Inspector's Report

Report by Mrs Jennifer Vyse DipTP, MRTPI, DipPBM Following an Inquiry into a Third Party Planning Appeal Site Inspection carried out on 23 September 2024 Inquiry held on 25 September 2024 _________________________________________________________

Appeal Ref: AP24/0013 Planning Application: 22/01134/A The appeal is made by the Patrick Parish Commissioners against the decision of the Planning Authority to grant approval in principle to Yorkfields Limited for residential development on Field 333135, part 334998 and part 335000, opposite Springfield Terrace, Foxdale IM4 3HG.

Procedural Matters

• 1. The red line application site boundary overlaps part of the adjacent cattery car park. As such, the applicant may not have legal control over that part of the site. Whilst that may have implications for implementation were the approval to be upheld, my recommendation is based only on the planning merits of the case. I am mindful in this regard, that development of the site for residential purposes is not reliant on any part of the adjacent car park.

DESCRIPTION

• 2. The roughly triangular appeal site, which extends to around 1.98 hectares (5 acres) lies on the southern side of the A24, opposite a row of properties known as Springfield Terrace. Ground levels within the site, which is covered with scrub vegetation, rise from the road boundary towards the south. A residential property, Kiondhooag, adjoins the southwestern corner of the site. A small watercourse runs along the road boundary, flowing from east to west.
• 3. Lower land to the west is covered in similar scrub vegetation. To the east is a small parking area for the cattery opposite. Beyond that parking area is an area known locally as The Deads, which has recently been reclaimed as open space in conjunction with the reclamation of further land to the east, which is now a residential property, Louisa House.
• 4. In 2014, approval in principle was granted on the current appeal site for residential development of the land, with all matters other than access reserved for future consideration.1 A 2016 permission extended the period for submission of the reserved matters to 5 September 2018.2 Both permissions have since expired without being implemented.
• 5. The current scheme relates to the same site and again sought approval in principle for residential development, but with all matters reserved for future consideration. Permission was granted subject to an Agreement under the provisions of Section 13 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999, which secured the provision of public open spaces and/or children’s play area, together with 25% affordable housing units.

• 1 PA14/00295/A
• 2 PA16/00751/B

6. The application site boundary, together with other land under the control ofthe applicant edged blue, is shown on Dwg No 3038/20 – 001 Location andSite Plan.

PLANNING POLICY AND GUIDANCE Foxdale Local Plan 1999

7. With the exception of a very small sliver of land in the northeastern corner ofthe site, the appeal site forms part of Development Area 3 as defined by theLocal Plan, which is identified for Predominantly Residential use in accordancewith the stipulated development brief. Much of the brief set out in the Planrelates to matters that would be dealt with via any future reserved matters(or detailed) application.3 The land to the west of the site also forms part ofDevelopment Area 3 and is zoned for Predominantly Residential development,with land beyond that allocated for light industrial purposes.

Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016)

8. A raft of policies is set out in the officer’s report. The most relevant, to mymind, is Spatial Policy 3 which identifies Foxdale as one of a number ofService Villages. Among other things, the policy confirms that housing is tobe provided to meet local needs and to broaden the choice of location ofhousing.

Our Island Plan (2022)

9. This sets out the Government’s vision for the Island for the next 10-15years, including the creation of 5,000 new jobs, a £10bn economy, and atarget population of 100,000. It sets out strategic priorities, includingincreasing the number of economically active new residents, while alsobringing forward measures so that the overall mix of new Isle of Manresidents contributes positively to the Island’s economy and society.

Draft Area Plan for the North and West

10. This is an emerging plan, which went out for consultation in June 2022.Whilst it retains Foxdale’s Service Village status, the residential zoning of theappeal site is not continued, although it is retained for the adjacent land tothe west. Instead, the site is shown as lying adjacent to but outwith thesettlement boundary.

THE CASE FOR PATRICK PARISH COMMISSIONERS (APPELLANT) The material points are:

11. Historically, the village has had an issue with flooding at the lower point ofthe road to the west of the appeal site. The Commissioners have concernsabout the capacity of the culvert which feeds into the river passing theschool to the west of the site, and the potential increase of flood riskresulting from the development. Due to the past mining history, there is

• 3 The exception is a reference in the brief to the need for development on the site to be accompanied by proposals for restoration of the adjacent Louisa Mine site. However, those works have since been undertaken.

also a continued environmental hazard from drainage water and contaminated soil.

• 12. The existing social infrastructure of the village is unable to support this development - public transport links with the village are very limited. There is a lack of healthcare capacity in general.
• 13. Whilst the site has been designated since 1999, the owner has failed to actually develop or sell the site on numerous occasions. The land has been the subject of three planning applications for residential development. Whilst securing approval for residential development, that has since lapsed, demonstrating the lack of interest in developing the site.
• 14. The emerging North and West Area Plan redesignates this area as open space, as the site is no longer visibly a former mining site and has returned to a semi natural state. The Cabinet Office ‘does not consider that a residential development would constitute a restoration of the landscape’. The current proposal is an attempt to circumvent the consultation process for the Plan.
• 15. An area of ecological value runs across the frontage of the site.
• 16. The site lies in an area which was formally mined and a number of features of mining history will still be present under the site and hold archaeological value.

THE CASE FOR YORKFIELDS LIMITED (APPLICANT)

• 17. The vast majority of the site is designated for development in the adopted Local Plan, with the exception of a small piece of land opposite No 8, Springfield Terrace and the cattery. This is the same site definition as was approved under 14/00295/A and 16/00751/B.
• 18. The Area Plan for the North and West is in preparation. Whilst the process has moved on since determination of this planning application, the weight to be afforded to the Draft Plan is still limited and opportunities for further changes to be made are still available including, potentially, allocating the site for residential development and reinstating the provisions of the Foxdale Local Plan.
• 19. The Commissioners, and others, refer to a perceived lack of need for the development, on the basis that the approved permission was not taken up. It is fully accepted that the development has not proceeded despite the approval in principle having been granted then extended. Of itself however, that is not a reason why the land should not be still considered suitable for development.
• 20. The bringing forward of this site is not straightforward and involves working with adjacent land owners to ensure that the required infrastructure is available. At the time of the previous approval in principle, the applicant was working with the adjacent owner who in turn was working with a developer to realise the development of Site 004b (the adjacent land to the west). That site was the subject of a successful application for residential

• development.4 Subsequently submitted applications for development of that site were withdrawn. Due to the uncertainty about development of that land, progress on the appeal site was delayed. The emerging Area Plan has brought new attention to the potential development of this site, but it does not detract from the fact that planning approval was previously granted for development of this site and that the extant Local Plan designates it for development.
• 21. Despite their objections, there is no evidence from any of the parties as to the lack of demand for housing here. The Strategic Plan sets out the housing need for the Island, identifying Foxdale as a Service Village, with Spatial Policy 3 stating that “Area Plans will define the development boundaries of such villages so as to maintain and where appropriate increase employment opportunities. Housing should be provided to meet local needs and in appropriate cases to broaden the choice of location of housing.” The lack of progress of any particular site does not in itself demonstrate a lack of need for the development of it.
• 22. As modified, the emerging Area Plan reduces the amount of land which is designated for housing in Foxdale. It is unusual for a development plan to reduce, not increase, the quantum of developable land, particularly in the face of increasing housing need and especially when the Government has announced its desire to grow the population to 100,000. The housing for such a population should follow the settlement hierarchy in the Strategic Plan, which suggests that Foxdale is a suitable settlement not only for local need, but also to broaden the choice of housing.
• 23. The most recent housing development in the village, Springfield Rise, is fully completed and occupied and it is not thought that there was any evidence of lack of demand when those houses were first built and occupied. There is no evidence that housing on the appeal site would not be received similarly favourably. There is no evidence of a shortage of school places in the local primary school, nor any other infrastructure issues and with the confirmation of the designation of a substantial area of land very close to the site for industrial purposes, supported by a current application for light industrial development thereon,5 would not only increase employment opportunities in the village, but also demonstrates confidence in the village as a desirable location for investment. It is envisaged that Foxdale will remain a popular place for people to live and work, noting as well its placement in relation to both Douglas and the Isle of Man Airport.
• 24. In terms of the culvert and flood risk, there were no objections to the proposal from relevant Government Departments, subject to further information at detailed stage. The site owner has a legal agreement from the owner of the land alongside for the use of, and access to, their land for the purposes of disposing of surface water. No issues have been raised by them, in respect of this means of draining the site. The Commissioners provide no evidence to support their concerns in this regard.
• 25.Notwithstanding their allocation in the Local Plan, neither the appeal site, nor the land adjacent to the west were designated for development in the

• 4 PA 15/00978/B Full application for 24 dwellings etc. Permission granted in 2018 subject to a S13 Agreement.
• 5 PA 24/00314/B

published June 2022 iteration of the emerging Plan. However, the modified 2024 version of the Plan shows the adjacent land allocated for residential development. That modified version of the emerging Plan also shows an area of ecological value running across the frontage of both sites.

