Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
25/90698/B
Page 1 of 30
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 25/90698/B Applicant : Department Of Environment, Food And Agriculture Proposal : Transportation of sediment from the Peel silt lagoon to Cross Vein Mine, treatment of it on site, and use in remediation of the site including capping works; this includes the construction of a settlement pond, temporary treatment plant, a vehicular access point, access tracks, drainage ditches, perimeter fencing, landscape works and temporary welfare facilities Site Address : Cross Vein Mine Slieau Whallian Road Lower Foxdale Isle Of Man
Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 16.01.2026
Conditions and Notes for Approval: C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.
Reason: To comply with article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 2. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a Detailed Design and Programme of Works consistent with the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, Cross Vein Mine Remediation, Environmental Statement, Volume I, Wardell Armstrong, Chapter 3: Development Description, dated July 2025, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. It shall include a programme for all the elements of the Remediation and Post Remediation Phases and include as a minimum the following information:
o Details of where the treatment, car parking and storage of materials and welfare facilities are to be located including layout plan and drawings and details of any structure, buildings, plant and machinery; o Details of wheel-cleaning of HGVs prior to their leaving the site; o Cross-sections (before and after) of the fill (including the capping layer and growing medium); o Detailed programme of the works; o Details of how the cement or other binder additives are to be stored and contained to prevent any contamination of the adjacent acidic habitat silt and avoid cement dust be blown around;
==== PAGE 2 ====
25/90698/B
Page 2 of 30
o Details of the treatment process, to ensure there is no risk of wind blow and tracking disturbance; o A Method Statement for habitat creation including details of the capping works and growing medium and its source and how this will be screened to ensure against the import of invasive plants and the provision of new heathland habitat; o The undertaking of lichen survey and the submission of the results with assessment before the works on-site commence. The assessment should include recommendations relating to potential mitigation; o Details of fencing or barriers to exclude protected species (which can be included in the Precautionary Working Methods Statement); o Details of programme or works (to avoid breeding birds season); o The undertaking of a pre-works bird survey and submission of the results; o Details of how any areas invertebrate interest within the fill area are to be managed and maintained; o Details of the dust controls for the management of silt and the cement during the treatment process; o An update on the mitigation measures taking into account the latest species surveys; o Details of source of growing medium and transport route to be used to transport the growing medium to the site; and o The appointment of an ecological clerk of works prior to works starting, who will have responsibility for the implementation of the environmental mitigation.
The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Detailed Design and Programme of Works.
Reason: To ensure the submission for approval of a Detailed Design and Programme of Works, consistent with the concept for the restoration scheme set out EIA Report.
C 3. The remediation phase of the works shall be completed by 31st December 2027 in accordance with the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, Cross Vein Mine Remediation, Environmental Statement, Volume I, Wardell Armstrong, Chapter 3: Development Description, dated July 2025, and details approved in accordance with Condition No. 3
Reason: To ensure that the site is restored within the timescale set out in the application and to prevent any long term loss of land.
C 4. The hours of work shall be limited to:
o 08:00 - 18:00 Monday - Friday; o 09:00 - 14:00 Saturday, and
No works will take place on Sunday or Bank Holidays.
Reason: In the interests of local amenity and to safeguard the amenity of local residents.
C 5. Car parking areas for construction staff shall be provided within the site throughout the remediation phase of the works in accordance with details which have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department.
Reason: To ensure provision of adequate off-road parking in the interests of highway safety.
C 6. The treatment plant and area, car parking and welfare facilities shall be decommissioned and removed from the site no later than 12 months following the commencement of the development hereby approved.
==== PAGE 3 ====
25/90698/B
Page 3 of 30
Reason: To ensure that the site is restored within the timescale set out in the application and to prevent any long term loss of land.
C 7. Prior to the commencement of any works a suitably qualified Ecological Clerk of Works shall be appointed who will have responsibility for the implementation of the environmental mitigation details to be submitted and approved by the Department in accordance with Condition No.3 and Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, Cross Vein Mine Remediation, Environmental Statement, Volume I, Wardell Armstrong, Chapter 3: Ecology, Section 8.6 Mitigation, dated April 2025.
Reason: To ensure the implementation of the mitigation measures set out in details to be submitted and approved by the Department in accordance with Condition No.3 and Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, Cross Vein Mine Remediation, Environmental Statement, Volume I, Wardell Armstrong, Chapter 3: Ecology, Section 8.6 Mitigation, dated April 2025.
C 8. The development shall implemented in accordance with the mitigation measures set out in: Department of Environment, Food And Agriculture, Cross Vein Mine Remediation, Environmental Statement, Volume I, Wardell Armstrong;
o Chapter 6: Ground Conditions and Contaminated Land, Section 6.6 Assessment of Effects, Design Solutions and Assumptions, paragraphs 6.6.1 - 6.6.4, Section 6.7 Monitoring and Mitigation, and Table 6.5: Summary of Effects, dated April 2025; o Chapter 7: Water Environment, Section 7.6 Mitigation Measures, Section 7.7 Assessment of Effects, Design Solutions and Assumptions, paragraph 7.7.1, and Table 7.17 Summary of Effects, dated July 2025; o Chapter 8: Ecology, Section 8.5 Assessment of Effects, Design Solutions and Assumptions, paragraphs 8.5.1 - 8.5.3, Section 8.6 Mitigation, dated July 2025 and Table 8.6: Summary of Effects; and o Chapter 9: Noise and Vibration, Section 9.5 Embedded Mitigation and Section 9.7 Mitigation, dated July 2025.
Reason: To ensure the implementation of the mitigation measures set out in details to be submitted and approved by the Department in accordance with Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, Cross Vein Mine Remediation, Environmental Statement, Volume I, Wardell Armstrong, Wardell Armstrong, dated July 2025.
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
DOI Highway Services (condition requested and not applied)
Manx Utilities - no objection
Glendhoo, Gleneedle, Lower Foxdale - not within 20m, but proposal requires an EIA and comments refers to "relevant factors" (flooding and contamination) and how they could impact on their property
==== PAGE 4 ====
25/90698/B
Page 4 of 30
Ballagreyney, Ronague, Castletown
Officer’s Report
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE AS IT REQUIRED TO BE ACCOMPANIED BY A FORMAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT AND BECAUSE IT IS A DEPARTMENT APPLICATION
1.0 THE SITE
1.1 The site comprises an area of approximately 4.3 ha of mining spoil at the former Cross Vein Mine known as 'the deads' that is owned and maintained by the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture (DEFA).
1.2 The Cross Vein Mine largely comprises a disused former lead mine with areas of heathland, located 1.6 km west of the Foxdale, 3.2 km southeast of Glenmaye, 4.2 km east of Dalby and 6.2 km southeast of the Peel. The A36 lies to the south of the mine site boundary, while the A3 lies to the east. Access to the site is via Glen Rushen Road and Slieau Whallian Road which run adjacent to the Site boundary.
1.3 The Site is mostly slightly undulating with a gentle downward slope towards the north, merging into an area of treeless upland heathland.
1.4 There are a number of items of former mine infrastructure and infrastructure related to the on-going management of the site within the proposed remediation area that makes up the application site. This includes the two mine shafts; the Engine Shaft and the Whim Shaft; seeding trial infrastructure, fences, and leaky dams and engineered heather bales for sediment control. The Site also contains areas of hardstanding near the mine shafts and an area along side the road, used for car parking.
1.5 The mine dates to pre-1832 when it was worked as the Cronk Vane mine and reportedly extracted lead. In 1832 the mine was acquired by the Isle of Man Mining Company and in 1881, the rights to the mine were sold and the mine closed. Over recent decades, the mine has been used by off-road motorcyclists and is also known locally as 'Snuff the Wind'. However, this unauthorised use was stopped in 2020 to reduce surface runoff of the contaminated silt ending up in Peel Marina.
1.6 Heathland lies to the north, east and south of the Site. Pasture farmland, the Arrasey Plantation and Glen Rushen Slate Mines, lie to the west. Glen Rushen Road borders the south of the Site and Slieau Whallian Road borders the north and west. Further south is the Shoulder Road (A36) that runs from A3 near Foxdale toward the southwest of the island. The Kerrowdhoo Stream is located 230 m east of the Site and a tributary 340 m to the north. The tributary flows in a northeasterly direction to join the Herrowdhoo Stream which then flows into the Foxdale River, and ultimately into the River Neb.
1.7 There are no Public Right of Ways (PRoWs) within or close to the Site boundary, although there are a number of informal tracks that extend around the Site and the surrounding areas of heathland.
1.8 The closest Public Rights of Way (PRoWs) to the Cross Vein Mine are located 1 km to the north near Kerrowdhoo Farm, 1.1 km to the northeast, four fields over from the A3 and Foxdale,
==== PAGE 5 ====
25/90698/B
Page 5 of 30
and 1.4 km to the southwest bordering the Arrasey Plantation. The Site is classed as Public Land Open to Ramblage although it has been closed to public access.
1.9 The Site falls within a Registered Heathland. Arrasey/Old Mines Designated Wildlife Site lies 0.1 km to the southwest of the Site and follows the Glen Rushen Road southwest through the Arrasey Plantation, covering a total area of 2 ha. The Cronk e King Area of Special Scientific Interest (ASSI) is located 1.6 km to the northeast of the Site. There are no trees or Registered Trees within the Site boundary. There are three Registered Tree Areas within a 2 km radius of the Site boundary: 1 km to the northeast, 1.4 km to the east and 1.6 km to the northeast.
1.10 Further afield, Glen Rushen ASSI is located 2.6 km to the southwest, Glen Maye ASSI, 3.3 km to the northwest and Ballacurry Road Designated Wildlife Site (C11), 3.2 km to the east. There are no designated heritage assets within the Site boundary or within 1 km of the Site.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL
2.1 The application describes the development as comprising the 'Transportation of sediment from the Peel silt lagoon to Cross Vein Mine (the Site), treatment of it on the Site, and thereafter its use in remediation of the Site including capping works. The Proposed Development will also include the construction of a settlement pond, temporary treatment plant, work access tracks, drainage ditches, fencing and landscape works.'
