DEC Officer Report

Application No.: 19/00427/B Applicant: Manx Utilities Authority Proposal: Alterations, replacement Sewage Treatment Works and construction of a replacement bridge Site Address: Ballaugh Sewage Treatment Works Dollagh Ballaugh Isle of Man IM7 5AS Head of Development Management: Mr S Butler Expected Decision Level: Planning Committee Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 22.07.2019 _________________________________________________________________

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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

• C 2. No tree shown as being retained on the approved drawing, 113-rev03 shall be cut down, uprooted, destroyed, cut or damaged in any manner during the development phase and thereafter within 5 years from the date that the new sewage treatment works is operational. In the event that retained trees become damaged or otherwise defective during the construction phase due to events outside of the applicant's control the Department shall be notified as soon as reasonably practicable and remedial action agreed and implemented.

Reason: To ensure that trees marked for retention are not removed, in the interests of maintaining the amenities of the area and to ensure the visual impact of the development is mitigated.

• C 3. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved an arboricultural method statement, prepared in accordance with the recommendations of British Standard BS5837:2012 (Trees in relation to Design, Demolition and Construction -Recommendations) shall be submitted and agreed in writing by the Department. The development must be carried out in accordance with the approved details. No alterations or variations to the approved tree protection scheme or working methods shall be made without prior written consent of the Department.

• Reason: To provide the additional detail required to provide a high level of confidence in the protection of retained trees and landscaped planting areas and to ensure that the approved development is implemented in accordance with these approved details.
• C 4. Unless otherwise required by details approved under condition 5, soil amelioration and replacement tree planting shall be carried out in accordance with the approved landscape plan, drawing 135-rev03. The planting shall be carried out in the first planting season following the completion of the development. Any trees which, within a period of 5 years from their planting, die, are removed, or, in the opinion of the Department, become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced as is reasonably practicable or in the next planting season with others of similar size, species and number as originally approved, unless the Department gives written consent to any variation.

Reason: To ensure that replacement tree planting takes place to mitigate the tree removal required to facilitate the development.

• C 5. The arboricultural method statement referred to in condition 3 shall include measures to protect bats and birds (including timing and duration of tree removal works, and the use of soft felling, avoidance of works outside of the months of September and October and the presence of an Ecological Clerk of Works present on site to supervise the works) and mitigation measures for the loss of any roost or nesting features.

Reason: To ensure no unacceptable impact on protected species, in particular the potential to disturb potential bat maternity roosts and nesting birds

• C 6. No works shall take place within 9 metres of a watercourse unless they are in accordance with a method statement which has first been approved in writing by the Department, and such a statement shall include details of the timing of the works.

Reason: It is important that any works to the watercourse do not have an unacceptable impact on aquatic habitats. The preferred times for works is between 1st July and 20th September, however if such works also include works to trees the requirements of condition 5 are relevant.

• C 7. No temporary works shall be carried out on the site (including access road, temporary bridge or works compound) unless the details (including lighting, duration and measures for removal/reinstatement) have first been approved in writing by the Department and the works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: The application will involve temporary works which would not be allowed under the Temporary Uses Development Order and the application has limited details of these.

• C 8. The development hereby approved shall not commence unless a method statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department which sets out how the waste generated from the site will be dealt with. The development shall take place in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that waste from the site is properly dealt with.
• C 9. The development hereby approved shall only be lit in emergencies or during maintenance works, unless otherwise approved under condition 8. Reason: To avoid light pollution Plans/Drawings/Information:

This approval relates to the following plans/drawings/information (all date stamped as having been received 09.04.19 unless indicated below):