• 26.The Cabinet Office’s response to the submission in the Area Plan process for the land to be designated states: “The Existing Settlement Boundaries envelop the developed areas of identified settlements and not simply a rehashing of unrealised proposals within the local plans or Development Order 1982”. It also states “The site is no longer visibly a former mining site and has returned predominantly to a semi natural state. Cabinet Office do not consider that a residential development would constitute a restoration of the landscape.”
• 27.Whether the site has returned predominantly to a semi natural state is not the only or the critical consideration for whether this site should be designated for development. It is important to consider demand, the position of the village in the settlement hierarchy and whether the development of the site would sit comfortably with the existing and proposed landform surrounding it - in this case - residential development to the north and proposed industrial development to the south.
• 28.It is not understood why a different approach has been taken for the two sites in the modified Plan, particularly as significantly more of the adjacent site is designated as of ecological value than the appeal site. There is no explanation other than the comments above to explain why the appeal site has not been designated for development and what justification there is for removing the designation of the Foxdale Local Plan.
• 29.The Local Plan fully understands the issues of the contamination of some parts of the village and the importance of the interplay of water passing through contaminated sites, as well as the importance of development in the resolution of these issues. The development of sites can separate water passing through potentially (or actually) contaminated sites which would happen if this current application is permitted and proper drainage installed.
• 30.The Local Plan also accepted that development of this site would be an acceptable extension of the village, sitting opposite existing housing and adjacent to land which is already or potentially developed. There has been no change in circumstance or policy since that decision. The land remains suitable for development and would add valuable and desirable housing in a sustainable location within an existing settlement ,which has a variety of amenities - a modern primary school, church, small local shop, employment opportunities and good transport links to the capital and the Island’s Airport. Foxdale is also well positioned in terms of access to leisure and recreation in terms of the football club, footpath network and South Barrule plantation and its various recreation opportunities.
• 31.The Strategic Plan encourages development in sustainable areas and making use of existing infrastructure (Strategic Policies 1, 2 and 10, Spatial Policy 5, Housing Policy 4 and Transport Policy 1) as well as addressing Climate Change in accordance with the Climate Change Act 2021. It also refers to environmental enhancement, with Environment Policy 27 seeking, among other things, to enhance the natural environment, including sites

contaminated by former mine workings, in order to ensure appropriate reclamation, water management, planting of appropriate tree species, the management of special habitats including aquatic habitats and the removal of eyesores.

THE CASE FOR THE PLANNING AUTHORITY The material points are: Principle of Development

• 32. The site falls within the defined settlement boundary for Foxdale and is zoned for predominantly residential purposes in the Foxdale Local Plan. General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan is permissive of development that accords with land use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Local Plan and with other policies in the Strategic Plan.
• 33. Being within the defined settlement boundary, in an area that is zoned for residential use and which is surrounded by residential properties, the proposed development is acceptable in principle.
• 34. Whilst the proposal would conflict with the emerging Area Plan, this still cannot be afforded any material weight in the assessment and determination of planning applications. The application was assessed against adopted planning policy which has been approved by Tynwald (i.e. the Strategic Plan and the Foxdale Local Plan), which remains the development plan for the assessment and determination of planning applications in Foxdale.
• 35. Matters raised in relation to the existing culvert and drainage would be the subject of a future Reserved Matters application and are not for consideration at this stage.

OTHER PARTIES

• 36. DoI Highway Services (Development Control): No objection subject to conditions.
• 37. DoI Flood Risk Management: no objections subject to the submission of a comprehensive flood risk assessment and modelling of the watercourse with any subsequent detailed application.
• 38. Manx Utilities Authority: do not oppose subject to detailed drainage matters being submitted with any detailed application.
• 39. Public Estates and Housing Division: Section 13 Agreement required to secure 25% affordable housing.
• 40. DEFA Biodiversity: An area of marshy grassland in the northwest of the site is mapped as an Area of Ecological Interest in the emerging North and West Area Plan. A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal is required.
• 41. Manx National Heritage: Opportunities for planting should be incorporated into the scheme in line with Environment Policy 1 of the Strategic Plan.
• 42. Local Resident – the site has been zoned for residential development since 1999 and the owner has failed to develop or sell the site during this time, despite getting planning permission (which has now expired). Approval in

• principle is only sought now because the emerging North/West plan currently re-designates the site as open space. A decision on this application should be delayed until such time as the new Plan has been approved.
• 43. The failure to sell the site to another developer is evidence that the site is not viable for development and there is no demand for such housing in the village of Foxdale.

