Decision on land development plan delayed

Fears for greenfield site development were raised in a four-hour debate

A development plan for the north and west of the Isle of Man has stalled in Tynwald after a raft of concerns were raised during a four-hour debate.

The Area Plan for the North and West failed to gain approval after a majority in the Legislative Council voted to reject it.

The proposals, which would update previous plans to guide future development in and around the towns of Ramsey and Peel, will now be subject to a combined vote of MHKs and MLCs in November.

One of the main concerns raised over the plan was the designation of areas of greenfield land for future building projects, which some politicians argued would be favoured over the regeneration of brownfield sites by developers.

The plan, which was first drafted in 2022 and has undergone a series of updates, outlines spaces that should be earmarked for housing or industrial use, and those to be kept as green spaces in the regions.

As well as the towns of Peel and Ramsey, it encompasses German, Patrick, Jurby, Andreas, Bride, Ballaugh, Lezayre, and the Maughold ward of Garff.

A housing need of 396 has been identified across the north and west of the island

While the the majority of members of the House of Keys voted in favour of the strategy, its failure to get enough support from the upper chamber ultimately led to it stalling for a month.

Housing targets

The area plan is closely linked to an all-island Strategic Plan, which looks at housing need across the board.

But targets in that plan are set out over a 15-year period between 2011 and 2026, calling for more than 1,500 dwellings across the north and west.

Now nearing the end of that period, the new area plan found the outstanding need for new housing in the north and west stood at 396 homes.

And it identified various sites for these, including several "urban extensions" in Ramsey and Peel, and smaller areas in Andreas, St Johns, Kirk Michael, and Foxdale.

Further "modest" sites in Ballaugh, Sulby and Glen Mona were also outlined.

The plan said these sites together could accommodate 457 homes, including affordable housing.

Four-hour debate

Several residents, local authorities, and other politicians had previously raised concerns, ahead of the Tynwald debate.

Glenfaba and Peel MHK Tim Crookall resigned from his post as minister without portfolio last month, citing the plan as a key reason behind the decision.

His constituency colleague Kate Lord-Brennan was one of many to speak at length in the debate.

She said to vote for the plan was "really a vote for developers" and warned it would see "green fields disappear" and pave the way for "over-development".

Government had no plans for developing infrastructure "that would usually accompany development plans", she explained.

She also said there was "already sufficient land zoned... and much of this is on brownfield land".

But Lord-Brennan's amendment to have the plan received rather than approved - removing any binding commitment to it - was rejected.

Her concerns were echoed by other members, including Douglas South MHK Sarah Maltby, who said without safeguards "developers will naturally pursue what is the most profitable large market rate homes on greenfield sites".

That would "undermine affordability for the very people we need to support", she added.

MLC Gary Clueit said the plan "assigns too much continuous land to greenfield development, especially in Peel and Ramsey, with too few controls over what is developed".

The plan also allocated "far too little land for nearby employment", he said, adding it would be detrimental to town centres and would erode the "soul" of communities.

'Make a difference'

Cabinet Office Minister David Ashford spoke at length and asked members to think back to the eastern plan, where there had been similar concerns.

Ashford said: "Many feared the worst, the green fields would vanish overnight, the communities would be overwhelmed.

"Five years on those fears haven't materialised."

He said it ensured community needs for facilities and infrastructure would be "considered as part of future development proposals".

The plan was the best way to "update our strategic and area planning policies at the same time", he said.

"We can be overwhelmed or hopeless, or grasp the opportunity for sustainable growth," he added.

After the motion was voted down by members of the upper chamber, Ashford called for the branches to vote as one body at the next sitting of Tynwald.