• o Cover letter (including statement in support of planning application)
• o Form, "Development within 9m of a watercourse"
• o Flood Risk Assessment
• o Site Location Plan Ownership (Drawing No. 100, Revision 01)
• o Site Location Plan (Drawing No. 101, Revision 02)
• o Existing Topographical Survey Plan (Drawing No. 102, Revision 01)
• o Existing Sections (Drawing No. 104, Revision 01)
• o Proposed Site Layout (Drawing No. 110, Revision 02)
• o Proposed Detailed Site Plan (Drawing No. 111, Revision 01)
• o Proposed Detailed Sections (Drawing No. 112, Revision 01)
• o Proposed Tree Clearance and Tree Protection Plan (Drawing No. 113, Revision 03) (date stamped as having been received 09/07/19)
• o Proposed Outfalls at Stream (Drawing No. 117, Revision 01)
• o Flood Maps (Drawing No. 118, Revision 01)
• o Existing Ballacooiley Bridge (Drawing No. 130, Revision 01)
• o Replacement Ballacooiley Bridge (Drawing No. 131, Revision 01)
• o Proposed Landscape Plan (Drawing No 135, Revision 03) (date stamped as having been received 09/07/19)
• o Amended Tree Clearance and Tree Protection Plan (Drawing No. 113 REV 03) and Proposed Landscape Plan (Drawing No. 135 REV 03)
• o E-mails from Arcadis dated 05/12/19 (12:10), 26/04/19 (15:50) and 01/07/19 (14:06) (all received 09/07/19)
• o Business Case in Support of the Replacement and/or Refurbishment of Six Manx Utilities Rural Sewage Treatment Works Facilities (dated stamped as having been received 09/07/19)
• o Regional Sewage Treatment Strategy (RSTS) Integrated RBCs - Ballaugh (dated stamped as having been received 09/07/19) _______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

THE APPLICATION IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE COMMITTEE AS IT IS A DEPARTURE FROM THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL, AND ALSO BECAUSE IT IS ACCOMPANIED BY AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The existing Sewage Treatment Works occupies the majority of the site, which operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. It includes a pumping station, two settling tanks, three filter beds and a sludge holding tank. The site includes areas of grass, tarmac and gravel. Access to the site is via the Ballaugh Glen Road, which links to the Cronk Road and crosses the Ballaugh River just upstream of the site. The site is approximately 0.25 hectares in size. The surrounding area is used for agricultural purposes. The hamlet of Dollagh is nearby whilst Ballaugh is located approximately 400m to the South.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Manx Utilities have applied for full approval to build a sewage works, to replace the existing works. This is required to meet new environmental regulations. A replacement bridge will also be required to provide access (although the proposal does not involve the creation/alteration of an access to a highway. There will still be one parking space.

2.2 The applicant's supporting statement indicates that:

• o The sewage catchment comprises small housing developments to the North of the A3 and a number of single swellings
• o Most of the catchment drains by gravity to the existing Sewage Treatment Works (STW)
• o The catchment is a combined catchment and therefore the STW has to cope with the combined surface water and sewage drainage flows
• o Ballaugh has been identified in the Strategic Plan as a location for potential additional growth.

2.3 The statement indicates that the current STW:

• o Is believed to have been constructed in the 1960s
• o Does not have any storm water holding facilities and so regularly allows untreated flows to outfall into the river
• o Fails to achieve the Licence to Discharge standard
• o Does not provide enough biological treatment to assure compliance with the Ammonia Standard
• o Has a settlement tank which is too small
• o Would fail future requirements

2.4 The statement indicates that a feasibility assessment has been carried out which indicates that the best option is to demolish the existing STW and build a new STW on the same site. - 2.5 The statement indicates that the main elements of the scheme are:

• o Two rotating biological contractor unites (RBC) to achieve the new environmental standards
• o Underground pumping station to lift flows to the new RBC units
• o New site roads, drainage, kiosks for electrical controls and ancillary works
• o A new bridge over the Ballaugh River with a higher soffit level
• o Tree clearance for the new site layout and a new tree planting and landscaping scheme

2.6 The EIA (see below) confirms that demolition of above ground infrastructure would be carried out to a minimum of 1m below the existing ground level. The new STW would be built on a platform constructed from 20 to 21 AOD. There would be rigid green mesh panel site fencing. It would include an odour control unit. There would be a temporary construction compound (to be determined but anticipated to be located east of the Ballaugh stream) and temporary bridge and approach roads (to be designed by the contractor). - 2.7 Construction is to take place 07.00 to 19.00 Monday to Friday and 0.800 to 13.00 on Saturday. Not on Sundays or Public Holidays. Works would involve the construction of a temporary access road, bridge and compound. No details are included of the temporary works as a contractor has not yet been appointed (although the applicant confirmed by phone-call on 22/07/19 that all works would be within the redline boundary). - 2.8 The application is accompanied by a Flood Risk Assessment. This indicates that the site has experienced flooding in the past as a result of the Ballaugh River, which is located on the east site boundary. The National Strategy on Sea Defences, Flooding and Coastal Erosion identifies the area to be at risk from fluvial flooding. It identifies the replacement of the STW as an opportunity to minimise any potential damage should the site flood again. IT makes the following conclusions:

• o A key feature of the proposed design is to widen the STW site access bridge. The results of the flood modelling work undertaken showed that flood risk upstream and ot the West of the site would potentially be reduced, whilst flood risk downstream would be increased by up to 30mm.

