9.7

LR) to give a revised target of 12.65ha. As 2.88ha of employment land has been developed since 2014, the outstanding requirement is for sufficient land to be available to meet a residual target of 9.77ha by 2026.

78 Employment Proposal 2 of the draft Area Plan indicates that the development of designated industrial land within existing settlement boundaries could contribute about 7.1ha toward meeting this target. In addition, Employment Proposal 3 of the draft Area Plan provides for the allocation of Site BE002a (south of Cooil Road) for employment development. This undeveloped site, which lies outside the existing settlement boundary, has a gross area of more than 9ha, and could contribute about 5.2ha net to meeting the residual employment land target. Furthermore, Employment Proposal 4 of the draft Area Plan, would designate Sites BE002b and BE006 as a Strategic Reserve for employment development. This undeveloped land, to the south of Cooil Road and north of New Castletown Road, has a gross area of almost 29ha.

79 The ELR also recommended that provision should be made for the development of a new Technology Park, which would be additional to the base requirement for employment land. The draft Area Plan allocates a site of 5.31ha for this purpose on Site DE004, at Sangster's Field, Douglas.

The Case for Eden Park Developments Ltd

80 Eden Park Developments Ltd challenged the adequacy of the employment land provision in the draft Area Plan. They owned existing employment land to the south of Cooil Road, together with the whole of Site BE002. They had received firm enquiries from a variety of prospective users of their land, who would jointly require some 9ha gross. These proposed developments would include a second phase of Jackson's existing multi-franchise car dealership (1.32ha); a second phase of the existing Eden Park light industrial units (1.71ha); an additional warehouse for Robinson's fruit and vegetable packaging business (0.69ha); a high quality manufacturing facility (1.2ha); a new HQ for Hartford Homes/Eden Park Developments Ltd (0.53ha); a private medical cluster (1.33ha); and a corporate office facility (1.35ha).

81 In 2018, Eden Park Developments commissioned GL Hearn to reassess the Island's employment land requirement. GL Hearn concluded that the ELR had significantly underestimated the need for additional employment land for several reasons. First, it had covered too short a period. A span of 15 to 20 years was generally considered to be an appropriate timeframe for planning purposes. Therefore, ideally the ELR should have covered a longer period, up to 2034.

82 Second, in estimating the future number of office jobs, the ELR had adopted the 'realistic scenario' used in the Government's Vision 2020 forecast, which postulated annual growth of 0.7% to 1.0%. However, the long term annual growth rate in the number of jobs in the Isle of Man had been 1.1% averaged over the 65 years between 1951 and 2016. Between 1991 and 2011, jobs had increased by an average of 1.5% per annum. It appeared that the growth rate used in the ELR had focussed too strongly on short-term trends in the wake of the global financial crisis of 2008. The consequent recession had unnecessarily been projected forward into the 2020s.

83 Third, the ELR assumed that 75% of future office development would be in Douglas town centre. However, the supply of sites there would be insufficient to meet 75% of the predicted demand. Much of the existing vacant office floor space in central Douglas was in older premises, of a relatively poor quality, and unattractive to potential users. The rental value of office buildings in Douglas would be insufficient to make the redevelopment of existing outworn office space commercially attractive. By contrast, there was a strong demand for the provision of modern office facilities on out-of-centre business parks, in attractive environments, with adequate parking space.

84 Fourth, the updated ELR appeared to have made no provision for inward investment, which in the past had made a substantial contribution to the Island's economy and employment growth. A suitable allowance should be made for this to continue.

85 GL Hearn's conclusion was that there would be a requirement for at least 16.5ha of employment land in the East, between 2014 and 2026 (as compared to the 8.43ha forecast in the ELR). However, 16.5ha should be treated as a minimum figure. A further 5-year's supply (10.6ha) should be added, to provide for market competition and flexibility. That would bring the total requirement to about 27ha. Eden Park Developments concluded that Sites BE002b and BE006 should be allocated for immediate development for employment purposes, rather than kept back as a Strategic Reserve for future employment use.

The Case for Peel Land

86 Similarly Peel Land challenged the adequacy of the provision of employment land proposed in the draft Area Plan. They are the owners of part of Site BE006, measuring about 6.7ha. They had commissioned consultants Hatch Regeneris to review