APL Planning Statement

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1999 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURE) ORDER 2019 1612-4.2.3.1 V1.0 JUNE 2022

Planning Statement

APPLICATION REFERENCE: TBC (DSFX1655134570900)

PROPOSAL:

VARIATION OF CONDITION 2 OF P.A. 21/01316/B — TO RETAIN SPECTATOR FACILITIES IN SITU FOR THE INTERIM PERIOD BETWEEN THE ISLE OF MAN TT RACES AND THE ISLE OF MAN FESTIVAL OF MOTORCYCLING AND TO EXTEND, FROM ONE WEEK TO TWO WEEKS RESPECTIVELY, THE PERIODS IN WHICH THE FACILITIES ARE ERECTED AND DISMANTLED.

ADDRESS: FIELD 315139, ADJACENT TO GLEN MOAR MILL, GLEN HELEN ROAD, LAUREL BANK, ST JOHNS, ISLE OF MAN IM4 3NN

AUTHOR: EUAN P. H. CRAINE, B.Arch, M.Arch, ADPPA, ARB, RIBA

HAVEN HOMES LIMITED THE OLD CHAPEL 32-34 MALEW STREET CASTLETOWN ISLE OF MAN IM9 1AF PHONE 01624 835222 EMAIL [email protected] WEB WWW.HAVEN.IM

Contents

• 0.0 Introduction 2
• 1.0 The Site 3
• 2.0 Planning History 3
• 3.0 The Proposal 3
• 4.0 Access and Parking 4
• 5.0 Flooding and Drainage 4
• 6.0 Environmental Impact 4
• 7.0.0 Planning Policy 5

• 7.1.0 General Provisions 5
• 7.2.0 Visual Impact and Landscape Character 6
• 7.3.0 Overriding National Interest 7

• 8.0 Summary 8

Appendices:

A Schedule of Drawings and Supporting Documentation

• 0.0 INTRODUCTION
• 0.1 This Statement has been prepared by Haven Homes Limited (the Agent) on behalf of Rockfell Limited (the Applicant) and is intended to be read and considered together with all associated submissions in the application bundle.
• 0.2 The Application is made for full consent for the Proposal (pursuant to the Act1, DPO2, IMSP3 and 1982 Plan4) without prejudice to any existing statutory consents, licences or other provisions in respect of the land (whether contained wholly or partly within the Site) or any concurrent applications for statutory consent in relation to either the land or the Proposal.
• 0.3 The Events referred to are the Isle of Man TT (the “IOMTT”) and Isle of Man Festival of Motorcycling (the “IOMFOM”).
• 0.4 The Proposal is as described in this Statement and as represented in the drawings scheduled at Appendix A. It may be summarised as the variation of Condition 2 of P.A. 21/01316/B (the “Extant Approval”), to retain spectator facilities during the interim period between the Events and to extend, from one week to two weeks respectively, the periods in which the facilities are to be erected and dismantled.
• 0.5 The Site is as delineated, edged red, on the Location Plan and Site Plan. The Applicant’s additional ownership of surrounding land is as delineated, edged blue, on the Location Plan and Site Plan. The Applicant is the freehold landowner of the Site, which comprises part of the parcel registered under Title 31-02047.

• 1 Town and Country Planning Act 1999
• 2 Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019
• 3 Town and Country Planning (Isle of Man Strategic Plan) Order 2016 and its Written Statement
• 4 Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982, its Written Statement and Map

• 1.0 THE SITE
• 1.1 The Site consists of the parcel defined in the Extant Approval.

• 2.0 PLANNING HISTORY
• 2.1 Save for the Extant Approval itself, the Planning history of the Site remains unchanged since the spectator facilities were considered by the Planning Committee (“PC”) on April 25th 2022.
• 2.2 The application for the spectator facilities had been prepared and submitted some 6 months prior to their planned implementation. A month prior to the planned implementation, the Department gave 3 reasons why it considered the facilities to be inimical to the environment, with reference to the Strategic Plan (IMSP):—

• 1) EP1 and EP2 regarding the facility’s retention between Events (and the permanency of the containers);
• 2) EP7 regarding the nature of imported fill; and
• 3) EP10 regarding flood risk.

