Ramsey Marina

Summary

The requester sought details regarding a 2018 internal circular and subsequent comments from DEFA officers concerning a proposed Ramsey Marina. The authority disclosed the specific technical and environmental feedback provided by the Fisheries Directorate and Ecosystem Policy Team, noting the proposal was premature and lacked necessary assessments.

Key Facts

• DEFA Fisheries Directorate deemed the Ramsey Marina proposal too early-stage and speculative to allow for a full assessment.
• The proposed development site is located within the Conservation Zone of the Ramsey Bay Marine Nature Reserve (MNR).
• An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is required under the Marine Infrastructure Management Act 2016.
• The proposal fails to adequately address longshore drift, sedimentation, and potential impacts on commercial fisheries (crab, lobster, scallops).
• The Ecosystem Policy Team highlighted risks to the adjacent Ramsey Mooragh Shore ASSI and existing vegetated shingle/dune habitats.

Data Disclosed

• 6th June 2018
• 19 March 2018
• 20 March 2018
• June 2017
• March/April
• July -December
• Marine Infrastructure Management Act 2016
• Chapter 2.1

Original Request

Further to Case ID 831165, I refer to information provided in response. In an email from Robin Bromley-Martin to Richard Lole (DEFA CEO) dated 6th June 2018, Mr Bromley-Martin refers to a circular: "Steve Butler has circulated, inter alia, members of your team asking for their comments, some of which we have received. " Mr Harrison has clarified that this referred to a request for a circular to be sent to a group of Officers asking for comment. Please can you advise: 1) What was the question/matter they were being asked to comment on? 2) What was the information that resulted from the circular? 3) What happened to that information? Thank you

Data Tables (2)

Full Response Text

Appendix 1

1 Ramsey Marina Proposal Comments from DEFA Fisheries Directorate General Comments The document is not comprehensive enough to make a full assessment, so the comments made below are general in nature. The document appears to be a very early stage proposal, and lacks the detail to be credible at this point. As such, the initial proposal appears to be both rather speculative and perhaps lacking in commitment. Location Please refer to Manx Marine Environmental Assessment (MMEA) Chapter 2.1 (https://www.gov.im/media/983541/2 1 hydrology weather climate climatology.pdf) and other chapters as relevant. Exposure and wind direction: best information indicates wind exposure from the North to the SE and wave exposure from the NE, which is a greater range than indicated in the document. Longshore drift and sedimentation issues are not significantly addressed in the document; with the comment that it isn’t a problem now. This is by no means certain and would require hydrological and sedimentation modelling in relation to proposed structures and potential impacts, as part of a fully-developed proposal. The outputs of such modelling would then inform a wider EIA. Environment As understood an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) would be required under the Marine Infrastructure Management Act 2016. Ramsey Bay is a marine nature reserve (MNR), with the proposed development sited in the Conservation Zone within the Reserve. There is no clear consideration, or apparent understanding, of this designation or implications in relation to the proposal. The comments made in relation to the MNR are scant and unsubstantiated. A development proposal would need to fully consider the implications and interaction with the MNR as part of the EIA. Section 4.1 is confusing and appears to indicate that the marina would be constructed above (M)LWS – meaning it would shallow/dry out during most tidal cycles. This doesn't appear consistent with a constant access marina. Dredging operations: reference is made to dredging during the construction phase and, potentially ongoing to maintain the marina entrance. There are therefore significant considerations for both of these dredging phases, especially in relation to the MNR conservation zone, eelgrass zone to the south, spoil dumping, etc. This would need to be fully considered as part of the EIA, and would undoubtedly require liaison with Department of Infrastructure (Harbours). Appendix 2a 2

Other operational issues, such as pollution control (oil, chemical spillages etc.), vessel discharges and biosecurity considerations would also need to be included in an EIA process.

Fisheries Various fisheries considerations need to be taken into account as part of this proposal.
There are two main commercial fishery sectors operating in Ramsey Bay; static gear (crab and lobster pots) and mobile gear fisheries (scallops and queen scallops).
Other fishery considerations would include the need to liaise with recreational anglers.

Specifically: • Static gear fishery: interactions with surface lines and buoys due to the relatively high density of pots in the bay.
• Mobile gear fishery: annual, seasonal survey (March/April) and fishing operations (July -December). • General interactions between recreational vessels and fishing vessels operating in the bay. • Potential impact of development on the Fisheries Management Zone scallop stock, including recruitment processes. • A project Fisheries Liaison Officer would be essential, as would early communications with the Manx Fish Producers’ Organisation.

Please contact or Karen McHarg to discuss further.