ASSESSMENT BY THE INSPECTOR

• 44. The main issue in this appeal relates to whether the principle of development is appropriate in this location in the light of current planning policy and guidance and the emerging Area Plan for the North and West.
• 45. Although the development plan does not have primacy in the decision-taking process here, it is a material consideration and provides the starting point for determination of this appeal. At present, the development plan for the area includes the Foxdale Local Plan of 1999 and the 2016 Strategic Plan. As confirmed in the Strategic Plan, existing Local Plans remain in effect until they are replaced by new Area Plans.
• 46. The Strategic Plan directs the focus of new development to existing towns and villages whilst seeking to maintain their identity. The Spatial Vision that stems from that includes a framework for development based, among other things, on a hierarchy of service centres. Spatial Policy 3 identifies Foxdale, as a Service Village. In terms of spatial distribution, the Strategic Plan makes clear that the housing needs of the Island will continue to be met by concentrating new development in the existing settlements.
• 47. The appeal site clearly lies within the settlement boundary for Foxdale, a former mining village, as currently defined by the Local Plan. Moreover, it is specifically allocated for residential development in that Plan (as is adjacent land to the west). In principle, therefore, the principle of residential development of the land, as proposed, would accord with the development plan.
• 48. The residential allocation in the Local Plan allocation in relation to the appeal site is not taken forward in the emerging Area Plan, with the site shown as lying adjacent to but outside a redefined settlement boundary. I am mindful, however, that whilst the residential allocation of the adjacent land to the west was not initially carried forward in the 2022 iteration of the emerging Plan, modifications in March 2024 re-cast it as residential land. Indeed, I am advised that the Cabinet Office has designated significantly more land in the modified draft Plan than had initially been proposed. At the Inquiry, it was confirmed that the emerging Plan could yet be further modified. On that basis, it was a matter of agreement between all parties that it should be afforded little if any material weight. I have no reason to disagree.
• 49. The Commissioners, and others, maintain that determining this appeal before adoption of the emerging Area Plan would be premature. However, whilst the Examination into the Draft Plan concluded this summer, there is still a way to go before potential adoption. It would not be right, in my view, to effectively impose a moratorium on decisions relating to new residential

• development within the Plan area pending its adoption, particularly as there is no indication that, were approval to be granted, the scale of development here could materially undermine the Area Plan,6 which in any event, only plans up until 2026, just a couple of years away. I am also mindful of the Government’s longer-term vision for the Island for the next 10-15 years, as set out in the Our Island Plan (2022) which includes a target population of 100,000, all of whom will need housing.
• 50. To conclude on this issue, I consider the principle of development on the appeal site to be appropriate in the light of current planning policy and guidance and having regard to the emerging Area Plan for the North and West.

Other Matters

• 51. The Commissioners raised concerns in relation to surface water drainage and flood risk. Whilst Mr Watterson also referred to flooding problems that he is currently grappling with, it is not for the appeal scheme necessarily to address that – all it needs to do is ensure that it does not exacerbate existing problems. In any event, I was advised that a committee is currently looking at a variety of options for dealing with surface water here. Moreover, it would seem that the relevant authorities are content that this a matter that can satisfactorily be dealt with through the submission of further details at reserved matters stage. I have no reason to disagree.
• 52. In relation to the potential for surface water to pick up contamination within the site, a further concern of Mr Watterson, again I have no reason to suppose that this could not be addressed at reserved matters stage. Indeed, dealing with long standing contamination issues can be considered a benefit of the development proposed.
• 53. I am mindful that the appeal site lies within an Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance, as defined by the 1982 Development Order. The Island’s 2008 Landscape Character Assessment identifies the appeal site as lying within an area of Incised Slopes (D11 Foxdale) with the settlement located in the valley bottom. Among other things, the strategy for the area includes restoration of landscapes disturbed by former mining activities.
• 54. An important consideration in coming to a view on impact on character and appearance is the previous approval, albeit expired. No material changes in terms of the character and appearance of the appeal site since then were drawn to my attention other, perhaps, than the erection of Louisa House further to the east. It is also relevant that the site is allocated for development in the development plan. There would have been an acceptance at the time, of the visual impact of housing on the site. I recognise that any remains of the site’s industrial past may well have blended into the landscape, but a careful layout, as was envisaged previously (with wider plots towards the south and east of the site) and generous landscaping particularly around the site boundaries, would minimise its visual impact. Any harm in this regard, would not, in the light

• 6 The plans that accompanied the 2014 approval in principle application showed a scheme of some 47 dwellings.

of the allocation, be a reason to refuse permission, with the Department having control over the final number of dwellings through the reserved matters.