2.2 The work are proposed in two phases, a remediation phase, and post-remediation phase.
2.3 The remediation phase comprises:
o The transport of sediment from the Peel de-watering lagoon to the Cross Vein Mine; o The construction of a settlement pond at the Cross Vein Mine; o Treatment of the transported sediment for re-use at the mine site; and o The remediation of the area of the mine known as 'the deads' by applying a capping layer and growing medium.
2.4 The post-remediation phase comprises the on-going and long-term management of the site following completion of the remediation works.
Background
2.5 The application explains that the background to the proposed remediation works is that periodic dredging is undertaken at Peel Marina due to the build-up of sediment which reduces safe depths for commercial vessels and restricts access to berths. Peel Marina has most recently been dredged in 2020 and 2021 with approximately 23,000 m3 of sediment removed. However, chemical analysis of the sediment in the marina has recorded concentrations of lead that exceed Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas) Action Levels so that it has not been permissible for the sediment to be deposed of at sea. The sediment has therefore been stored in a temporary dewatering lagoon in Peel, adjacent to Peel Power Station, for which Planning Permission Ref. 18/01293/B was approved in March 2019. The permission allowed the lagoon to be retained until 8th March 2024, by which time it was due to be decommissioned and the site restore to it original use as agricultural grazing land. The volume of the sediment that has been de-watered in the lagoon has reduced to 16,000 m3.
2.6 The source of the heavy metal contamination in the marina sediment has been identified as being from several metalliferous mines located within the River Neb catchment including the Cross Vein Mine.
The Existing Peel Dewatering Lagoon
==== PAGE 6 ====
25/90698/B
Page 6 of 30
2.7 The sediment currently held in the Peel dewatering lagoon is to be used in the remediation of Cross Vein Mine. Planning Application, Ref. 24/00301/B for the retention of the temporary dewatering lagoon has been submitted, and is being considered concurrently. If approved this will extend the lifetime of both the lagoon and the associated discharge pipeline along the River Neb between Ballaterson Farm and Peel Marina, to December 2027. The planning application covers both the ongoing operation and decommissioning of the temporary lagoon facility and the discharge pipeline.
2.8 The Department of Infrastructure is responsible for the lagoon. The lagoon has been constructed in a small field at the end of Mill Road, towards the southwest of Peel. Peel Power Station lies 25m north of the lagoon and there are residential areas to the north, east and west. The A27 lies to the east of the lagoon's boundary.
The Proposed Development
2.9 The Proposed Development aims to treat the 16,000 m3 of sediment currently stored in the Peel de-watering lagoon, to make it suitable for reuse in the remediation scheme at the Cross Vein Mine. The primary objective will be to mitigate migration of heavy metals into the River Neb catchment and Peel Marina. It is proposed that the treated sediment is used as a capping layer across 'the deads' to reduce surface run-off and leaching of the underlying heavy metal impacted soils currently at the surface. The capping layer will serve to break or weaken potential pollution linkages and mitigate the risks.
2.10 A recent topographical survey of the site shows the existing levels range between 238.86 mAOD and 253.00 mAOD. Therefore, assuming a capping layer of between 500 - 800 mm, the anticipated post-remediation levels will be between 239.36 mAOD and 253.80 mAOD. The exact thickness of the cap and the final levels will be confirmed at the detailed design stage but it is not anticipated that it will differ significantly from this. The capping layer will be graded at the edges of the site to tie into the levels of the adjacent areas. Due to the undulating nature of the surrounding land there is unlikely to be a noticeable increase in elevation post-remediation particularly once the site becomes re-vegetated.
The Remediation Process
2.11 This remediation process will comprise three stages; enabling works, treatment of the sediment and the capping of the mining spoil. It will begin with the collection and transporting of the sediment from the Peel dewatering lagoon to the Cross Vein Mine, where it will be treated.
2.12 The treatment will comprise chemical and physical stabilisation/solidification of the sediment to make it suitable for use as part of the capping layer. The treated sediment will be covered with an imported growing medium (topsoil) layer, approximately 150 millimetres (mm) in depth, to facilitate the restoration of the Site to heathland, essentially to tie in with the surrounding heathland.
Remediation Phase Enabling Works
2.13 The enabling works will comprise the collection and transport of the 16,000 m3 of dewatered dredged sediment from the Peel de-watering lagoon to the mine, construction of a settlement pond and the setting-up of plant at the mine site to enable sediment treatment and site remediation through capping.
2.14 There is an existing area of hardcore forming a haul road around the Peel lagoon providing ease of vehicle access to remove the sediment. The sediment will be removed from the lagoon by an excavator and placed onto a dumper truck before being transported to a heavy goods vehicle (HGV) for transport to Cross Vein Mine.
==== PAGE 7 ====
25/90698/B
Page 7 of 30
2.15 It is anticipated that the dredged sediment will be transported to the Cross Vein Mine over a period three months, between August and October 2026, with an estimated 8m3 per HGV load. Assuming a 22-day working month, the average number of HGV movements per day is expected to be 60 two-way movements per day (30 arrivals and 30 departures).
2.16 The proposed route extends north from the dewatering lagoon in Peel along Mill Road until this adjoins Station Road. The route then goes onto the A27 and through Heathfield Drive and Queens Drive. The roundabout on Queens Drive then leads onto the A1. The A1 is followed 4.7 km east until the crossroads at St John's, where the A1 and A3 intersect. The A3 is then followed for 5.3 km south through Lower Foxdale and Foxdale until a right turn onto the A36. The A36 is then followed until Glen Rushen Road which then leads to Cross Vein Mine.
2.17 It is anticipated that the number of staff undertaking work during the transportation of the sediment will be 5-10. A temporary access track/area of hardstanding may be required at the mine Site to enable the HGVs to offload the sediment for treatment.
2.18 An area likely to be 20 m x 20 m will be allocated for the temporary treatment plant, this will be in the north of the Cross Vein Mine Site to avoid the mine workings and ecological exclusion zones to protect areas of bryophytes (i.e. small, seedless, nonvascular plants that include mosses and liverworts). The treatment area will be located near to the stockpiled sediment, and comprise water storage tanks, a grout pump, a batching plant, storage of stabilisation agents and fuel storage. The plant used is a typical excavator around 3 m high and a grout batching plant around 1.5 m high. The treatment area is likely to covered in an impermeable membrane and within a containment bund which is likely to be approximately 500 mm high and less than a metre wide. The method of containment will be confirmed at the detailed design stage but is anticipated that this will comprise the stockpile being placed on an impermeable membrane and bunded.
2.19 The exact details of the temporary treatment area will be confirmed once a contractor is appointed for the project and will be removed at the end of the site works. There would also be one or two site cabins for office and welfare of the Site workers.
2.20 To manage potential surface water run-off, a settlement pond will be constructed at the north of the site to trap any mobilised sediment and limit contamination of the River Neb catchment during the works. The positioning of the pond is to avoid the mine workings and ecological exclusion zones. To further limit water run-off, suitable sediment traps will be installed during construction of settling pond.
Treatment
2.21 The sediment to be transport from the Peel de-watering lagoon will not immediately be suitable for reuse given the risk posed to the water environment and therefore it requires treatment to be re-used as part of the capping layer. The treatment of the sediment from the dewatering lagoon will take place on the site.
2.22 The main objectives of the capping layer at Cross Vein Mine are:
o Physical - reduce the infiltration of rainfall into the mining spoil, reduce the formation of channels in the mining spoil from surface run-off and the mobilisation of the fine-grained fraction of the mining spoil being transported towards the River Neb catchment; and o Chemical - reduce leaching of lead, zinc and copper from the mining spoil.
2.23 The sediment needs to be treated to create a suitable material to address the above physical and chemical requirements, whilst not causing an increase in the contaminant loading at the site. To achieve this the treatment proposed comprises chemical and physical stabilisation/solidification of the sediment.
==== PAGE 8 ====
25/90698/B
Page 8 of 30
2.24 The application explains that stabilisation/solidification is a well-established remediation technique for reducing the leaching of heavy metals into soils. To lock in heavy metals into soil/waste, the sediment needs to be stabilised through the addition of binder material such as cement and other specific binder additives. The additives result in the chemical fixation of soluble element into more insoluble, chemically stable compounds, therefore reducing leaching. By treating the sediment, a new more solid material is created. This new material slows the contaminant release rate and prevents contaminants from entering the environment at unacceptable levels.
2.25 It is proposed that site-specific remedial targets for the protection of the water environment around the Cross Vein Mine will be derived and agreed with DEFA. The treated sediment will not exceed these targets to be considered suitable for re-use at the Cross Vein Mine.
Capping
2.26 Capping will consist of 'the deads' being reprofiled and capped with the treated sediment and a suitable growing medium. The growing medium will be seeded to complete the remediation of the project.
2.27 Due to the Site's previous use by unauthorised off-road vehicles, re-profiling work is required prior to the placement of the capping layer to create a more even topographic profile to facilitate capping and promote efficient drainage.
2.28 An existing ditch at the eastern end of the site will be realigned to run into the new settlement pond at the beginning of the re-profiling and capping works to capture mobilised sediment. A series of sediment control measures including leaky dams and engineered heather bales have already been installed in several water channels across the wider Cross Vein Mine by DEFA to trap finer-grained sediment transported by surface run-off during rainfall events from 'the deads' area. DEFA will be responsible for maintaining the settlement pond after the remediation works has been completed. If the pond requires periodic dredging, it is considered that the heavy metals concentrations in the sediment are likely to reduce following the remediation of the area and therefore, dredged material may be suitable for disposal at landfill on island subject to further chemical assessment.