• 2.3 The Applicant, anxious that the application’s determination might otherwise be delayed beyond the commencement of the Events, had little choice but to acceed to several restrictions imposed by condition to the Extant Approval.
• 2.4 The sentiments of the PC, particularly regarding restrictions on the annual duration of the spectator facilities, have since been recorded in the meeting minutes (with our emphasis):—

“The Members thanked the applicant for taking on board advice and making the requested changes in order to make the application more suitable for approval. One member could see no reason why the structures could not stay between race periods to help improve the viability. Another member expressed that there may be a potential that once the structures have been in place for a number of years, the applicant may feel it worthwhile to submit a further application to retain the structures between race periods.”

• 3.0 THE PROPOSAL
• 3.1 With the prior urgency having passed and the Extant Approval in hand, the Applicant is now in a position to rebut those restrictions imposed at short notice.
• 3.2 The Extant Approval being relatively recent, the relevant material considerations will remain fresh in the minds of consultees at the time of this Application’s submission. Equipment and facilities associated with the Events are conventionally left in situ around the course (including Areas of High Lanscape Value) for the interim period — as can also be readily demonstrated at the time of this Application’s submission.
• 3.3 It is proposed that the spectator facilities in their entirety (including all of those elements expressly referred to under Condition 2) be treated on an equitable basis and retained for the duration of the Events — including the interim period between the Events.

• 3.4 Having successfully implemented the spectator facilities, the Applicant has gained an improved knowledge of the various operational constraints involved. There is, for example, a limited range of appropriate equipment available on the Island for the purposes of positioning (and repositioning) the containers.
• 3.5 Uncertainty has arisen as to the bearing capacity of the former forecourt given a number of fuel tanks situated below finished ground level. The load specifications of the retractable outrigger beams (required to stabilise cranes) have also been found to be incompatible with the existing ramp to the west of the forecourt.
• 3.6 For these reasons, an emergency road traffic order for a partial road closure of the adjacent highway was required during implementation during the recent Isle of Man TT Races. Consequently, removal in the intervening period would require two further road traffic orders, creating unecessary cost and public disruption. It is now clear that a two week period is required for each of the erection and dismantling operations, instead of the maximum one week currently provided for.
• 3.7 It is therefore also proposed that Condition 2 be varied to allow at least two weeks immediately before and after the inclusive period of the Events (not one week as currently provided).

• 4.0 ACCESS AND PARKING
• 4.1 It is considered that the variation of Condition 2 will have no bearing on matters already considered by the relevant authority with regards to highways. The operation of the vehicles accesses, egresses and parking both on and off season will remain unchanged.

• 5.0 FLOODING AND DRAINAGE
• 5.1 It is considered that the variation of Condition 2 will have no bearing on matters already considered by the relevant authority with regards to drainage (or flooding). The variation will present no increased risk to (or from) the watercourse.

• 6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
• 6.1 Although not expressly referred to in the Decision Notice, the previous application was amended in response to concerns raised regarding the nature of imported fill. None of the conditions to the Extant Approval concern imported fill, nevertheless the Applicant remains content not to import fill for the purpose of levelling the containers.

• 7.0.0 PLANNING POLICY
• 7.1.0 — GENERAL PROVISIONS —

• 7.1.1 IMSP §1.3.1 states (with our emphasis):“A strategic plan comprises a written statement formulating the Department’s general policies in respect of the development and other use of land in the Island, together with a reasoned justification of those policies and such diagrams, illustrations, or other explanatory matter as the Department thinks fit.”
• 7.1.2 IMSP §1.7.2 states (with our emphasis):“The Aim, Objectives, Policies and Spatial Strategy must be looked at as a whole. They are intended to inter-relate and should not be read in isolation.[…]”
• 7.1.3 IMSP §1.4.2 states:“[…] those parts of the Island which are not the subject of approved Local Plans are covered by the land-use zones on the 1982 Development Plan.”
• 7.1.4 IMSP §1.4.3 states:“Existing Local Plans will remain in effect until they are replaced by new Area Plans. The 1982 Development Plan, as amended by the various Local Plans, will have effect as an Area Plan. New Area Plans will be in general conformity with the Strategic Plan.”