19 March 2018

1 From: Selman, Richard Sent: 20 March 2018 15:24 To: Cc: Chance, Jennifer; Butler, Steve (DEFA); McHarg, Karen; (Fisheries) Subject: RE: CONFIDENTIAL - Ramsey Marina From the perspective of the Ecosystem Policy Team, we make the following comments in addition to those noted with regard to wildlife conservation, by Fisheries. The Ramsey Mooragh Shore ASSI lies just to the north of the proposal area. This currently loses chunks of important habitat (including protected plants) during winter storms, and in addition to storm wave damage, it is subject to changes in longshore drift and sea level rise/coastal squeeze. Any coastal development in this area, such as this proposal, must include consideration of the likely effects on the ASSI.
Also, we are aware that the build-up of sand on the south side of the breakwaters has resulted in a developing area of vegetated shingle/dune, with the following species recorded in June 2017: Sea mayweed Matricaria maritima Coltsfoot Tussilago farfara Hedge mustard Sisymbrium officinale Common scurvy Cochlearia officinalis Sea kale Crambe maritima (seedlings) Sea beet Beta vulgaris Orache Atriplex sp. Prickly saltwort Salsola kali Sea sandwort Honkeya peploides Sea plantain Plantago maritima Sea rocket Cakile maritima Common stork’s-bill Erodium cicutarium Curled dock Rumex crispus Common saltmarsh grass Puccinellia maritima The likely loss of this specialised coastal habitat must be a part of the consideration, though we area also aware that this developing area may be at the cost of areas immediately north of the breakwaters that currently have little sand (which might lie offshore beyond the breakwaters or get dredged away).
There was also a pair or ringed plovers (Wildlife Act Schedule 1) and a pair of oystercatchers (both seen with chicks in this area). We don’t, however, hold the general bird records for this area. Kind regards, Richard Selman Dr RG Selman, Senior Biodiversity Officer (Zoologist) Department of Environment, Food & Agriculture, Thie Slieau Whallian, Foxdale Road, St John's, Isle of Man, IM4 3AS Tel (direct) +44 (0)1624 695740 Tel. DEFA +44 (0)1624 685835 Fax +44 (0)1624 685851 Email Richard.Selman@gov.im Website: www.gov.im/defa DEFA - working for a clean, safe, healthy, attractive and vibrant environment which will be enjoyed by present and future generations alike. Our Island, Our Environment, Our Future. Appendix 2b 2 WARNING If you are not the intended addressee of this e-mail, you must not copy or deliver it to anyone else or use it in any unauthorised manner.

From:

Sent: 23 February 2018 15:02 To: Selman, Richard; McHarg, Karen; (Fisheries); ; Southworth, Edmund Cc: Chance, Jennifer; Butler, Steve (DEFA) Subject: CONFIDENTIAL - Ramsey Marina Importance: High

Dear All,

Jen and I have just had a pre-application discussion with potential applicants, who wish to development a Marina in Ramsey. There initially ideas can be viewed in the attached document.

At this early stage we would be very grateful if you were able to have a read through the proposals and comment on whether you have any concerns/thoughts and also what level of information you would require to determine any planning application, should it be submitted.

The application will likely require a full Environmental Impact Assessment as the requirements of the IOM Strategic Plan.

We have said we would get back to the applicants within the next 3 weeks, to given them some initial comments on the scheme; so if possible, if you could let us know in the next few weeks on your initial thoughts, we would be very grateful. Kind regards

ANY VIEWS EXPRESSED IN THIS EMAIL ARE THOSE OF THE OFFICER ONLY AND ARE WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ANY FORMAL DECISION MADE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1999 AND ANY RELEVANT SECONDARY LEGISLATION.
PLEASE BE AWARE THAT SHOULD THE CONTENT OF THIS EMAIL BE MATERIALLY RELEVANT TO A PLANNING APPLICATION, ITS CONTENT MAY BE PUBLISHED AS DETAIL RELEVANT TO THE FORMAL ASSESSMENT OF THE APPLICATION. PUBLICATION WILL INCLUDE AVAILABILITY VIA ONLINE SERVICES.

PLANNING & BUILDING CONTROL DIRECTORATE, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, FOOD & AGRICULTURE (DEFA), MURRAY HOUSE, MOUNT HAVELOCK, DOUGLAS, ISLE OF MAN, IM1 2SF

