Officer Report 05/02006/B
Application No.: 05/02006/B Applicant: Mr John Alfred Kneen Proposal: Repair and widening of existing / former tracks, and creation of new tracks, and repair to hedges Site Address: Fields 314585314586314583314582315141315142 W Of Ballig Bridge And N Of Poortown Road St Johns Isle Of Man ### Considerations Case Officer : Mr Ian Brooks Expected Decision Level: Committee Decision ### Written Representations ### Consultations Consultee : S.P.M.C. \& E. Notes: see comments Consultee : Highways Division Notes: no adverse traffic impacts subject to the imposition of the following conditions(s) the visibility from the existing access road A onto the public highway must be improved by removing the vegetation and gate post to the east of the existing entrance. Vehicle egress from the track marked green onto the A20 must not continue because the visibility is inadequate and traffic emerging from the access represents a hazard to highway users. Consultee : German Parish Commissioners Notes: no objection
Officer's Report
The site comprises of fields 314585314586314583314582315141315142 north of the Poortown Road and West of Ballig Bridge
Designated area of high landscape value and scenic significance. The proposal is to repair and widen existing/former track and the creation of new tracks and repair to hedges. The tracks do and will vary in width from 4 m to 7 m .
By letter received on the 18th August 2005, the agent indicates that the tracks will allow general improvement and securing of the holding for agricultural purposes and to gain access to the piles of scree to secure and remove them in the longer term.
The agent has indicated that the removal of stone extracted and exported from the site will form the basis of a future application as will request for a agricultural shed. Furthermore, the agent has indicated that in the much longer term, consideration will also be given to the possible infilling of the quarry.
I suggest that in the absence of an approved overall masterplan, the incremental growth of activities suggested by the agent for the location would be unsatisfactory, leading to visual intrusion and environmental consequences in this area of high landscape value and scenic significance.
Furthermore, I consider the plans submitted are inadequate to assess the impact of this proposal on the surrounding area and therefore it would be premature to consider this application.
Recommendation
Recommended Decision: Refused
Date of Recommendation: 30.01.2006
Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal
C : Conditions for approval <br> N : Notes attached to conditions <br> R : Reasons for refusal <br> O : Notes attached to refusals
R 1 . The incremental growth of activities suggested by the agent for the location would be unsatisfactory, leading to visual intrusion and environmental consequences in this Area of High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance.
Furthermore, Insufficient information has been submitted to assess the impact of this proposal on the surrounding area and therefore it would be premature to consider this application.
Decision Made : Committee Meeting Date :