The Site remains the subject of the 1982 Plan, in which the Site is designated as an Area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV).

• 7.1.5 IMSP §1.4.4 states:“In the case of any inconsistency between the provisions of the Strategic Plan and the provisions of an Area Plan, whichever came into force later will prevail.”

The IMSP was adopted in 2016 and therefore prevails in the case of any inconsistency with the 1982 Plan.

• 7.1.6 In assessing the application that gave rise to the Extant Approval, the Planning Authority directed itself to:—

• • General Policy 2;
• • General Policy 3;
• • Strategic Policy 1;
• • Strategic Policy 2;
• • Strategic Policy 4;
• • Strategic Policy 5;
• • Environment Policy 1;
• • Environment Policy 2;
• • Environment Policy 4;
• • Environment Policy 7;
• • Environment Policy 10;
• • Transport Policy 4;
• • Transport Policy 7;
• • Business Policy 11;

• 7.2.0 — VISUAL IMPACT AND LANDSCAPE CHARACTER—

• 7.2.1 IMSP Strategic Policy 4 states:“Proposals for development must: […]

(b) protect or enhance the landscape quality and nature conservation value of urban as well as rural areas but especially in respect to development adjacent to Areas of Special Scientific Interest and other designations; […]

It is noted that Strategic Policy 4 makes no particular distinction regarding Areas of High Landscape Value, with such areas being specifically provided for under Environment Policy 2.

• 7.2.2 IMSP Strategic Policy 5 states:“New development, including individual buildings, should be designed so as to make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island. In appropriate cases the Department will require planning applications to be supported by a Design Statement which will be required to take account of the Strategic Aim and Policies.”

It is noted that Strategic Policy 5 is provided in the context of IMSP §§4.3.8—4.3.11 relating to permanent structures (and cannot be divorced from Strategic Policy 5 itself by virtue of IMSP §1.7.2). The Proposal comprises temporary facilities.

• 7.2.3 IMSP Environment Policy 1 states:“The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. For the purposes of this policy, the countryside comprises all land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 at A.3.6 or which is not designated for future development on an Area Plan. Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative.”
• 7.2.4 IMSP Environment Policy 2 states:“The present system of landscape classification of Areas of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance (AHLV’s) as shown on the 1982 Development Plan and subsequent Local and Area Plans will be used as a basis for development control until such time as it is superseded by a landscape classification which will introduce different categories of landscape and policies and guidance for control therein. Within these areas the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration unless it can be shown that:

• (a) the development would not harm the character and quality of the landscape; or
• (b) the location for the development is essential.”

Given the reduced number of course-side locations at which spectators may enjoy the Events due to safety concerns, those locations that do remain have become increasingly important in the success of the Events as major component of the Island’s visitor market. The topography of the Site (produced in the adjacent highway‘s historical construction) significantly mitigates the perceived visual impact of the facility from the public realm. The facility cannot reasonably be said to be particularly intrusive, especially in comparison to the purposefully vibrant crash barriers, advertising, and many other Events-related installations left over the interim period. Such considerations must be proportionally weighed.

• 7.2.5 IMSP Business Policy 11 states:“Tourism development must be in accordance with the sustainable development objectives of this plan; policies and designations which seek to protect the countryside from development will be applied to tourist development with as much weight as they are to other types of development. Within the rural areas there may be situations where existing rural buildings could be used for tourist use and Environment Policy 16 sets out the circumstances where this may be permitted.”

It is noted that Business Policy 11 is provided in the context of IMSP §§9.5.4—9.5.8 relating to permanent structures (and cannot be divorced from Business Policy 11 itself by virtue of IMSP §1.7.2). The Proposal comprises temporary facilities.