TEL: 44+ (0) 1624 – - FAX: 44+ (0) 1624 – 686443

EMAIL: @GOV.IM WEB: WWW.GOV.IM/CATEGORIES/PLANNING-AND-BUILDING-CONTROL

PLEASE DON'T PRINT THIS EMAIL UNLESS YOU REALLY NEED TO

Comment from Manx Utilities. Sent to DEFA 11th June 2018, 15:23 Appendix 2c

1 From: Butler, Steve (DEFA) Sent: 28 March 2018 17:14 To: .com' Cc: ; Chance, Jennifer Subject: Ramsey Marina Attachments: Ramsey Marina Proposal - PD-KM comments 19032018.docx; RE: CONFIDENTIAL - Ramsey Marina Importance: High Good Afternoon, Further to our telephone call, and as promised, please find attached an update on the internal consultations, links to the relevant policies and information in relation to Environmental Impact Assessment. I regret that I have not had chance to review your document in detail, and am out of the office until the middle of April. However, I will chase the remaining consultees, review the document, discuss with and endeavour to provide more detailed comments by the end of April. I hope this is helpful. Kind regards, Steve Consultations As discussed, has consulted the following. • DEFA (Ecology) – R. Selman • DEFA (Fisheries) – K. McHarg • DOI Highways - • Manx Utilities ( ) • Manx National Heritage (E. Southworth) The responses from DEFA Ecology and Fisheries are attached. MNH has advised that his “initial instinct is to agree about the EIA. Needs also to consider the development of cruise sector where we are seeing an increase of small boats”. DOI Highways have not commented in detail, but have advised we should also consult with DOI Harbours (M. ) and DOI Structures ) - will endeavour to do this tomorrow. We are also in discussion with DOI Policy Team about potential harbour regulations and local bylaws to understand how the various complimentary regulatory regimes will fit together in terms of this project, and will provide more information on this in due course. Planning Policy If you have not done so already, you may find the 2016 Strategic Plan helpful (www.gov.im/strategicplanning ) and the 1998 Ramsey Plan (https://www.gov.im/categories/planning-and-building-control/planning- policy/development-plan/local-plans/ ) Environmental Impact Assessment I understand you have been advised that an Environmental Impact Assessment is likely. There are 5 broad stages to the process: • Screening – determining whether an EIA is required; Appendix 3 2 • Scoping – determining what issues the EIA should consider; • Preparing an Environmental Statement - this is the document which is produced by the applicant and submitted to the planners and is a key part of the EIA process; • Making a planning application and consultation – this provides an opportunity for all interested parties to comment on the proposal, informed by the information and findings set out in the Environmental Statement, and can include comments being made on the Environmental Statement itself; • Decision Making - the Environmental Statement, together with any other information which is relevant to the decision, and any comments and representations made on it, are taken into account in deciding whether or not to grant Planning Permission consent for the development.

Screening • Strategic Plan Environment Policy 24 indicates that EIA will be required in certain cases. Paragraph 7.18.2 of the main text clarifies that in some cases EIA will be required in every case (Paragraph A.5.2 of Appendix 5 sets out the cases) and in other cases will be required depending on the nature of the proposal/area (thus paragraph A.5.2 of Appendix 5 is akin to “Schedule 1” development in the UK).
• However, an important distinction between the Isle of Man and UK is that in the Isle of Man, the requirement for EIA comes from policy rather than legislation. A proposal which is listed under A.5.2 and does not have an EIA would not be in accordance with Strategic Plan Environment Policy 24. Therefore, in theory, a planning application could be submitted without an EIA for a type of development listed in A.5.2 and still be validated/processed. In such circumstances we would need to consider whether or not we were willing to determine the application on the basis of the information provided or whether we would need to serve a “21 day” letter on the applicant requiring an Environmental Statement and, if one is not received, treating the application as withdrawn (see 4(3) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) No 2 Order 2013).
• Of course, in the event that we were willing to determine the application for a type of development listed in A.5.2 without an EIA we would need to consider whether the non-compliance with EP24 was sufficient to warrant a refusal.

Use of UK Guidance • An EIA should therefore be informed by the UK regulations/guidance - Although the Strategic Plan sets out clear policies in relation to when EIA is required, it does not set out how EIA should be done. It states at A.5.1 that in due course a Planning Policy Statement will be produced but in the interim UK methodology will be used. The PPS has not yet been produced therefore any EIA would be informed by the relevant parts of the UK EIA Regs (2017) and DCLG Guidance (last updated July 2017) - although Schedules 1 and 2 of the UK EIA regulations are not relevant as these aspects are covered locally – as set out above.

Link to UK Guidance: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/environmental-impact-assessment

Scoping • Section 18 and Schedule 4 of the UK Regs which sets out what an ES should contain. Para 035 of the UK EIA Guidance (2017) is helpful in emphasising that an ES should be focused and does not need to be any longer than it needs to be (quoted below for ease of reference) • It should be noted that the consideration of alternatives is not a requirement, but if alternatives have been considered this must be explained in the statement.

Para 035 of the UK EIA Guidance (2017) states, “…Whilst every Environmental Statement should provide a full factual description of the development, the emphasis should be on the “main” or “significant” environmental effects to which a development is likely to give rise. The Environmental Statement should be proportionate and not be any longer than is necessary to assess properly those effects. Where, for example, only one environmental factor is likely to be significantly affected, the assessment should focus on that issue only. Impacts which have little or no significance for the particular development in question will need only very brief treatment to indicate that their possible relevance has been considered. Where 3 alternative approaches to development have been considered, the Environmental Statement should include a description of the reasonable alternatives studied which are relevant to the proposed development and its specific char

[Response truncated — full text is 20,126 characters]