2.29 Temporary sediment controls such as heather bales, coir logs or sedimats will be implemented as necessary during the remediation works to prevent the migration of fine-grained sediments into the River Neb catchment, which may become mobilised during the works.
2.30 Following completion of the works, the settlement pond will be cleaned out and any sediment dredged from the pond will be chemically assessed and disposed of at a suitable facility or, if feasible, treated to an appropriate specification for re-use as part of the capping layer.
2.31 Approximately 4,000 - 5,000m3 of growing medium (topsoil) for acid grassland and heather will be sourced from elsewhere. It is anticipated that this will be transported to the site over a period of around a month between October and November 2026. Assuming a 22-day working month and an estimation of approximately 8m3 per load, the average number of HGV movements per day associated with this aspect of work is expected to be 58 two-way movements (29 arrivals and 29 departures).
2.32 The growing medium will comprise a clean low fertility soil capable of supporting native upland flora such as heather, common bent, cotton grass and blaeberry. Parts of the remediation site that support calaminarian grassland will be retained and, if feasible, enhanced.
Post-Remediation Phase
2.33 The successful establishment of native vegetation will further stabilise the engineered capping layers, limiting downstream dispersal of sediments. The Site will ultimately naturalise and
==== PAGE 9 ====
25/90698/B
Page 9 of 30
become part of the surrounding heathland. It is anticipated that the end use of the Site will eventually be Public Land Open to Ramblage, corresponding with the current designation. However, given the nature the Site, even with management to maintain optimum conditions, it is anticipated that the new heathland habitats could take approximately 10 years to establish. Therefore, it is likely that public access to the Site will need to be controlled for up to 10 years to allow the heathland and habitats to establish entirely.
2.34 A pedestrian access gate will be installed on the boundary of the Site which will be locked until the heathland and habitat is fully established. Once unlocked, the use of bicycles will be heavily discouraged, whilst the use of motorised bikes will be prohibited on the Site. This is to ensure the habitats can have the best chances of establishment and flourishment and contribute ecologically to the local area.
Indicative Development Timescales
2.35 The enabling works, including the transportation of the dewatered dredged sediment, are likely to take place between August and October 2026. It is anticipated that it will take four months to complete the treatment and capping works, from November 2026 to February 2027. This programme avoids breeding bird season. However, work intensity may be affected by winter weather.
2.36 Working hours are anticipated to be between 8am and 6pm Monday to Friday and between 9am and 2pm on Saturday, although because of the mine's isolated rural location, there may be the option to extend working hours and include further weekend work if necessary. Agreement would be sought for any change to typical hours.
Mitigation and Design
2.37 The key aim of the Proposed Development is to mitigate contamination issues affecting public open space and the wider environment.
2.38 Three exclusion zones are to implemented into the design. These comprise one mine working exclusion zone, protecting the former mine shafts and shallow mine tunnels, and two ecological exclusion zones to protect areas of bryophytes. The treatment plant and settlement pond will be positioned so they do not overlap or interfere with these zones.
2.39 Short-term risk of dust particles becoming airborne from wind or vehicle movement will be managed by the contractor through dampening down of the growing medium. The capping layer to the mining spoil across the Site will inhibit the mobilisation of fine-grained fraction of mining spoil by surface run-off.
2.40 A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) will be implemented which will set out appropriate mitigation and management measures during the works.
Overall Conclusions of the EIA Report
2.41 Overall Conclusions of the EIA Report submitted with the application (set in Section 10) are that:
"...Mitigation measures have been used to reduce impacts to the lowest practicable level consistent with the overall objectives of the Proposed Development. Any residual effects, either during the remediation or post-remediation phase, were then identified and the significance of these residual impacts assessed within each technical chapter. Following mitigation, all residual adverse environmental effects have been found to be not significant...
==== PAGE 10 ====
25/90698/B Page 10 of 30
2.42 In relation to the impacts on ground conditions and ecology the EIA identifies beneficial residual effects relating to human health, controlled waters and ecology. It states:
"Chapter 6 (Ground Conditions and Contaminated Land) identified some significant beneficial residual effects relating to human health, controlled waters and ecology. For human health, the contaminated soils at the Site will be covered and capped, which will inhibit fine particles of the spoil from becoming airborne from wind or vehicle movement, thus lessening the impact from inhalation of particles. The capping layer will also reduce infiltration, mobilisation of sediment and leaching of heavy metal contamination into nearby streams that flow into the River Neb Catchment, thus benefitting water quality. Lastly, the restoration will facilitate revegetation with native species which will minimise dust generation subsequently benefitting ecology...
Chapter 8 (Ecology) identified the post-remediation phase as having a moderate positive effect for registered heathland as a result of the Proposed Development which is deemed significant at a National Level. This is due to the creation of new heathland habitat".
2.43 In relation to cumulative impacts the EIA identifies that the potential for cumulative effects to arise is considered to be negligible, which is not significant.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY
3.1 The relevant Local Plan remains the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982, under which the site is not designated for development. It is located within an area identified as a Nature Conservation Zone, Nature Reserve or Site of Ecological Importance for Nature Conservation and as being located on an area of land owned by Isle of Man Forestry, Mines and Land Board.
3.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains a number of policies that are relevant to the determination of the application, the most relevant of which is Environment Policy 27 which states:
"The Department will seek to enhance the natural environment, including sites contaminated by former mine workings, along with other Government Departments, local communities, the private sector and all appropriate agencies in order to ensure the appropriate reclamation, water management, planting of appropriate tree species, the management of special habitats including aquatic habitats and the removal of eyesores".
3.3 Other relevant policies are:
o Strategic Policy 1 which states that "Development should make the best use of resources by: (a) optimising the use of previously developed land...; (b) ensuring efficient use of sites, taking into account the needs for access, landscaping, open space and amenity standards; and (c) being located so as to utilise existing and planned infrastructure, facilities and services"; o Strategic Policy 2 which states that "New development will be located primarily within our existing towns and villages...Development will be permitted in the countryside only in the exceptional circumstances identified in paragraph 6.3";. o Strategic Policy 4, which states that "Proposals for development must ... (b) protect or enhance the landscape quality and nature conservation value of ... rural areas but especially in respect to development adjacent to Areas of Special Scientific Interest and other designations; and ... (c) not cause or lead to unacceptable environmental pollution or disturbance."; o Strategic Policy 10 which states that "New development should be located and designed such as to promote a more integrated transport network with the aim to...(c) not adversely affect highway safety for all users..."; o General Policy 2 which states that "Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning...and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development:... (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping...; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding
==== PAGE 11 ====
25/90698/B Page 11 of 30
landscape...; (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses;...(f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality; [and]...(i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; o General Policy 3 states that "Development will not be permitted outside of those areas which are zoned for development on the appropriate Area Plan with the exception of...(g) development recognised to be of overriding national need in land use planning terms and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative". o Environment Policy 1 which states that "The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. ...Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative. o Environment Policy 4 which states that "Development will not be permitted which would adversely affect: (a) species and habitats of international importance"; (b) species and habitats of national importance; [and] species and habitats of local importance such as Wildlife Sites, local nature reserves, priority habitats or species identified in any Manx Biodiversity Action Plan...; o Environment Policy 7, which states that development that may impact on watercourses must set out amongst other things, "...(b) details of pollution and alleviation measures must be submitted; (c) all engineering works proposed must be phased in an appropriate manner in order to avoid a reduction in water quality in any adjacent watercourse..." o Environment Policy 22 which seeks to prevent pollution, including to water or air; o Environment Policy 24 which indicates where Environmental Impact Assessments may be required; o Environment Policy 26 which states that "Development will not be permitted on or close to contaminated land unless it can be demonstrated that there is no unacceptable risk to health, property or adjacent watercourses."; and o Waste Policy 1 which sets out how waste-related applications are to be assessed.
4.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Legislation
4.1 The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report sets out the legislative and policy framework, which includes highlighting the provisions of the:
o Public Health Act (Waste Licensing) o Collection and Disposal of Waste Regulations (2000) o Waste Strategy (2018)
4.2 Other relevant Strategies and Policies include:
o Harbour's Strategy (2018) in relation to Harbour refers to the need for drafting options for the longer term solution for the disposal or treatment of contaminated silt. Statement 5 in the Strategy states:
Working in consultation with DEFA, the Department will determine both short- term and short-to- medium term options for the removal of the current build-up of contaminated silt in order to be able to dredge in Peel in 2018 and 2019, whilst also considering a longer-term solution for the disposal or treatment of contaminated silt. The Department will consult with other departments, Peel Town Commissioners and harbour users.
o Waste Strategy (2018) aims to manage waste sustainably and economically, with a focus on self-sufficiency and the Waste Hierarchy. It includes a Core Strategy with principles and key policies approved by Tynwald, an Annual Statement of Need to identify waste management capacity shortfalls, and a series of contemporary technical reports to support the strategy. It identifies that
==== PAGE 12 ====
25/90698/B Page 12 of 30
the priorities for waste infrastructure include provision of strategic disposal capacity including landfill void space for problematic and inert waste. The Strategy does not include explicit reference to the Rockmount Silt Store. The Department of Infrastructure has recently consulted on updated principles for the Waste Strategy for the period 2025 to 2035. The Strategy does not include explicit reference to the Rockmount Silt Store.
o Biodiversity Strategy (2015 - 2025) - sets out key objectives, with the overall aim of managing biodiversity to minimise loss, maintain and (where necessary) restore or enhance native biodiversity, and actively involve society in understanding, appreciating and safeguarding biodiversity.
