Loading document...
The land at Glen Auldyn, Lezayre, is located within the application site which is indicated within the red line in the submitted location plan. The site is located south of Glen Auldyn.
The application site is within an area recognised as being an area of ‘white land’ not zoned for development under the Isle of Man Development Plan Order 1982. The site is not within a Conservation Area, however the site is within an area zoned as High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance and is within an area of Nature Conservation Zones, Nature Reserves & Sites of Ecological Importance for Conservation.
Retention of new track (06/01777/R) – decision pending
Retention of planted, and approval for completion of a forestation scheme (06/01687/R) – decision pending
Approval in principle for the renovation and conversion of redundant cottage and outbuildings to living accommodation (03/00206/A) – refused on the grounds that:-
The application seeks approval for the retention of planted and approval for completion of an afforestation scheme.
The proposed tree planting will take place over a five year period with the first years planting already taken place. Each total area of tree planting consists of approximately five acres with each years planting comprising a total of 3,200 trees (a total of 17 different species) with broadleaves approximately 30-45cms, conifers approximate size 20-40cms, each tree would be spaced 2-3 metres apart.
Lezayre Parish Commissioners oppose the application on the following grounds:-
The Commissioners are opposed to all retrospective planning applications.
The Commissioners respectfully request that this Retrospective Planning Application is not considered in isolation but should be viewed alongside PA 06/1777/R and PA 06/01771/R. Unanimous.
Highways Division:-
Do not oppose
Wildlife & Conservation Officer:- I promised to send comments once I had got further information on this application. I have now discovered that the three areas proposed for tree planting on the west side of valley that are above the 250m contour were a mistake (one retrospective and two proposed), due to rough, indicative plotting. These areas are very high on the hill, open to the wind and boggy. We have spoken to the applicant, who has stated that the application is for areas lower down, on the bracken slopes, which form a Small Woodland Scheme.
There are Schedule 1 birds breeding on the site (whinchats) but the planting would be done in the winter and on the basis that there will still be substantial, open bracken slopes in this area, it is likely that whinchat will continue to breed.
Accepting the amendment to the mapped proposal, we have no further comment to make, having already commented on the Scheme previously.
The S.P.M.C. & E, have commented to the planning application which can be summarised as, no particular objection providing it does not involve a blanket of pines.
The Manx National Heritage have objected to the planning application which can be summarised as, the blocks of planted/planned trees on the lower slopes of the area are amongst bracken which is not usually a high priority site for conservation however the blocks up the slope to the west of the greenway track are amongst upland heath and bog which are ecologically valuable, habitats would be damaged and drainage pattern disrupted, the proposals would have a drastic visual impact due to the block planting on the traditional upland landscape, look very artificial from a number of surrounding areas (mountain Road & public footpaths), and there is the potential for disturbance of archaeological features (medieval sheilings) and if found appropriate measures should be taken.
The owners and/or occupants of the Larch Lea, Glen Auldyn object to the planning application, which can be summarised as, complete disregard to the islands planning strategy, the current activities of the Glen Auldyn Sporting Syndicate are already out of control and this scheme to progress will worsen the situation of the residents of Glen Auldyn
The main issue of concern I have, is due to the blocks of the planted/planned tree plantings which would create plantations that would have a very artificial appearance within a quite prominent area, particularly viewed from the Mountain Road and public ramblage areas.
Whilst in principle I consider the planting of trees to be acceptable within this area, I believe the scheme should have a much more natural appearance. The proposal does include a variety of species of trees which will/would give a more natural feel to the schemes, however due to the block planting schemes I do not believe this alone would not be enough to prevent the schemes from looking artificial, and therefore having/creating an adverse visual affect to the detriment of the traditional upland landscape.
For this reason the proposal would seem inappropriate in these locations and therefore my recommendation is for a refusal. In my opinion the existing trees should not be removed, but a subsequent application should be submitted to the Planning Authority which includes planting schemes which would have a more natural appearance and incorporating the existing planting schemes.
I consider that the following meet the criteria of Government Circular 1/06 and should be afforded interested party status:
I consider that the following parties that made representations to the planning application do not meet the criteria of Government Circular 1/06 and should not be afforded interested party status:-
Recommended Decision: Refused
Date of Recommendation: 26.02.2007
The planting schemes would have a detrimental appearance upon the traditional upland landscape which has been zoned as an area of High Landscape or Coastal Value and Scenic Significance and within an area of Nature Conservation Zones, Nature Reserves & Sites of Ecological Importance for Conservation, as the planting schemes have been/would be planted in blocks which would give a very artificial appearance.
This is without prejudice to a further application for planting schemes of a more natural appearance, incorporating the planting which has already taken place.
Decision Made: Refused Committee Meeting Date: 8/3/07
27 February 2007 06/01687/R Page 5 of 5
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown