Crossag Farm & Clagh Vane
Once again we have seen the Isle of Man Government’s behaviour at its worst.
The first sitting of the Inquiry July 2007:
Their written case in advance of the inquiry was slim, ours was copious (over 100 pages) and in the 20 copies supplied weeks in advance as is the custom.
At the hearing they suddenly produced one single copy of 150 odd pages of new expert evidence, supported by several overseas witnesses and marshalled by an overseas lawyer and overseas experts, most witnesses new to the process and introduced essentially in reply to our advanced evidence and presumably in the hope that the Inquiry could be confined to a decision based on paper submissions. We protested and asked for an adjournment, but after private discussion, we were persuaded to try to continue to represent our case.
When on the second day they declared that the ‘Strategic Plan’ had been passed by Tynwald the evening before and that the rules had been changed, we did walk out, as quite properly also did the Commissioners Clerk pending new instructions from his Board and appropriate legal advice.
The second sitting of the Inquiry October 2007:
We finally had our opportunity to put our objections, as members of BADRA, a number of individual
objectors and objections from the commissioners where as powerfully put, to pick out one or two points that it was attempted to get over.
The traffic problem was very strongly put, but according to the expert from overseas Ballasalla does not have a traffic problem and the new development will not affect things!
The density of the public sector and first time buyers was questioned in comparison to the large private houses; we were informed that it is not financially viable to allocate the same space for public sector and first time buyers.
As for public space available for leisure the football field is to be included as is landscape planted areas.
Concerns over the close proximity to Glashen Close the answer was is as per developments across.
When concerns where pointed out that it was not necessary to demolish Clagh Vane, and that previously surveys of Clagh Vane had stated small repairs and alterations were all that was required the reply hinted that the decision to demolish was not that of DOLGE but the Treasury.
(Webmaster: I am sorry I have not put all the objections but space limits me, details are available from committee members)
To paraphrase our doubts about the whole project, we are not totally against the development what are concerns are:
They (Government) have not yet honoured their promise of a ‘Village Plan’, nor do they have the remotest current intention of doing so.
They have only vague and unspecified plans for a by-pass and traffic amelioration and we cannot accept their promises with confidence as we have seen at the Inquiry they still deny there is a problem.
They have not in place, nor any apparent intention for, any financed plans for play amenities, a park or proper ‘Green Amenity Lungs’
We are not satisfied over the need for the destruction of Clagh Vane, whose need for repairs can be laid firmly at the door of DOLGE, these houses are repairable, their retention desirable.
We are very unhappy with the lack of support facilities: from the considerations of the disabled, the lack of footpaths or social amenities for the young etc. the increased distance to the shops etc.
The lack of proper priority for the first time buyers.
The inappropriate position and size of the school.
The over intensive development which goes considerably against what was agreed as appropriate in 7/91,which has been the only public discussion so far.
In conclusion how it is possible to expect a village, already burdened by huge and fast increasing traffic concerns, which will be worsened by the Airport expansion, to now engage on an increase in their housing and thus population of some 60% without proper regard to the increase of amenities.
No other town or village in the Island could be expected to accept such sudden growth.
If this expansion were allowed to go ahead the pleasant ambience of the village would be finished.
Even with the vast outcry from the people of Ballasalla that this is not wanted, unfortunately Government attitude can be summed up in one statement made by a member of DOLGE at the recent meeting re the alterations to be made to the remaining parts of the Clagh Vane estate, (I make no apologies as to including all public sector houses Quines close, Crossag close, Clagh Vane, etc under the one name as this is the Clagh Vane community), when the official was asked why a metal fence was to be put up in one spot when nobody wanted it, ‘BECAUSE THE DEPARTMENT HAS DECIDED THAT IS WHAT WE WANT’ unfortunately this is the mentality we are fighting.