• 7.3.0 — OVERRIDING NATIONAL NEED —
• 7.3.1 IMSP §6.1.1 states:“The Development Plan will make positive land-use allocations and provision through its policies such as to meet the Island’s foreseen development needs for the period 2001-2016. It will therefore provide the basis on which development control decisions are made during this period.”
• 7.3.2 IMSP Strateic Policy 2 states:“New development will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages, or, where appropriate, in sustainable urban extensions of these towns and villages. Development will be permitted in the countryside only in the exceptional circumstances identified in paragraph 6.3 [General Policy 3].”
• 7.3.3 IMSP General Policy 3 states:“Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of: […]

(g) development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative […] ”

• 7.3.4 On May 17th 2022, Tynwald Court unanimously carried a motion to receive Government Document 2022/0036 entitled “Our Island, Our Future: Isle of Man Visitor Economy Strategy 20222032”. Programme 5, entitled “Events Development”, outlines stated national objectives:—

“Strengthen existing events to improve their impact, visitor experience and financial sustainability;[…]”

Having been adopted after the Extant Approval, the document supersedes the Department’s prior assessment as to the national need for such facilities. The document more broadly targets an increase in visitor numbers to 500,000 by 2032, a volume clearly not foreseen by the Development Plan, for which suitable allowance must be made in any event as a matter of national policy.

• 8.0 SUMMARY
• 8.1 The Proposal augments an existing use of the Site associated with the two most significant tourism events held on the Island, thereby increasing the capacity for their enjoyment at a particularly popular location, in accordance with adopted national policy.
• 8.2 The Site has been carefully considered in the generation of the design of the Proposal. This takes advantage of the natural topography of the Site in order to best conceal elements of the Proposal in a manner not seen at many other such course-side facilities on the Island, which also remain in situ for the interim period between the Events.
• 8.3 It is considered that by avoiding the repositioning operations, as otherwise required by Condition 2, wider disruption will also be avoided. The viability of the facility would also be improved, again in accordance with adopted national policy.
• 8.4 The amenity of existing developments in the Site’s vicinity (to which the Department has also previously consented) will be retained without prejudicing the use of those developments.
• 8.5 The Proposal will provide adequate amenity in and of itself, as is considered necessary to support and properly accommodate the existing use of the Site and its supporting activities.
• 8.6 It is considered that the Proposal complies with the planning policies identified in this Statement (being those to which the Department previously directed itself). Where there exists any matter that may impede an application’s approval, it is the public duty of the Department to advise the Applicant or their Agent, so that such matters may be addressed prior to determination.
• 8.7 The Applicant is glad to have been able to implement the spectator facilities in time for the Events’ return this year, and looks forward to help contribute towards their ongoing success.

Appendix — A

SCHEDULE OF DRAWINGS IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION

APPLICATION REFERENCE: TBC (DSFX1655134570900)

PROPOSAL:

VARIATION OF CONDITION 2 OF P.A. 21/01316/B — TO RETAIN SPECTATOR FACILITIES IN SITU FOR THE INTERIM PERIOD BETWEEN THE ISLE OF MAN TT RACES AND THE ISLE OF MAN FESTIVAL OF MOTORCYCLING AND TO EXTEND, FROM ONE WEEK TO TWO WEEKS RESPECTIVELY, THE PERIODS IN WHICH THE FACILITIES ARE ERECTED AND DISMANTLED.

ADDRESS: FIELD 315139, ADJACENT TO GLEN MOAR MILL, GLEN HELEN ROAD, LAUREL BANK, ST JOHNS, ISLE OF MAN IM4 3NN

Appendix A

Schedule of drawings submitted in support of the Application

Author Reference Rev. Drawing Title

• Haven Homes 1612-100.00 A Location Plan
• Haven Homes 1612-100.01 A Site Plan as Existing
• Haven Homes 1612-100.02 B Site Plan as Proposed
• Haven Homes 1612-100.03 A Visibility Splay: Egress
• Haven Homes 1612-100.04 A Visibility Splay: Access
• Haven Homes 1612-100.05 A Swept Path Analysis Sheet 1 of 2
• Haven Homes 1612-100.06 A Swept Path Analysis Sheet 2 of 2 Haven Homes 1612-100.10 B Plans, Elevations and Section