• o The buildings are flood free with sufficient freeboard therefore flood risk at the site is considered acceptable.
• o There are potential third-party flood risk impacts resulting from the proposed works, however they do not affect any properties and Manx Utilities will be discussing the offsite impacts with the local landowners
• o There is no safe access and egress possible to the site during flood events, further work would be required to determine the potential frequency of flooding.
• o They would recommend that all users of the site are made aware of the potential flood risk and no personnel should access the site in times of flood risk.
• o Manx Utilities have indicated that they feel the increase in flood risk off-site only affects
• open fields and is considered to be acceptable, and there is limited scope to mitigate third party flood risk on the site.

2.9 The application is accompanied by an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The EIA includes an Executive Summary. It indicates that a scoping report was produced and resulted in the EIA focusing on: Noise and Vibration Assessment; Cultural Heritage and Archaeological desk top review; Plans & Policies and Ecology - Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (prepared by MWT). It indicates that a separate Arboricultural Impact Assessment, Tree Protection Plan and Arboricultural Method Statement have been prepared to accompany the planning application. The conclusions are summarised below.

• o In relation to noise it concludes that operational noise generated by the proposed new plant, given the existing baseline conditions, would not be detrimental.
• o No built heritage or archaeological assets have been identified within the Development Site and "Manx Heritage Trust" have advised that no archaeological mitigation would be required on the basis that any disturbance to previously disturbed ground would be minimal.
• o The relevant Strategic Plan policies would be complied with and appropriate mitigation measures have been put in place.
• o An extended phase 1 habitat survey was undertaken on 26.06.18 with further survey work to assess trees for bat roosts on 30.09.18. The building on the site was assessed as having negligible potential for bats but some of the trees had potential and one bat roost was identified. A bat box is proposed and further boxes recommended. Works within the river would require a method statement. Pre-commencement nesting bird check would be undertaken for any vegetation clearance.

2.10 The EIA indicates that they have consulted with various bodies including DEFA, Manx National Heritage and the Manx Wildlife Trust. - 2.11 The application is accompanied by a completed development within 9m of a watercourse form which clarifies that the alignment and profile of the watercourse is not being amended, but there will be two new outfalls one built into the crib walling of the river bank one for land drainage and one for the outfall of cleaned effluent. Any fuels or lubricants are to be stored within bunded containers at the site compound. There will be a contractual ban on the disposal of washings o the watercourse. - 2.12 In response to queries raised by the Case Officer and consultees (Environmental Protection and Trees), the applicant provided the following additional/amended information:

• o E-mail correspondence from April 2018 with DEFA environmental health relating to the methodology for the noise assessment
• o E-mail (05/12/19) setting out actions from a pre-planning meeting - this appears to be an internal e-mail and was not copied to DEFA P&BC
• o E-mail (03/07/19) setting out response to queries from DEFA Environmental Protection in relation to waste volumes/types/disposal E-mail (01/07/19) setting out response to queries from Case Officer - including providing consideration of landscape impact (which highlights the benefit of additional planting to minimising impact), odour assessment (which indicates that given the technology to be used a detailed assessment is not considered to be required), further justification in terms of flooding

• and confirmation that the temporary works would need to be covered by a condition attached to the planning approval
• o Copy of Business Case in support of the Replacement and/or Refurbishment of Six Manx Utilities Rural Sewage Treatment Works Facilities (August 2015) and Regional Sewage Treatment Strategy (RSTS) Integrated RBCs - Ballaugh (September 2015)
• o Amended Tree Clearance and Tree Protection Plan (Drawing No. 113 REV 03) and Proposed Landscape Plan (Drawing No. 135 REV 03)

3.0 PLANNING POLICIES - 3.1 The site is within an area covered by the 1982 Development Plan. It is an area not designated for development, an Area of Private Woodland or Parkland and an Area of High Landscaping or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance. - 3.2 The following policies of the Strategic Plan are relevant:

