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  17  of  19

PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 21.08.2023

PA No 23/00168/B Applicant Dandara Commercial Limited Proposal Erection of 45 industrial/storage & distribution units in four separate blocks Site Address Vacant Land Between Balthane Park Industrial Estate And New By-Pass Road Douglas Road Ballasalla Isle Of Man Senior Planning Officer Mr Jason Singleton Presenting Officer As above - Addendum to the Officer Report

Addendum PC SITTING 10th JULY 2023 1.1 Following the committee meeting of 10 July 2023, the application was deferred for a site visit and to seek additional information that was raised by a late representation from the Derby Haven Residents association regarding drainage from the application site and potential pollution of Derbyhaven Bay that is a SSSI and protected.

Further information has been received since the initial committee meeting to address those concerns and have been updated online (only brief summaries contained below).

==== PAGE 18 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  18  of  19

stream and its wider impact upon Derbyhaven bay (ASSI). They question the effectiveness of the current silt prevention procedures and seek greater controls as a preventative measure.

Manx National Heritage 5.1 14/07/13 - further commented on the impacts of poor drainage and silts entering the water course and its impacts under the Wildlife Act and further seeks that the application; "should demonstrate how run off from this proposed development will be dealt with in a manner which will not facilitate the transportation of silt into a freshwater course or onto an ASSI"

Highways 6.1 A query was raised regarding the use of the proposed bypass for bus routes and the proposed layby and associated infrastructure. Richard Webster (Highways) confirmed (by email

==== PAGE 19 ====

                                      23/00168/B                                     Page  19  of  19

14/08/23) that; "when the bypass is completed (waiting for the developer to construct it), then daytime services Monday-Sunday can be split so some go down the A5 and some go down the bypass. Nightime and off-peak services would remain on the A5 as these services are less frequent and need to cover a wider catchment".

In terms of IPS - The Derbyhaven Residents Association would not meet the criteria as set out in the 2021- Operational Policy on Interested Person Status.

SUBSEQUENT CONSIDERATION

At the committee meeting of 21 August 2023, the application was approved with an amendment sought to condition 15 to be more specific with regards to the form of boundary treatment to the north of the parking area to infill between the space buildings. Members felt this should be more permanent that would prevent any tampering or removal of section to act a short cut and a suitable boundary treatment that could offer some noise attenuating.

Condition 15 amended to say; Prior to the commencement of development a boundary plan showing details of a masonry constructed wall to screen how the open spaces to the front of the parking (north) is to be secured between the buildings, shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.

Two additional conditions to be added as per the addendum report following consultation with government stakeholders and agreed by Committee.