Applicant Statement to Committee

Statement On Behalf Of Applicant

To the Planning Committee on review

1. The Laxey and Lonan Public Inquiry produced a number of fundamental statements from Mr Mossop, the Inspector, these included:-

a. First, no development whatsoever should be permitted in the Laxey and Lonan area which resulted in more raw sewage going into the Bays (Laxey Bay and Garwick Bay).

b. Secondly, the areas put forward for development by the Department of Local Government and the Environment (“the Department”) were substantially not capable of development until IRIS was available.

c. Thirdly, despite this lack of buildable land then put forward by the Department development within Laxey and Lonan should not be allowed to stagnate.

d. Fourthly, the Department should seek out suitable lands, which could support a sewage treatment plants so that development could take place without pumping more raw sewage into the Bays.

1. I put forward land on my farm to the Department as being suitable for residential development within the Baldrine settlement and produced a plan that showed a stream ran through my land. This letter was dated 22nd January 1999. I was informed by the Department that I need not raise my proposals again since having already notified them my submission would be taken into account when the Laxey and Lonan proposals were being prepared. The last letter I received to this effect from the Department was dated 17th April 2000.

1. In reliance upon these assurances I saw no reason whatsoever to attend the Public Inquiry since I had already put forward my broad submissions which I had been assured would be taken into account.

1. Despite these assurances, no reference whatsoever was made by the Department to the Inspector at the Public Inquiry concerning the availability of my land within the Baldrine settlement which land was capable of supporting a sewage treatment plant. It was never even put to the Inspector on the basis that 'this land could support a sewage treatment plant but the Department rejects it for the following reasons....'

1. Even when the Inspector told the Department that it had to review its submissions and find development land which could support a sewage treatment plant, the Department failed to give any consideration to my land or inform the Inspector that it was available though the Department could not support it, and simply repeated in their subsequent report the unbuildable land (until IRIS is available) which they had originally put forward to the Inspector at the Public Inquiry.

1. The simple fact is that unless permission is given to develop the Department's preferred land which has to connect to the existing sea outlet sewage system and thereby pump more raw sewage into the Bays there are at least 100 units shortfall of housing in the Laxey and Lonan area for the next many years. Indeed, I have seen no credible Government statement to the effect that IRIS will be available in the Laxey and Lonan area before 2015 and even if then.

1. So far as the C26/A2 Junction is concerned, my Engineers put a proposal to the Department of Transport (which complies with the relevant standards of the Department of Transport - Highways Division), towards the end of September 2005 and, as of today, they are still awaiting a response to that. The simple fact is that there is as yet no valid objection to my Engineers' proposals. Also, the development of any of the larger preferred sites within Baldrine and elsewhere would also bring on to the A2 significant traffic in difficult locations, none of which appear to have been a problem to the Department or the Department of Transport.

1. Similarly, with regard to the conjunction of tramlines and public roads there are at least 7 such within the Onchan built-up area already, none of which have provision for pedestrian crossing of the tramlines (whatever that means) or any other safety features, which leads one to wonder why the one at the junction of the C26 and A2 should be of such significant difference. The simple answer is, it isn't.

1. On the question of drainage, in February 2003, the Department of Transport - Drainage Division, had no objection in principle and despite a letter dated 19th May 2004 from them concerning this application, in respect of which they have made no further comment), I say there can be no drainage concern at this stage.

1. The important thing to bear in mind is that this is simply an application for approval I principle and it would be for a detailed application to fulfil all legitimate highway and drainage requirements.