5.0 PLANNING HISTORY
5.1 There is no previous planning application history relating to the current application site at the Cross Vein Mine.
5.2 Planning Application Ref. 03/00657/B was approved on the 10th November 2003 for the Excavations, capping, reinstatement and the fixing of metals grille over adits, at the three abandoned mines at the Cross Vein Mine, and Dixons Vein Mine and Doarlish Ard, which extended over an area located approximately 250m east of the current application site.
5.3 Planning Applications 22/00287/B for the Rockmount Silt Store and Planning Application Ref. 24/00301/B for the Peel De-Watering Lagoon are noted - see Section 7.2.
6.0 REPRESENTATIONS
Patrick Parish Commissioners (20.10.25 and 22.12.25)
6.1 It is not clear from the response whether or not the commissioners object to the proposal, but they do express concern about two points. Firstly, about the increased traffic through lower and higher Foxdale was with an increase of around 20-25% in HGV traffic through the villages, and that this may cause delays when there are stationary vehicles parked in both areas which stop traffic flowing freely.
6.2 They have also expressed concern about the impact on private water supplies with there being private wells located within 2km of the site.
6.3 They also suggested that DEFA and DOI to hold a public meeting to obtain feedback from residents.
German Parish Commissioners
6.4 Were consulted on 28th October 2025 but has not commented on the application.
Peel Town Commissioners
6.5 Were consulted on 28th October 2025 but has not commented on the application.
DOI - Highway Services (04.08.25)
6.6 Highway Services does not oppose the application. They have advised that the Proposed Development will have no significant negative impact on highway safety, network functionality and/or parking as the site access and layout are acceptable for the size and forecasted daily traffic flow of the development, is temporary in nature, and that there are no current or future road safety concerns with the development's impact on the surrounding network. Details on how vehicles will not drag dirt, gravel and mud onto the highway should be conditioned.
==== PAGE 13 ====
25/90698/B Page 13 of 30
DOI - Highways Drainage
6.7 Were consulted on 7th October 2025 but has not commented on the application.
DEFA - Inland Fisheries Policy Manager
6.8 Was consulted on 7th October 2025 but has not commented on the application.
DEFA - Environmental Protection Unit
6.9 Was consulted on 7th October 2025 but has not commented on the application.
DEFA - Planning Policy
6.10 Were consulted on 7th October 2025 but has not commented on the application.
DEFA - Ecosystem Policy Team (28.10.25)
6.11 Ecosystem Policy Team has advise that it has no objection to the proposal subject to resolving the matters raised below, prior to any consent that may be forthcoming, by the provision of further details or the imposition of condition to secure the following:
o Details of where the treatment, car parking and storage of materials and welfare facilities are to be located (so as to confirm that the heathland habitat within the red line will not be affected or disturbed by the temporary uses); o Cross-sections (before and after) of the fill (to protect immediately habitat); o Detailed programme of the works (to ensure the settlement pond is installed an operational before any treatment or capping works commence which might cause pollution); o Submission of CEMP including details of the storage of silt on the site prior to treatment; o Details of how the cement or other binder additives are to be stored and contained to prevent an contamination of the adjacent acidic habitat silt and avoid cement dust be blown around ; o Details of the treatment process, to ensure there is no risk of wind blow and tracking disturbance; o A Method Statement for habitat creation including details of the capping works and growing medium and its source and how this will screened to ensure against the import of invasive plants and the provision of new heathland habitat; o The undertaking of lichen survey and the submission of the results with assessment before the works on-site commence. The assessment should include recommendations relating to potential mitigation; o Details of fencing or barriers to exclude protected species (which can be included the CEMP and Precautionary Working Methods Statement); o Details of programme or works (to avoid breeding birds season); o The undertaking of a pre-works bird survey and submission of the results; o Details of how any areas invertebrate interest within the fill area are to be managed and maintained; o Details of the long-term monitoring and surveying of the capped area as set out in the EIA Report (paragraphs 8.6.19 to 21) to continually assess the remediation of the Site and propose any changes required to management measures or suggestions to ensure successful establishment of vegetation; o Details of the dust controls for the management of silt and the cement during the treatment process; o An update on the mitigation measures taking into account the latest species surveys; and o The appointment of an ecological clerk of works prior to works starting, who will have responsibility for the implementation of the environmental mitigation.
==== PAGE 14 ====
25/90698/B Page 14 of 30
6.12 In addition the Ecosystem Policy Team comments that the EIA Report Chapter 5 which deals with the consideration of alternatives does not present any details in relation to alternative disposal options for the Peel silt de-watering lagoon. In addition they comment that the chapter does not discuss the trials that DEFA has undertaken over in terms of site remediation, which might not necessarily involve the use of Peel de-watering lagoon. They also note that the 'Do Nothing' Scenario has been discounted on the basis that there would be no remediation of the site, but point out that without the scheme the site would very slowly revegetate naturally now that the disturbance of motorcycles has been halted, where the lead levels allow it, with surface levels expected to drop as the metals wash from the surface gravel.
DEFA - Environmental Health
6.13 Were consulted on 7th October 2025 but have not commented on the application.
DEFA - Energy and Minerals (14.10.25)
6.14 hThey ave made the following comments:
DEFA have ownership of the Mines entrances in the Island. This application will interact with the Cross Vein Mine and the entrances within the mine complex.
They understand the need for the development and accept the principal of permanent disposal of the material from the Peel de-watering lagoon. They note the presence of a mine working safety exclusion zone within the site boundary.
Although not explicitly referenced in the application they consider that previously provided advice regarding mine entry safety, shallow mine workings, and the types of vehicles used on site remains relevant and should be considered in the ongoing assessment and management of the site.
They advise that the Department should be made aware of any evidence indicating disturbance to a mine entry or shallow mine workings, to ensure appropriate safety and mitigation measures are considered.
DEFA - Agriculture
6.15 Were consulted on 7th October 2025 but have not commented on the application.
DEFA - Flood Management Division
6.16 Were consulted on 7th October 2025 but have not commented on the application.
Manx Utilities Authority - Electricity (14.10.25)
6.17 State that due to its remote location there is not a mains electricity supply easily available to service the site. The nearest point of connection is approximately 2km away.
6.18 They comment that it is not clear from the application whether an electricity supply is required for the development to operate any the plant and machinery required to undertake the remediation works or for welfare facilities. They therefore advise that if electricity is required, then this would be more easily provided by the applicant in the form of mobile generation/renewable sources rather than trying to extend the mains electricity network to the site.
Manx National Heritage
==== PAGE 15 ====
25/90698/B Page 15 of 30
6.19 Was consulted on 7th October 2025 but have not commented on the application.
Manx Wildlife Trust (24.09.25)
6.20 Manx Wildlife Trust welcomes the large amount of ecological survey work over several years which has guided this application.
6.21 It comments that Chapter 8 of the EIA Report now requires updating in the light of recent survey work by the British Lichen Society has shown that the site to be of national significance for the conservation of rare metallophyte lichens because the site supports a lichen flora which would very likely meet the UK criteria for SSSI designation for metallophyte lichen assemblages.
6.22 It advises that initial (but not comprehensive) results of the survey conducted in July 2025 recorded 34 species of Lichen including some that are nationally scare. It also identified additional species at the nearby Beckwith's Mines indicating significant potential for their presence at Cross Vein if a more detailed survey was undertaken.
6.23 Manx Wildlife Trust therefore wishes to highlight that Cross Vein is afforded planning policy protection under Environment Policy 4 as a nationally important site, and that the site be considered for statutory protection as an Area of Special Scientific Interest (noting also the presence of the globally rare Lead Moss, which is a Manx Biodiversity Action Plan species). MWT therefore requests that a detailed lichen survey and mitigation plan be conducted on this site prior to determination of this application and that protections for lichens and Lead Moss be incorporated in both the plan and through conditions.
Local Residents
6.24 There has been third-party three representations, one from a resident in Lower Foxdale, one from a resident of Peel and the third from a resident in Castletown.
6.25 Glendhoo, Gleneedle, Lower Foxdale (31.10.25) - whilst not stating that they object express concern in relation to the following points:
o That their property is situated downstream from Cross Vein Mine, and that the river that runs adjacent to their property collects water from the drainage systems around the mine; o The river floods during heavy rainfall and has already caused tens of thousands of pounds of damage to property and infrastructure; o The proposal includes the creation of a settlement pond, drainage ditches and treatment works, all of which risk altering existing water flow and increasing runoff volume and velocity. Any overflow or discharge from the treatment area - particularly if contaminated with lead and zinc residues, would flow directly into the river system and ultimately into their property; o They therefore have serious concerns about both the increased flood risk to their own and neighbouring properties and essential infrastructure downstream and about the potential contamination risk to the river, surface waters and soils (photographs of the river in flood have been submitted); o They ask that a full flood risk assessment along with information on how it is proposed to manage the stormwater, the water discharge route from the pond and drainage, and details of their proposed monitoring of the overflow discharge water; o They also express concern about the HGV traffic that will arise from the transporting of the de-water silt from the Peel de-watering lagoon to the Cross Vein Mine, particularly through Foxdale; and o They suggest that de-watered silt be treated on-site in Peel, rather than at the Cross Vein Mine, where it risks being washed back down the river system to Peel marina.
6.26 Sea Peep, Town Road, Peel (11.08.25) - neither objects to nor supports the application but highlights a number of extracts from the submitted application including in summary that:
==== PAGE 16 ====
25/90698/B Page 16 of 30
o 18,000m3 of silt will be transport from Peel to the Cross Vein Mine between August 2026 and October 2026; o There will be transported in 8m3 loads, so that there will be approximately 2000 HGV loads of transported material, so that there would be 60 two-way HGV movements on each working day. o 5,000m3 of growing medium will be transported to the Site to facilitate the restoration of the Site to heathland. Assuming a 22-day working month and an estimation of circa 8m3 per load, the average number of HGV movements per day associated with this phase of work is expected to be approximately 58 two-way movements; o In addition there will be traffic movements associated with the delivery of materials, and a number of additional trips will also be required in relation to staff. A maximum of 15 workers are forecast to be at the Cross Vein for the treatment and remediation works. It is assumed that all workers will travel to the Site by private car. This will equate to 30 additional two-way daily car trips by staff to the Site; o In total therefore is anticipated that there will be approximately 90 two-way movements comprising of 30 cars and 60 HGVs; o Treatment and remedial works will be completed by February 2027; o The assessment included in the application concludes that this level of traffic movements per day will have no material impact on the operation of local road network; o This level of traffic will have an impact on the those living along the route through the centre of Peel for the duration of the works.