• 55. An area of ecological interest runs along the site frontage associated, it would seem, with the watercourse there. I have no reason to suppose, in this regard, that it would not be possible to design a layout at reserved matters stage that afforded suitable protection for that area.
• 56. Concerns were raised that the infrastructure in the village was inadequate to support any additional housing. Be that as it may, the Local Plan identifies areas for new residential, and industrial, development within the settlement. The Structure Plan also identifies it as a suitable location to which some new development is to be directed. Moreover, whilst no material weight can be attached to the emerging Area Plan, I note that it continues to identify the village as a location for new residential and industrial development. Whilst I understand the concerns raised, they do not tell against the appeal scheme, which is on land within the settlement boundary that is allocated for development. Whilst medical services may not be readily available, I understand that the settlement has some amenities, including a modern primary school, church, small local shop, employment opportunities and transport links to the capital and the Island’s Airport. Foxdale is also well positioned in terms of access to leisure and recreation opportunities.
• 57. Other concerns in relation to the potential for archaeology within the site can be addressed by condition.
• 58. Benefits prayed in aid include the provision of housing on an allocated site in a village location, improvements to water quality in the catchment, the provision of an element of affordable housing and the provision of public open space and/or a play area. Whilst the latter is intended to meet the needs of future occupiers of the site, existing residents would be able to access it too. Taken together, these are matters to which I afford moderate beneficial weight.

OVERALL CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

• 59. The principle of residential development on the site accords with the current development plan. For whatever reason, the allocation is not carried forward in the emerging Area Plan. Be that as it may, it was a matter of agreement between all parties at the Inquiry that the Plan could only be given little if any material weight, not least since it could still be modified. With that in mind, arguments about prematurity can also carry very little weight. I do not consider the appeal scheme to be so substantial, or that its cumulative effect would be so significant, such that allowing the scheme could materially undermine the plan-making process. In this regard, I am also mindful in this regard, that the longer-term vision of the Our Island Plan Strategic Plan includes a target population of 100,000, all of whom will need housing. Arguments in relation to prematurity therefore carry very little weight.
• 60. Accordingly, for the reasons set out above, and having taken account of all other matters raised, I recommend that the appeal should not succeed and that Planning Authority’s decision to grant planning permission be upheld.

Reason: The principle of residential development on the site accords with the site allocation in the current development plan. Whilst that allocation is not carried forward in the emerging Area Plan, given that the Plan could still be modified, it can be given little if any material weight at this time. In this regard, the appeal scheme is not so substantial, nor would any cumulative effect be so significant, as to materially undermine the plan-making process, especially when regard is had to the long-term vision of Our Island Plan for a target population of 100,000. Arguments in relation to prematurity therefore carry very little weight. No other material considerations in this case lead to a different conclusion.

• 61. Should the Minister agree, recommended conditions are set out at Annex B below. They are based on the related discussion at the Inquiry.
• 62. One of the conditions discussed related to the submission of a scheme for the provision of affordable housing. However, affordable housing provision is already secured through the signed S13 Agreement. As an alternative to onsite provision, the Agreement also allows for the payment of a commuted sum, which any condition could not. In my view, any such condition would essentially duplicate the S13 provision and as such, is unnecessary. I have not included it therefore, in the list of recommended conditions.
• 63. Another condition discussed relates to open space provision. Again, the provision of such is included in the S13 Agreement. In this instance however, its provision would have implications for the overall layout of the site, one of the Reserved Matters (affordable housing provision generally relates to tenure – in terms of character and appearance, developments should be tenure ‘blind’). As such, I am content that a condition is justified in this regard.

Jennifer A Vyse

Independent Inspector

28 October 2024

Annex A

Present at the Inquiry FOR THE APPELLANT: Roger Bankes-Jones Patrick Parish Commissioners (Vice Chair)

FOR THE APPLICANT: Sarah Corlett Director, Sarah Corlett Town Planning Consultancy Tony Lloyd-Davies Applicant’s agent Mr R Richardson Applicant Ms S Richardson Applicant

For The Planning Authority:

Abigail Morgan Planning Officer with the Authority Toby Cowell Planning Officer with the Authority

OTHER PARTIES: Neil and Jane Watterson Springfield Terrace residents

ANNEX BSchedule of recommended conditions

Time limit for Commencement

• C1. The development hereby approved shall begin before the expiration of four years from the date of this approval, or before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the Reserved Matters, whichever is the later.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019.

Reserved Matters C2. Detailed approval of siting, design, external appearance, internal layout of buildings, site layout, drainage, landscaping and means of access (hereinafter called "the Reserved Matters") shall be obtained from the Department in writing before any development is commenced. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To comply with the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019.

C3. The Reserved Matters submitted pursuant to condition C2 above, shall include details of:

• (a) all hardsurfacing materials;
• (b) all external materials;
• (c) existing and proposed ground and finished floor levels;
• (d) access and connection arrangements to the public highway;
• (e) streets, including any paths and turning areas;
• (f) visibility splays;
• (g) parking provision in accordance with adopted standards and criteria;
• (h) waste bin storage in accordance with local authority standards;
• (i) a highways drainage scheme;
• (j) a transport assessment;
• (k) an accessibility audit;
• (l) a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit and Designer's response; and
• (m) a swept path analysis (waste collection vehicle).

Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and highway safety.

Drainage and Flood Risk C4. The Reserved Matters submitted pursuant to condition C2 above shall include the following details and/or demonstrate compliance with the following:

• (a) full details of how the development will connect to the public sewerage system;
• (b) foul drainage in accordance with Manx Sewers for Adoption (MSFA);
• (c) surface water drainage in accordance with MSFA; and
• (d) surface water attenuation designed to 1:100 year plus relevant allowance for climate change event. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In order to prevent increased risk of flooding and prevent pollution of watercourses from potential pollutants associated with previous uses of the land.

C5. No development shall begin until such time as the Department has received confirmation in writing from Manx Utilities that there is sufficient capacity in the public sewerage system to accommodate the additional flows arising from the approved development.

Reason: In order to prevent increased risk of flooding and prevent pollution.

C6. No development shall take place, including works of site clearance, site preparation and below ground works, until a comprehensive Flood Risk Assessment, including modelling of the watercourse(s) that run through the site, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The Reserved Matters details to be submitted pursuant to condition C2 above shall accommodate any necessary resistance/mitigation/resilience measures.

Reason: In order to minimise the risk of flooding on the site and of the surrounding area.

Contamination C7. No development shall take place, including works of site clearance, site preparation and below ground works, until an assessment of the risks posed by contamination, carried out in accordance with British Standard BS 10175 BS 10175:2011+A2:2017 Investigation of potentially contaminated sites - Code of practice (or equivalent British Standard if replaced), has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. If any contamination is found, no development shall take place until:

• i) a report specifying the measures to be taken, including the timescale, to remediate the site to render it suitable for the development hereby permitted has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department;

• ii) the site has been remediated in accordance with the approved measures and timescale; and

• iii) a verification report has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department.

If, during the course of development, any contamination is found which was not previously identified, work shall be suspended on that part of the site until:

• a) additional measures for remediation of the site have been carried out in accordance with details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department; and

• b) a verification report for the additional remediation work has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department.

Reason: In order to protect the health of future occupiers and to prevent pollution of the environment.

Archaeology C8. No development shall take place, including works of site clearance, site preparation and below ground works, other than in accordance with a Written Scheme of Archaeological Investigation and Evaluation that shall have previously been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. Any safeguarding measures identified in the Written Scheme as being necessary to ensure preservation in situ of important archaeological remains and/or further archaeological investigation and recording shall be submitted to and approved in

writing by the Department, with development to be carried out in accordance with the approved details measures.

Reason: In order to minimise risk to potential archaeology on the site, given its mining history.

Ecology C9. No development shall take place, including works of site clearance and preparation, until a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal has been carried out on the site, including any necessary species/habitat specific surveys, and the Report has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The Reserved Matters details to be submitted pursuant to condition C2 above shall include any ecological measures recommended in the Report.

Reason: In the interest of preventing harm to protected species and habitats.

Open Space C10. The Reserved Matters submitted pursuant to condition C2 above shall include open space provision (including playing space) in accordance with the requirements set out at Appendix 6 of the Strategic Plan (or any subsequent iteration thereof). Once provided, the open space shall be retained in perpetuity.

Reason: In accordance with Recreation Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan in order to meet the needs of future residents in the interests of residential and environmental amenity.

----------------------------------------------End of Schedule----------------------------------------------