• o Strategic Policy 1 - optimising use of previously developed land
• o Spatial Policy 4 directs new housing (to meet local needs) and limited employment
• opportunities to villages, including Ballaugh.
• o General Policy 2 sets out broad 'Development Control' considerations, including in relation to: Not adversely affecting landscape, wildlife or watercourses, Incorporating trees where possible, Not affecting the amenity of local residents, Not having an unacceptable impact on road safety and Not being at an unreasonable risk of flooding
• o General Policy 3 indicates developments within the countryside will only be approved in exceptional circumstances, including previously developed land with a significant amount of buildings, where the continued use is redundant and where redevelopment would reduce the wider environmental impact and/or where the development is of overriding national need in land use planning terms and there is no reasonable or acceptable alternative.
• o Environment Policies 1 and 2 protect the countryside and landscape,
• o Environment Policy 3 protects woodland
• o Environment Policies 4 and 5 relate to protected species
• o Environment Policy 7 relates to water courses
• o Environment Policies 10 and 13 relate to flooding.
• o Environment Policy 22 deals with vibration, odour, noise and light pollution
• o Environment Policy 26 deals with the remediation of contaminated land/sites
• o Environment Polices 40 and 41 deal with Archaeology

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 4.1 No relevant applications identified.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 Ballaugh Parish Commissioners (09.05.19) confirmed that they had no objections. - 5.2 DEFA Arboricultural Officer raised four initial concerns and on 07.05.19 provided further comments, as summarised below.

• 1. A lack of information on the temporary bridge Following a site visit with the agent I am now optimistic this can be built without having a detrimental impact on the trees. The detail is still lacking, however, and this is something that could be addressed through a condition, although I haven't made any specific recommendations relating to this (see below). DEFA Fisheries officers may be interested as this will obviously require some work in the river.
• 2. A lack of detail on location and specification of protective fencing to be used around perimeter of CEZs As discussed in the email below, the additional detail required here can be addressed through a condition
• 3. Species choices/planting densities and lack of detail on nursery specifications and planting specifications in the landscaping plan The amended landscaping plan addresses my concerns - Has this been formally submitted?

• 4. Other trees inside the site which are due to be removed under a Tree Preservation Act licence are not shown on drawing 113 - this is important background information for the assessing officer. The amended tree removal plan addresses this. If this application is approved I recommend you consider applying the following conditions:

No tree shown as being retained on the approved drawing, 113-rev03 shall be cut down, uprooted, destroyed, cut or damaged in any manner during the development phase and thereafter within 5 years from the date that the new sewage treatment works is operational. In the event that retained trees become damaged or otherwise defective during the construction phase due to events outside of the applicant's control the Department shall be notified as soon as reasonably practicable and remedial action agreed and implemented. Reason: To ensure that trees marked for retention are not removed, in the interests maintaining the amenities of the area and to ensure the visual impact of the development is mitigated.

Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved an arboricultural method statement, prepared in accordance with the recommendations of British Standard BS5837:2012 (Trees in relation to Design, Demolition and Construction -Recommendations) shall be submitted and agreed in writing by the Department. The development must be carried out in accordance with the approved details. No alterations or variations to the approved tree protection scheme or working methods shall be made without prior written consent of the Department. Reason: To provide the additional detail required to provide a high level of confidence in the protection of retained trees and landscaped planting areas and to ensure that the approved development is implemented in accordance with these approved details.

Soil amelioration and replacement tree planting shall be carried out in accordance with the approved landscape plan, drawing 135-rev03. The planting shall be carried out in the first planting season following the completion of the development. Any trees which, within a period of 5 years from their planting, die, are removed, or, in the opinion of the Department, become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced as is reasonably practicable or in the next planting season with others of similar size, species and number as originally approved, unless the Department gives written consent to any variation. Reason: to ensure that replacement tree planting takes place to mitigate the tree removal required to facilitate the development.

5.3 DEFA Ecology (03.05.19) noted the information provided with the application and the provisions of the Wildlife Act 1990. They note the trees proposed for removal may have value for wildlife and request condition that a method statement for tree removal (timing of works, duration and precautions to protect bats and birds as well as mitigation measures for the loss of roost/nesting features. Tree works should be undertaken in September/October to avoid disturbing potential bat maternity roosts and nesting birds. Trees must be soft felled with an Ecological Clerk of Works present to supervise the works.

5.4 DEFA Fisheries (24.05.19) asked to make sure a copy of the 9m from watercourse form was on the file and to request a method statement at least 2 weeks before works begin and that the works are carried out between 1st July and 20th September. - 5.5 DEFA Pollution Control (28.06.19) indicate that the applicant provides insufficient information in relation to decommissioning and management of waste and asks for further information. - 5.6 DOI Highways (19.06.19) state, "The site is accessed via a private road off the adopted A10. The new site access, the temporary bridge, temporary approach road and the proposed

• replacement bridge would all be constructed on unadopted land that should not affect the public highway. There is no information in the application on the proposed site traffic and parking demand but it is anticipated to be similar to the current facility. As the site is adjacent to the A10 a construction management plan should not be required to mitigate the impact of construction traffic on the public highway network, but the applicant is requested to discuss any traffic issues that would arise from the construction works with Highway Services well in advance. Highway Services does not oppose the application".
• 5.7 DEFA Environmental Health, and DOI Waste Management, have all been consulted and made no comments.

- 6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 Overview

• 6.1.1 The application included an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The quality of this and omissions within it are disappointing. Additional information has been provided, however it reduces the helpfulness of an EIA to have to rely on separate/additional information as an EIA is intended to provide a holistic assessment with the information presented in a way to be accessible to stakeholders. However, on balance it is considered that there is sufficient information to determine the application.
• 6.1.2 It is considered that the main issues are:

• o Principle of Development (StP1, SP4, GP3, EP1);
• o Local Amenity (Noise, Smell, Light) (GP2, EP22);
• o Highway Safety (GP2);
• o Remediation (EP22);
• o Flooding (GP2, EP10 and 13);
• o Landscape (GP2, EP2) and Trees (GP2, EP3);
• o Protected Species (GP2, EP4 and 5) and Watercourses (GP2, EP7); and
• o Archaeology (EP40 and 41).

6.2 Principle of Development (StP1, SP4, GP3, EP1)

• 6.2.1 The site is not designated for development, however it is currently in use as a sewage works and this is an important material consideration. The redevelopment of this site for a continuation of this site but with a more modern facility which is more effective will have no net impact on the use of land within the countryside for development. The applicant has provided some information to demonstrate why the development is required and why the redevelopment of the site is the most appropriate solution. It is therefore considered that the proposal complies with General Policy 3g).

6.3 Local Amenity (Noise, Smell, Light) (GP2, EP22)

• 6.3.1 Given the existing use, it is considered that the proposal is likely to provide a net benefit. The applicant has confirmed that the site will only lit for emergencies/maintenance and a condition could be imposed to ensure that this is the case.

6.4 Highway Safety (GP2)

• 6.4.1 It is noted that DOI Highways are relied upon and, on that basis, it is considered that there is no unacceptable impact.

6.5 Remediation (EP22)

• 6.5.1 DEFA EPU requested additional information about waste, which has been supplied. No further comments have been received at the time of writing. It is considered that the works are capable of being carried out in an acceptable manner however, given the lack of detailed information provided, a condition could be imposed requiring a working plan.

6.6 Flooding (GP2, EP10 and 13)

• 6.6.1 The works will reduce the likelihood of the existing site being damaged or its operation hampered by flooding. There is a small increase in off-site flooding, but this is in relation to agricultural land and minor. It is therefore considered that the flooding impacts are not unacceptable.

6.7 Landscape (GP2, EP2) and Trees (GP2, EP3)

• 6.7.1 Given the location of the site, it is important that adequate landscaping is retained/provided to avoid an unacceptable impact on the wider countryside/landscape. The detailed input of the DEFA Arboricultural Officer is noted and welcomed. This has resulted in amended plans and the suggested conditions are noted. On balance it is considered that the proposal will not have an unacceptable impact in this regard.

6.7 Protected Species (GP2, EP4 and 5) and Watercourses (GP2, EP7)

6.7.1 The comments from DEFA Ecology are noted, including the suggestion for a condition.

• 6.7.2 The comments from DEFA Fisheries are noted. A 9m Watercourse form has been supplied and is included with the application details. The suggestions that a method statement be supplied and that the works are carried out between 1st July and 20th September are noted.

6.8 Archaeology (EP40 and 41)

• 6.8.1 It is considered that the application contains sufficient information to demonstrate that archaeology has been considered and there will be no unacceptable impacts. It is not considered that any conditions are necessary.

7.0 CONCLUSION - 7.1 The principle of the development is welcomed, as it reuses an existing site and will increase in the effectiveness of a vital element of infrastructure whilst also, once in operation, reduce the potential for wider environmental/amenity impacts. There are some areas where further detail is required and it is considered that this can be addressed by condition. Therefore the application is supported.

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:

• 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.

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 confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.

Decision Made : Permitted Committee Meeting Date: 29.07.2019 Signed : Mr S Butler Presenting Officer Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required. Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO

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.