6.27 Ballagreyney, Ronague, Castletown (26.11.25) - objects to the application and summary makes the following comments:
o It states that there are substantial deficiencies in the EIA Report which as a result fails to comply with statutory planning and environmental legislation, and relies on outdated or invalid policy documents. As a result the application, as currently submitted, is incomplete and cannot be lawfully approved without further clarification, public consultation, and technical assessment. o It states that the application places invalid reliance on rejected Draft Area Plan for the North and West (DAPNW), which carries no valid planning weight. As such, any policy rationale based on DAPNW is procedurally incorrect. The only legally applicable planning documents are the 1982 Development Plan (as amended), the Strategic Plan 2016, and relevant local plan policies. The EIA is flawed for assessing the development against a non-operative policy document. o It argues that there has been inadequate assessment of cumulative effects, because the EIA Report states that 'no other developments fall within the Zone of Influence' and that cumulative ecological impacts are negligible. This it states is demonstrably incorrect. It argues that the although the planning application for the Cair Vie onshore wind farm proposal has not yet been submitted, the project is a sufficiently advanced pre-application stage, having already been subject to Environmental Impact Assessment Scoping and with a Generation Station Licence Application submitted, that it should be taken into account, as 'reasonably foreseeable project'. It is located in proximity to the Cross Vein Mine and constitutes a major development with significant ecological disruption, including peat disturbance and high levels of construction traffic. This project should have been evaluated cumulatively alongside the remediation proposal. The failure to do so renders the EIA incomplete. To exclude Cair Via solely on the basis that a planning application has not yet been lodged would conflict with best practice; o The species survey fail to provide two year's bird and amphibian survey requirements results and as result the failure to account for breeding and migratory schedules exposes the development to risks of direct biodiversity harm and legal challenge. o There has been a lack of public consultation during the EIA preparation, contravening the principles of the Aarhus Convention and the Isle of Man Government's own public participation policies; o The application fails to clarify how anti-fouling chemicals from fishing vessels, present in Peel Harbour sludge, will be treated before relocation into a sensitive peatland environment. No risk assessment of leaching, runoff, or long-term toxicity has been provided;
==== PAGE 17 ====
25/90698/B Page 17 of 30
o The EIA Report fails to specify where 4,000-5,000 m3 of growing medium will be sourced from. This is a material omission as extraction may impact other sensitive upland areas. Without confirmation, the application is incomplete; o There has been a failure to assess the impact on private water supplies insofar as the EIA Report incorrectly states that there are no private water supplies within 2 km; o The application does not appear to provide definitive confirmation of legal ownership or long-term control of the land in question. No clear documentation has been submitted demonstrating that the applicant has exclusive and unrestricted title to the site. It is also unclear whether all relevant historical land rights have been satisfactorily extinguished or lawfully transferred.
7.0 ASSESSMENT
7.1 Main Issues
7.1.1 The main issues in the determination of the application are:
o Need/Alternatives; o Highways Impacts; o Ground Conditions and Contamination o Impacts on the Water Environment; o Ecology; o Other Matters (Noise and Vibration); and o Cumulative Effects.
7.1.2 The EIA (section 4.5) sets out that at the scoping stage a number of topics were scoped into the EIA (Ground Conditions and Contaminated Land, Water Environment, Ecology and Noise and Vibration). A number of topics were scoped out of the EIA but with some information still required as part of the application (transport, air quality and human health) and two topics no potentially significant effects were identified and so it is considered that no standalone technical reporting is required (Archaeology and Cultural Heritage and Landscape and Visual Impact).
7.1.3 It should be noted that neither covenants nor procedural matters are material planning considerations.
7.2 Need And Alternatives
7.2.1 In terms of need and alternatives the proposed remediation scheme as the Cross Vein Mine has to be viewed in the context of the overall strategy for dealing with the de-watered dredged silt from the Peel Marina, that is also relevant for Planning Applications 22/00287/B for the Rockmount Silt Store and Planning Application Ref. 24/00301/B for the Peel De-Watering Lagoon. In relation to 24/00301/B, one of the key issues in the delay in the determination of that application, has been the need to find a long-term alternative waste management option to re-use and/or dispose of the dredged material from the Peel Marina. To do this has meant developing a remediation option for the Cross Vein Mine which has been identified as one of the main sources of the elevated concentrations of lead and zinc in the sediment deposited in the Peel Marina. In addition, there has also been a substantive need in its own right to address the address the contamination of surface waters, and in particular the River Neb as result of contaminated waste from the mine draining into the river catchment, by identifying a remediation option for the mine.
7.2.2 There is not only clear policy support set out in The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 for ensuring that the Peel Marina continues to function, but also for dealing with contamination arising from former mine workings with the key policy development plan policy being Environment Policy 27 which expressly sets out that DEFA and other Government Departments will seek to enhance the natural environment, including sites contaminated by former mine workings to ensure the
==== PAGE 18 ====
25/90698/B Page 18 of 30
appropriate reclamation, water management, planting of appropriate tree species, the management of special habitats including aquatic habitats and the removal of eyesores.
7.2.3 The strategy that has been developed, seeks to use the dredged material currently held in the Peel de-watering lagoon, enabling it to be emptied and decommissioned, whilst also providing the material required for the implementation of a remediation strategy for the Cross Vein Mie, which if successful, will create a capping layer to reduce surface run-off and leaching of the underlying heavy metal impacted soils currently at the surface. The capping layer will in turn serve to break or weaken potential pollution linkages and mitigate the existing pollution risk. Ultimately if successful the remediation strategy opens up the possibility that the reduction in the concentrations of contaminants is sufficiently remediated to enable the future disposal at sea of the dredged sediment from the Peel Marina, thereby obviating the need to continue to dispose of it on-land.
7.2.4 The on-going need to find an alternative waste management option to re-use and/or dispose of the dredged material from Peel Marina and to do so in conjunction with the remediation of the Cross Vein Mine, raises the question as to whether there are any other alternatives. The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 Environment Policy 1 makes clear that development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative. In this case the test of national need does not apply unless there would be resulting adverse effects on the countryside, which as set out in further details below, it can be concluded that there would not be. Even to the extent that the test of national need or exceptional circumstances does need to be considered as set out in Strategic Policy 2 and General Policy 3, as a site specific remediation scheme intended to address the contamination at the Cross Vein Mine, the alternative location of the proposed remediation scheme is not an option and the key issue for some time, as detailed in the accompanying reports on Planning Application Refs. 22/00287/B and 24/00301/B has been what the longer term options are for managing the contaminated silt that has been dredged from the Peel Marina and how this will be dealt with in the future.
7.2.5 Chapter 5 of the EIA report submitted with the application in accordance with Schedule 4 of the EIA Regulations includes an assessment of the alternatives including the 'do nothing' scenario, the siting of the development at an alternative location and an alternative site design. Whilst it identifies the 'do nothing' scenario would eliminate the potential for adverse environmental impacts arising from the Proposed Development, it would mean that the Cross Vein Mine would not be remediated. This is not considered a viable option as the remediation works seek to improve the condition of both the mine site and address the issue of disposal of contaminated sediment from Peel Marina, both of which have associated environmental and social implications.
7.2.6 Through surface run off, sediment from local mines builds up in Peel Marina and reduces safe depths for commercial vessels and restricts access to berths. Through chemical analysis of the sediment in the marina, the assessment identifies that it was recorded that there are concentrations of lead that exceeded Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas) Action Levels. Through capping the mining spoil at Cross Vein Mine and adding a growing medium to vegetate the area, surface run-off will be reduced and this in turn will lessen these effects. At the same time, landscape value will increase as the reprofiling and establishment of vegetation will integrate the mine Site better with the surrounding heathland.
7.2.7 On this basis the assessment identifies that the proposed remediation scheme aligns with the aims of The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. This includes 'Quality Environment' as the proposals will protect and improve the quality of the environment. The proposals also relate to the aim of ensuring 'Sound Infrastructure' through reducing the amount of sediment run-off into Peel Marina.
7.2.8 In relation to the consideration of alternative site location, the assessment identifies that because the Proposed Development is specifically intended to remediate Cross Vein Mine to reduce
==== PAGE 19 ====
25/90698/B Page 19 of 30
further runoff, the consideration of an alternative site is simply not deemed to be applicable, with the need for the scheme being inherent to mine's location.
7.2.9 In relation to an a alternative site design the assessment identifies that the scheme has evolved as the result of an ongoing and iterative design process, in which various design alternatives have emerged and been considered. The design has been influenced by factors including environmental constraints identified through the EIA process; and feedback from stakeholders. It explains that the site design has undergone several design iterations, and the location of the sediment treatment area has been amended to minimise environmental impacts where possible. For example, the area has been located at the north of the Site to avoid the mine workings and the ecological exclusion zones. In addition, mitigation measures have been identified and incorporated into the proposal in order to avoid, remove or reduce any adverse environmental effects that cannot be adequately addressed through design. The proposal is considered to be the optimum design alternative, which has been the result of an iterative design process incorporating the views of key stakeholders, as well as environmental constraints. The assessment concludes that it constitutes the most sustainable alternative for development to meet the needs and objectives of the area, whilst minimising adverse impacts on the environment.
7.2.10 The comments of the Ecosystem Policy Team, set out above, should be noted in relation to the 'do nothing scenario' and that this could potentially be considered as a longer term option, but this does not address the issue of what to do with the de-watered silt currently held in the Peel de- watering lagoon, which the current proposal does also address.
7.2.11 There is therefore no obvious or apparent reason to disagree with the conclusion of the EIA Report and accordingly in terms of the key policy requirements the proposal can be considered to be acceptable and in compliance with the key relevant policies including Strategic Policies 1 and 2, General Policy 3, Environment Policies 1 and 27, and Waste Policy 1.
7.3 Highways Impacts
7.3.1 The key issue in terms of highways impacts relates to the traffic generated by the movement of the de-watered silt off-site from the Peel de-watering lagoon to the Cross Vein Mine and the other associated traffic movements (i.e. the import of soils as a growing medium and staff movements).
7.3.2 Relevant Policy includes the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, Strategic Policy 10, General Policy 2, Paragraph (i) and Waste Policy 1, which seek to ensure that new development does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the highway network.
7.3.3 The application includes a Transport Statement which sets out details of the anticipated traffic associated with the development.
7.3.4 The removal of existing de-watered silt is expected to take place in the third quarter of 2026 and involve the movement of approximately 16,000m3. The transport route from the lagoon to the primary road network was and still is expected to be along the designated HGV route through Peel. This route is designated under the Long or Heavy Vehicles (Designated Roads) Order 2015 and comprises sections of Mill Road, Station Road, the A27 (Patrick Street), Heathfield Drive and Queens Drive before reaching the primary road network at the A1 (Tynwald Road/Douglas Road). The DOI's road hierarchy map (DOI, 2016) classifies Mill Road as an access road and Station Road, the A27 (Patrick Street), Heathfield Drive and Queens Drive as secondary roads. The route would pass the Queen Elizabeth II High School, and for this reason it is stated that the transport of the sediment from the site to the Cross Vein Mine would not be undertaken at times of drop-off or pick-up of pupils at Queen Elizabeth II High School.
7.3.5 The route will then follow the A1 and the A3, then the A36 and Glen Rushen Road. There is a cattle grid on Glen Rushen Road, circa 60 metres north of the junction with the A36, which
==== PAGE 20 ====
25/90698/B Page 20 of 30
restricts HGV movements. It is proposed that a Traffic Marshal will be present to open the gate of the cattle grid for construction and operational vehicles.
7.3.6 The proposed site access arrangements comprise a priority-controlled T-junction on Slieau Whallian Road to the west of the Site, for construction and operational access. The proposed site access comprises a 6m carriageway, with 3m radius on the north side of the junction and 23m radius on the south side of the junction.
7.3.7 In terms of the operational traffic generation it is understood that the de-watered sediment will be transported to the Cross Vein Mone over three months, between August 2026 and October 2026, in 8m3 per load. This means that approximately 2,000 HGV loads will be required. Assuming a 22-day working month, the average number of HGV movements per day is expected to be approximately 60 two-way movements.
7.3.8 Once the sediment is treated, approximately 5,000m3 of growing medium will be transported to the Site, between October and November 2026 to facilitate the restoration of the Site to heathland. Assuming a 22-day working month and an estimation of circa 8m3 per load, the average number of HGV movements per day associated with this phase of work is expected to be approximately 58 two-way movements.
7.3.9 In addition to traffic movements associated with the delivery of materials, a number of additional trips will also be required in relation to staff. A maximum of 15 workers are forecast to be at the Cross Vein for the treatment and remediation works. Given the rural location of the Site and the lack of accessibility to public transport, it is assumed that all workers will travel to the site by private car. This will equate to 30 additional two-way daily car trips by staff to the site. This figure may be reduced if workers will arrive in shared transport. Adequate parking for all light vehicles will be provided within the site.
7.3.10 The average number of movements per day during the peak operation of the Site is expected to be approximately 90 two-way movements comprising of 30 cars and 60 HGVs. It is not anticipated that the movement of growing medium would be concurrent with the movement of the de-watered silt.
7.3.11 It is proposed that a Traffic Management Plan (TMP), will form part of the contractor agreements, offering a means of enforcement by the Site Manager. The aims of the TMP will be to ensure safe management and monitoring traffic, particularly for delivery of materials and for efficient travel to site for workers; and to maintain highway safety and the free flow of traffic on the public highway.
7.3.12 As set above two of the three third-party representations have raised concerns about the traffic impacts of the development.
7.3.13 The assessment of the traffic impacts set out in the transport Statement however concludes that the this level of traffic movements per day will have no material impact on the operation of local road network.
7.3.14 Highway Services agree with the conclusions set out in the Transport Statement and advise that the proposed level of traffic generation and routeing will have no significant negative impact upon the highway network in terms of highway safety, highway operation and car parking, and that they therefore have no objection to the proposal, subject to the inclusion of a condition to requiring the submission of details of wheel cleaning leaving the site. However, it is considered that this is a matter sufficiently covered by Highways legislation and so no condition is proposed.
7.3.15 In terms of the impact on highways the application can therefore be considered to be compliant with The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 Strategic Policy 10, General Policy 2, Paragraph (i) and Waste Policy 1.
==== PAGE 21 ====
25/90698/B Page 21 of 30
7.4 Ground Conditions and Contamination
7.4.1 The key Issues in terms of ground conditions and contamination relate to whether the levels of contamination on the site can be safely addressed and remediated, and whether the use of the treated silt from the Peel de-watering lagoon is appropriate and acceptable and does not give rise to any effects on sensitive receptors.
7.4.2 Relevant policy includes that set out in The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, Strategic Policy 4, Waste Policy 1, and Environment Policies 7, 22 and 27.
7.4.3 The issue of ground conditions and contamination is considered in the EIA Report, (Chapter 6 - Ground Conditions and Contaminated Land). It reports the potential significant effects of the Proposed Development in terms of ground conditions in the context of the Site and surrounding area. In particular, it considers the potential effects on soil and water contamination on sensitive receptors such as controlled waters, site users, construction workers and off-site receptors.
7.4.4 The assessment set out in the EIA Report is supported by a Preliminary Geo-Environmental Risk Assessment, an Outline Remediation Strategy, a Verification Plan, a Mining Report and a Sediment Reuse Feasibility Report. These assessments include appraisals of the potential for contamination, the risks to human health and controlled waters receptors, and the development of an Outline Remediation Strategy. The Outline Remediation Strategy for Cross Vein Mine includes the installation of a clean cover layer for the protection of human health and the installation of a capping layer to mitigate risk to the surrounding water environment by reducing leaching of contaminants. The feasibility study considers the suitability of the dredged Peel Marina sediment for the capping layer, following treatment.
7.4.5 The purpose of the assessment is to ensure that the Proposed Development incorporates appropriate mitigation such that it is compliant with the requirements of Part 2A of the UK Environmental Protection Act (EPA) 1990 and the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
7.4.6 The assessment is based on UK Environment Agency guidance (Land Contamination Risk Management (LCRM)) in the absence of IOM guidance and involves the use of background data and collected data to produce a conceptual site model. The model depicts the environmental processes that occur on and in the vicinity of the site and identifies the potential sources of contamination ('the sources'), the identification of who or what may be affected by the contaminants ('the receptors') and the possible pathways by which contaminants may migrate to one or more of the receptors ('the pathways').
7.4.7 Laboratory chemical analysis of the site has been undertaken on soil samples taken from across the Cross Vein Mine site. Arsenic concentrations are recorded at concentrations which exceed published UK Generic Assessment Criteria (GAC) for a public open space (parkland) end use at two sample locations, and lead concentrations exceed the GAC in eight locations at concentrations ranging between 1,700 and 79,000 mg/kg. The high concentrations of lead recorded is identified as most likely being due to the presence of lead ore in the samples. The main exposure pathway for these contaminants it identified as being direct contact and ingestion/inhalation of soil and dust.
7.4.8 A ground investigation has also been undertaken at the Peel de-watering lagoon. Soil samples obtained during the investigation have been compared against published UK GAC for a public open space (parkland) end use and none have been found to exceed the GAC. The results of the leachate testing have however indicated the potential for leaching of copper, zinc, nickel and lead from the sediment.
7.4.9 The investigation has confirmed that the sediment can be re-used in public open space (parkland) in terms of the risk to human health, but that it is not suitable for re-use in its current
==== PAGE 22 ====
25/90698/B Page 22 of 30
form in respect of the risk posed to the water environment. It identifies that the Peel de-watering lagoon sediment is suitable for re-use as part of the capping layer at Cross Vein Mine if treated to ensure protection of the water environment, with treatment involving the physical and chemical stabilisation and solidification.
7.4.10 The assessment identifies that during the works phases, potential risks to site workers and members of the public can be managed via the adoption of current best practice, the use of appropriate PPE and basic on-site health and safety considerations. It identifies that potential risks to controlled waters can similarly be managed through the adoption of good construction practices.
7.4.11 Following completion, the assessment states that a programme of post-remediation monitoring will be undertaken to measure the success of the remedial works, including on-going sampling and analysis of the surrounding watercourses to confirm that concentrations of lead and zinc downstream of Cross Vein Mine have reduced. The development will also be regularly checked for any required maintenance to ensure continued betterment of the Site and surrounding area.
7.4.12 The EIA Report in conclusion identifies, based upon the information available from the supporting assessments that, the residual effects will be negligible to moderately beneficial, and consequently that there are no potential issues or concerns at the Site that cannot be successfully managed or mitigated that would preclude the Proposed Development.
7.4.13 The application can accordingly be considered to be compliant with The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, Strategic Policy 4, Waste Policy 1, and Environment Policies 7, 22 and 27.
7.5 Impacts on the Water Environment
7.5.1 The key issue in relation to the water environment is whether there is any risk of significant effects arising from the treatment of sediment at the mine, remediation of the mine and any effects on the hydrological regime and water quality.
7.5.2 Relevant policy includes that set out in The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, Strategic Policy 4, Waste Policy 1, Environment Policy 7 and Environment Policy 22.
7.5.3 The assessment of the impacts on the water environment is set out in the EIA Report (Chapter 7 - Water Environment). It is supported by a hydrological walkover survey photographic record and a Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy. The assessment considers potential effects on surface water, groundwater, flooding, abstractions, public water supplies (PWS) or private water supplies (PrWS).
7.5.4 The assessment identifies that the site lies within the Foxdale River catchment, which is a sub-catchment of the River Neb catchment. Runoff from the Site drains towards the northeast to the Kerrowdhoo Stream and its tributary and ultimately to the Foxdale River and the River Neb.
7.5.5 Potential effects on the water environment are identified as those which may change the hydrological and hydrogeological flow regime, and those which may cause pollution and a degradation in water quality. The assessment identifies the pathways for water during the different phases of the development including the Enabling Phase, Treatment Phase, the Remediation Phase and the Post Remediation Phase. It identifies that:
o Surface runoff within the Site will be managed and directed to the settlement pond and discharged to a drain that would connect to the Tributary of Kerrowdhoo Stream; o Soil stripping, vegetation removal and earthworks can result in compaction of soil by machinery, which reduces infiltration, increases runoff and shortens the rainfall-runoff response and inhibits the vertical movement of water within the superficial deposits; o The potential for pollution from spills or leakage of fuel and oil from the use of machinery;
==== PAGE 23 ====
25/90698/B Page 23 of 30
o Earthworks can generate runoff high in sediment, which if not treated can have a polluting impact on the receiving downstream waterbodies; o The potential for pollution from the use of concrete and cement products, and in particular that when water comes into contact with concrete and cement products becomes highly alkaline; o The existing made ground at the site comprising mining spoil, contains several heavy metals, notably, lead, zinc and copper; o That hydrocarbons relating to the site's previous land use as a popular spot for off-road motorcyclists may become mobilised by the earthworks; and that o Treated sediment at the Site, may still contain small quantities of several heavy metals, notably, lead, zinc and copper.
7.5.6 However it also identifies that infiltration into the made ground will be reduced following the reprofiling and capping of the Site.
7.5.7 To 'lock in' contaminated soils or wastes, the assessment identifies that the sediment will initially be stabilised through the addition of binder material and other specific binder additives, for example a cement product (e.g., Portland cement or lime). The additives will result in the chemical fixation of soluble elements into more insoluble, chemically stable compounds, thereby reducing the leaching potential.
7.5.8 The assessment nevertheless acknowledges that it is not expected that all heavy metals will be removed from the sediment during the treatment phase and therefore that there is still potential for a small amount of leaching to surface watercourses and groundwater in the restoration phase.
7.5.9 To mitigate this, the proposal includes a number of designed-in or embedded mitigation measures, the most significant of which is that surface water runoff at the site during the enabling works, treatment and remediation phases will be directed via a series of drainage ditches to the settlement pond where it will be discharged via a weir structure to control the flow rate to the tributary of the Kerrowdhoo Stream.
7.5.10 It identifies that the existing ditch at the eastern end of the Site will be realigned to run into the new settlement pond at the beginning of the re-profiling and capping works to capture mobilised sediment. Temporary sediment controls such as heather bales, coir logs or sedimats will be implemented as necessary during the remediation works to prevent the migration of fine-grained sediments into the River Neb catchment, which may become mobilised during the works. Following completion of the works, the settlement pond will be cleaned out and any sediment dredged from the pond will be chemically assessed and disposed of at a suitable facility or, if feasible, treated to an appropriate specification for re-use as part of the capping layer.
7.5.11 In addition the works will be undertaken in line with guidance and codes of best practice which would be included in a Site's Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) or equivalent. It will be the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that all mitigation measures outlined in the Site's CEMP or equivalent will be implemented and adhered to.
7.5.12 The overall conclusion of the assessment is that for all receptors, with appropriate mitigation in place, the scale of potential impacts will be no greater than minor adverse, which is not considered to be significant. No significant cumulative effects are identified.
7.5.13 As noted above the EIA Report is also supported by a Flood Risk Assessment which identifies that the risk of flooding is generally low within the Site, and the risk of flooding will not increase as a result of the Proposed Development. It is, therefore considered that, from a flood risk and drainage perspective, the site is suitable for the Proposed Development.
7.5.14 As set out above there have been no objections from any of the key consultees in relation to the impacts on the water environment.
==== PAGE 24 ====
25/90698/B Page 24 of 30
7.5.15 It should be noted that two of the three third-party representations refer to water environment related issues; the first expressing concern about downstream flood risk and risk of pollution being increased in the Lower Foxdale area; and the second stating that there are private water supplies located within 2km of the site, a point also made by the Patrick Parish Commissioners.
7.5.16 In relation to the flood risk in Lower Foxdale, it may be the case that there is already as stated in the representation concern about flooding in the area. However, the issues to be considered in relation to the application, is whether there would be any consequential increased risk of flooding or pollution caused by the development. As set out above the EIA Report and the Flood Risk Assessment included with the application identify that this would not be the case. The Flood Risk Assessment states and concludes (at paragraphs 9.1.5 to 9.1.8 that:
"Surface water runoff will be stored and managed within the Site boundary. The increase in impermeable area as a result of the proposed development will be accounted for, with sufficient attenuation provided for all storm events up to and including the 1 in 100 year return period, plus a 20% allowance for climate change.
Attenuation will be provided within a settlement pond located in the north of the Site. A network of new drainage ditches will convey surface water runoff to the pond. Leaky dams will be installed along the ditches to increase storage capacity within the ditches. Discharge offsite, into the watercourse, will be restricted to greenfield runoff rate.
The proposed measures will provide significant reduction in downstream pollution compared to the existing scenario.
As the risk of flooding is generally Low within the Site, and the risk of flooding will not increase as a result of the proposed development, it is, therefore considered that, from a flood risk and drainage perspective, the Site is suitable for the proposed development".
7.5.17 In relation to the proximity of provide water supplies the assessment identifies that there are "no known Public or Private Water Supplies Within 2 km of the Site". The submitted objection, whilst claiming that there are does not state where these are or provided any evidence to support the assertion that there or how they would be impacted on. There are no records of planning applications for boreholes for public or private water supplies within 2km of the site and none of the relevant consultees have identified this as an issue.
7.5.18 Therefore on balance this is not considered to be a reason for refusal and the application can accordingly be considered to be compliant with The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, Strategic Policy 4, Waste Policy 1, Environment Policy 7 and Environment Policy 22.
7.6 Ecology
7.6.1 The key issue is whether the proposed import of de-watered silt and the remediation of the Cross Vein Mine have any potential to disturb or cause loss of sensitive habitats and species on and around the remediation site.
7.6.2 Relevant policy includes that set out in The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 Waste Policy 1, and Environment Policies 1 and 2.
7.6.3 The EIA Report (Chapter 8 Ecology) sets out an assessment of the likely significant effects of the Proposed Development in terms of Ecology. It is supported by a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal Report (PEA) that was prepared in 2020 and an accompanying technical note that has updated (in 2023) the survey results reported in the PEA.
==== PAGE 25 ====
25/90698/B Page 25 of 30
7.6.4 The species surveys undertaken include those for common lizard, invertebrates, bryophytes (small, seedless, nonvascular plants), breeding birds, wintering birds and hen harrier. The survey found evidence of all these, except hen harrier, with it concluding that the habitat was only of limited suitability for roosting hen harrier.
7.6.5 In terms of designated sites, there is one statutory designated site located within 2 km of the Site; Cronk e King ASSI, located approximately 1.6 km northeast from the Site and is notified for the presence of neutral hay meadows. Glen Rushen ASSI is located beyond 2 km, at a distance of approximately 2.4 km southwest from the Site, which is notified for areas of unimproved acid grassland, valley mires and flushes as well as a population of breeding birds. There are no non- statutory designated sites within 2 km of the Site.
7.6.6 In terms of habitat the assessment identifies that the majority of the mine site, to the east of Slieau Whallian Road, consists of mine spoil wastes with two small areas of Calaminarian grassland and old stone mining buildings. On the smaller area of the mine site, to the west of the road, is also an area of mine spoil waste but also dry dwarf-shrub heather moorland. Beyond the site boundary of the mine, the land is dominated by dry dwarf-shrub heather moorland with an acidic pool and overland drains.
7.6.7 The Site is located within an area of Registered Heathland (under the Heath Burning Act 2003). Due to the contaminated nature of the mine spoil waste within the Site, it is effectively bare ground. There is some emerging lichen and bryophyte growth, and as noted above for this reason it is proposed that two ecological exclusion zones are established immediately adjacent to the site.
7.6.8 The assessment identifies that there are a number of man-made drainage channels close to the Site boundary and within the surrounding area. They are generally shallow being 1.5 m wide with 50 cm high banks and only seasonally wet. They consist of plant species found elsewhere within the heather moorland but show characteristics of acid flushes (i.e. they can be acidic).
7.6.9 In summary the assessment concludes that the Proposed Development lies within the upland landscape of the River Neb Catchment, close to Foxdale. The Proposed Development is located within an area that supports various protected species and where various protected habitats can be found and that the planned sediment transportation, treatment at Cross Vein mine and the remediation of the Site can be undertaken without likely significant adverse effects on protected species, protected habitats or nature conservation sites. While there are some identified minor and moderate negative effects upon protected species and habitats in the short term, prior to mitigation, in the long term post-remediation, it is identified that there will be a minor to moderate positive effect across the registered heathland, calaminarian grassland, dry dwarf shrub heather moorland, and for common lizards, invertebrates, and breeding birds, and a minor negative effect for bryophytes, once restoration is complete.
7.6.10 The impact assessment concludes that with appropriate mitigation, there are no significant adverse residual effects and there are no significant cumulative effects.
7.6.11 As set above both the Ecosystem Policy Team and the Manx Wildlife Trust have highlighted that a recent lichen survey of the area has recorded 34 species of Lichen including some that are nationally scare and they recommend that the site is resurveyed before the works go ahead to ensure that the proposed ecological mitigation measures are updated if required. The Ecosystem Policy Team has also identified a number of matters in relation to which additional details should be secured by condition prior to the works starting on-site to ensure that the proposed ecological mitigations are updated as required. They also advise the appointment of an Ecological Clerk of Works prior to works starting, who will have responsibility for the implementation of the environmental mitigation.
7.6.12 On this basis the application can be considered to be compliant with The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 Waste Policy 1, and Environment Policies 1 and 2, subject to inclusion of
==== PAGE 26 ====
25/90698/B Page 26 of 30
conditions relating to the detailed woks on site and requiring that the appointment of an Ecological Clerk of Works who will have responsibility for the implementation of the environmental mitigation.
7.7 Other Matters
7.7.1 Other matters include noise and vibration, which are addressed in Chapter 9 of the EIA Report and the assessment of Cumulative Effects which is addressed in Chapter 10.
7.7.2 Noise and Vibration: Chapter 9 of the EIA Report sets out details of the likely significant effects of the Proposed Development in terms of Noise and Vibration for the remediation phase. It considers the likely significant effects on existing sensitive receptors (ESRs).
7.7.3 The key concern is identified as being noise arising from the transport of dewatered sediment between the Peel de-watering lagoon and the Cross Vein Mine, as result of the increase in HGV movements using the local road network. The baseline has been established by undertaking sound level measurements at 10 locations along the proposed transportation route between Peel and the Cross Vein Mine.
7.7.4 The assessment identifies that the core working hours considered in this ES will be 08:00 - 18:00 Monday - Friday; 09:00 - 14:00 on Saturday, with no works taking place on Sunday or Bank Holidays.
7.7.5 Best working practice will be implemented during the remediation phase. The following measures will be put in place in a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), to minimise impacts:
o All transportation vehicles will be regularly maintained to control noise emissions, with particular emphasis on lubrication of bearings and the integrity of silencers; o A programme of all works will be distributed to all identified ESRs in the area and updated as the Proposed Development progresses; o Broadband reversing alarms will be used instead of tonal alarms; o Adherence to the restriction of construction working hours; and o Where noise and vibration levels cause complaint, bespoke monitoring will be undertaken at the ESRs to determine whether Enabling Work traffic is causing Significant impacts or not. This will be secured through implementation of the CEMP.
7.7.6 The conclusion of the assessment indicates a magnitude of change for all receptors is low adverse. The resultant significance of effect is minor which is not significant during the daytime. As such, the assessment concludes that no additional mitigation is required to reduce sound levels at existing receptors.
7.7.7 It should be noted, as set out above, that the Patrick Parish Commissioners and the third party objectors have raised concerns about the impacts of the increase in traffic, including potentially traffic related noise. The assessment indicates that these concerns, whilst understandable, are not sufficient, given the working hours and the limited duration of the works, to warrant refusal of the application, and indicates that the adverse effects can be managed through the proposed mitigation measures which can be secured by condition.
7.7.8 There are no objections from the relevant consultees.
7.7.9 On this basis the application can be considered to be compliant with relevant development plan policy which includes The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 Waste Policy 1, and Environment Policy 22, subject to inclusion of conditions regulating the working hours and ensuring compliance with the proposed mitigation measures.
7.8 Cumulative Effects
==== PAGE 27 ====
25/90698/B Page 27 of 30
7.8.1 Chapter 10 of the EIA, together with each of the technical chapters considers the cumulative effects of the development. The assessment considers both Intra-cumulative Effects, which arise from the collective actions, aspects or effects of the Proposed Development, and Inter-cumulative Effects which arise from the Proposed Development and from other committed development projects of a similar size or scale in the area. The assessment identifies four other development projects in conjunction with which the Proposed Development could give rise to cumulative effects. However, it identifies that that the potential for both Intra-cumulative Effects, Inter-cumulative Effects cumulative effects is negligible, and is not significant. It should be noted, in response to the third-party representation objecting on grounds of the omission of reference to the Cair Vie onshore wind farm, that as no planning application has yet been submitted, this should correctly not be treated as a committed development. As such, that the EIA does not make reference to the Cair Vie onshore wind farm, does not invalidate the assessment.
8.0 CONCLUSION
8.1 The proposed remediation scheme as the Cross Vein Mine has to be viewed in the context of the overall strategy for dealing with the de-watered dredged silt from the Peel Marina, that is also relevant for Planning Application Ref. 22/00287/B for the Rockmount Silt Store and Planning Application Ref. 24/00301/B for the Peel De-Watering Lagoon. One of the key issues in the delay in the determination of 22/00287/B, has been the need to find a long-term alternative waste management option to re-use and/or dispose of the dredged material from the Peel Marina. To do this has meant developing a remediation option for the Cross Vein Mine which has been identified as one of the main sources of the elevated concentrations of lead and zinc in the sediment deposited in the Peel Marina. In addition, there has also been a substantive need in its own right to address the address the contamination of surface waters, and in particular the River Neb as result of contaminated waste from the mine draining into the river catchment, by identifying a remediation option for the mine.
8.2 In terms of the environmental impacts key issues include the impacts in relation to highways, ground conditions and contamination, the water environment, ecology, noise and Vibration and cumulative effects. The conclusions of the assessment in the updated EIA report of the impact across these issues, is that the development is acceptable, subject to the inclusion of the conditions set out at the beginning of this report.
8.3 There is no obvious or apparent reason to disagree with the conclusion of the EIA Report and accordingly in terms of the key policy requirements the proposal in terms of need and alternatives can be considered to be acceptable.
8.4 The application can accordingly be considered to be compliant with The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, Strategic Policies 1,2, 4 and 10, General Policies 2 and 3, and Environment Policies 1, 4, 7, 22, 24, 26 and 27, and Waste Policy 1 is therefore recommended for approval subject to conditions set out in this report.
9.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE
9.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted).
9.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to: o applicant (in all cases); o a Local Authority; Government Department; Manx Utilities; and Manx National Heritage that submit a relevant objection; and o any other person who has made an objection that meets specified criteria.
==== PAGE 28 ====
25/90698/B Page 28 of 30
9.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10.
9.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required): o any appellant or potential appellant (which includes the applicant); o the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, the Department of Infrastructure and the local authority for the area; o any other person who has submitted written representations (this can include other Government Departments and Local Authorities); and o in the case of a petition, a single representative.
9.5 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given the Right to Appeal.
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.
Decision Made : Refused
Committee Meeting Date: 26.01.2026
Signed : Mr Andrew Sierakowski Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
YES See below
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/ customers and archive records.
==== PAGE 29 ====
25/90698/B Page 29 of 30
PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 26.01.2026
Application No. :
25/90698/B Applicant : Department Of Environment, Food And Agriculture Proposal : Transportation of sediment from the Peel silt lagoon to Cross Vein Mine, treatment of it on site, and use in remediation of the site including capping works; this includes the construction of a settlement pond, temporary treatment plant, a vehicular access point, access tracks, drainage ditches, perimeter fencing, landscape works and temporary welfare facilities Site Address : Cross Vein Mine Slieau Whallian Road Lower Foxdale Isle Of Man
Planning Consultant Andrew Sierakowski Reporting Officer As above
Addendum to the Officer’s Report
The Committee overturned the Case Officer recommendation and the application was subsequently REFUSED for the following reasons.
R1. The proposed timing of the enabling works, including the transportation of the dewatered dredged sediment, between August and October, and the overall level of vehicle movements, would have an unacceptable impact on traffic and highway safety during the summer tourist season and therefore be contrary to Strategic Plan Strategic Policy 10(c).
R2. Inadequate consideration of alternatives to the treatment of the material at the Cross Vein Mine site, including the potential for the off-site treatment of the de-watered silt nearer to the existing lagoon site in Peel and therefore the proposal would be contrary to Waste Policy 1 and Strategic Plan General Policy 3(g).
R3. Inadequate consideration of alternatives to the deposition of the material at Cross Vein Mine, including the potential to spread the material on parkland and therefore the proposal would be contrary to Waste Policy 1 and Strategic Plan General Policy 3(g).
R4. There is too much uncertainty of potential impacts, in particular in relation to capping areas and so changing the permeability, and the impacts of this for example in relation to drainage and therefore the proposal would be contrary to Waste Policy 1(c)(vii).
==== PAGE 30 ====
25/90698/B Page 30 of 30
Reason for Refusal
R 1. The proposed timing of the enabling works, including the transportation of the dewatered dredged sediment, between August and October, and the overall level of vehicle movements, would have an unacceptable impact on traffic and highway safety during the summer tourist season and therefore be contrary to Strategic Plan Strategic Policy 10(c).
R 2. Inadequate consideration of alternatives to the treatment of the material at the Cross Vein Mine site, including the potential for the off-site treatment of the de-watered silt nearer to the existing lagoon site in Peel and therefore the proposal would be contrary to Waste Policy 1 and Strategic Plan General Policy 3(g).
R 3. Inadequate consideration of alternatives to the deposition of the material at Cross Vein Mine, including the potential to spread the material on parkland and therefore the proposal would be contrary to Waste Policy 1 and Strategic Plan General Policy 3(g).
R 4. There is too much uncertainty of potential impacts, in particular in relation to capping areas and so changing the permeability, and the impacts of this for example in relation to drainage and therefore the proposal would be contrary to Waste Policy 1(c)(vii).
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal