• Minutes for the August 2016 Meeting

    October 10th, 2016 by Stan Pilling in General News ·Meeting Minutes

                                  RUSHEN PARISH COMMISSIONERS

    Meeting held 7pm Wednesday 24th August 2016, Ballafesson Hall.


    Present:- Mr P Gunn (Acting Chairman), Mr D Radcliffe, Mr S Pilling.   Mr J Young had indicated he may be very late due to work and arrived at 9.30pm.

    Apologies: Mr P Vernon.

    In the absence of the Chairman Mr Gunn took the Chair.

    The Clerk had been in contact with Mr Kelly of Nomads and had agreed to some of their Members meeting with the Commissioners to discuss the draft lease. Mr Parkes, Mr Kelly and their legal representative Ms Greenhalgh attended. This commenced at 7pm and finished at 8.15.

    The Public Session then commenced at 8.15:-

    1. MINUTES The Minutes of the meeting held Wednesday 20th July, having previously been circulated, were taken as read. Mr Radcliffe proposed, Mr Pilling seconded and all agreed that this was a true record.
    3. a) DoI/Local Authority Issues:-
    4. i) Department of Infrastructure: Transfer of function from DOI to Local Authorities; Waste Management and other such topics:-

    Transfer of Functions to Local Authorities from the Department of Infrastructure/Local Authority Transition.

    Waste charges at the EfW. Letter received from Mr P Gawne, Minister entitled Domestic Waste Disposal Charging 2016/17.                                                                                          “I am writing to you all following receipt of several letters and emails containing questions about the new charging regime introduced in this year. I am addressing the questions raised in this way rather that in individual replies to each letter because many questions are similar and others, who haven’t yet written, may be interested in the responses.” He covered:- Changed Regime and Timing; Impact on Local Authority Budgets; Legal Basis or Vires.                                                                             Part of the letter says:- “Availability fee is not to be recovered from CA sites and so a mechanism needed to be found to recover that element directly from local authorities. The basis used was the same basis used to allocate CA site costs between LAs which was not the same as tonnage or population. This has led to small differences in costs at individual authorities when the previous contribution to CA site costs is included in the comparisons. If this previous contribution is ignored then authorities will see an apparent increase in the costs of waste disposal.                                                                                                                                        At the most recent meeting of the Local Authority Waste Working Group I gave a commitment that on like for like tonnages no authority would be worse off under the new charging regime by more than £1,000 and that if they were then the DOI would meet the cost. This commitment does not include the impact of Civic Amenity Site related availability fees. In other words the guarantee is that, on like for like tonnage, the total availability charge to each local authority, including the contributions to CA sites, will not increase by more than £1,000. Total charges will of course vary as tonnage varies but only by £20.40/tonne.                                                                                                               The actual effect of the use of tonnage as a basis for allocation of availability fee combined with the increase in domestic waste in 2015/16 over 2014/15 means that the total charge per tonne of domestic waste in 2016/17 will be £77.90 or just under 1% less per tonne than in 2014/15 and 2105/16. The transition arrangement notified to you in January of this year means that all authorities will pay the same rate per tonne assuming that they deliver the same tonnage as in 2015/16. Obviously if the tonnage increases then the rate will decrease and if tonnage decreased then the rate will increase.”                                 This letter was noted.

    Also received 6 page document entitled ‘Charging for Disposal of Domestic Waste. This described how and on what basis the calculations were made. This was also noted.

    1. ii) Political WWG. No meeting held.

    Officer Waste Working Group – meeting held 21st July at Douglas Corporation’s Training Room at their depot.  The Clerk had attended although some hadn’t. Ian Harris, Director of Finance chaired the meeting. Stephanie Gray was also there making notes. The power point presentation couldn’t take place as the projection equipment didn’t work. The report received of the last meeting (when only a very few Clerks were allowed to attend – unless they gate-crashed) stated that it had been suggested by the Clerk to Port Erin Commissioners that the data regarding refuse weights, vehicle details, etc should be shared between LAs/Clerks. The Clerk (RPC) had reiterated RPC’s views that they didn’t feel there was any need to share this data and for another layer of bureaucracy and that LAs could and did already communicate with each other. MS Gray again asked and most agreed (these were Clerks) and all were to let SG know, in writing if they didn’t want their data shared. It transpired eventually that RPC were the only ones who didn’t agree.  A sub-committee of some Clerks had been set up to look into recycling and they met on 4th Aug. No report back from them to LAs.

    Next meeting of Officer WWG is on Tuesday 20th September

    Clinical Waste – Mr Pilling questioned why Local Authorities seem to be expected to pay for the secondary incinerator which burns clinical waste as this arising is from places such as hospitals, care homes, doctor’s surgeries, etc. It is not a domestic arising.

    iii) All Island Clerks Forum.  The next meeting was to be held at 10am on 6th October at Port St Mary Commissioners Office. The Clerk to attend.


    Email from the Clerk to Port Erin fwd 4/8 re the combined housing application form. He/they requested input re the handling of incoming housing application forms if they were hand delivered into a Parish office – this would form part of the ‘principles of operation’ document. “It is the intention to make the application process accessible to all, which would allow forms to be dropped off to Parish offices. Is this something you would like to happen? “   He gave scenarios which he would like RPC’s opinion upon – week commencing 22 August. “These views could be put in the document for final discussion.”                                                               Members were in agreement with this.

    Officers Housing WG meeting – none held.

    The Political Members’ Housing Working Group Meeting – none held

    1. v) Members’ Declaration of Interests Record Book. No new entries.
    2. b) Ballakilley Land

    Rushen Recreational Area.

    1. i) Agreement for Southern Nomads. – Draft Lease (as opposed to the Legal Agreement which they had almost two years ago) given to them on 21st Discussed in ptivate session.

    ii)) BMX Track/Skate park – meeting with Port Erin and Port St Mary. This was held on 27th July at Ballafesson Hall. All Members of RPC and their Mrs Kelly, Clerk were present; those for Port Erin Commissioners were Mrs Guy, Mr Egee, Mrs Sim and Mr Roberts;  for Port St Mary Commissioners Mrs McCabe Williams (their Chairman) and Mr I Skelly were present.

    The press release prepared by the Clerk and Members had appeared in the Examiner. Kristian from ISB had contacted the Clerk again after reading the article and was assured that he would most certainly be included when RPC would be holding meetings for interested parties.

    Mr Vernon, Chairman, had indicated to the Clerk that he would like the area at the Ballafesson Road side of the field, where there would be no pitches, to be measured and marked out so that an idea of the actual space could be physically seen rather than trying to envisage it from looking at the plans. Mr Radcliffe said that he would do this.

    The possible future uses of this land was for discussion and an action plan to explore options would be determined.

    iii) Rushen Burial Ground Authority

    The Clerk had contacted the Advocates to ask how close to Completion the transaction was. All the RBGA members had now signed the document and the Advocates were now just waiting for the due payments.

    1. iv) Church Field & Barracks Field – The grass in the Barracks field had been cut and would be baled as soon as the weather was suitable. The grass in the Church Field would most likely be left until just before the RBGA wanted to access their part of the field as it was possible that they would initially want to use the field gate and go over RPC’s part of the field.
    2. v) Ballakilley residential estate The Clerk had contacted David Humphrey from Dandara regarding various matters arising from the Estate. They were to contact her once they returned from holiday.
    3. c) Waste Management, Refuse Collection, Roads, Gullies and Hedges .

    Jones Services Ltd. Refuse collections . No problems.

    Cronk Mooar Farm, Shore Road. Lockable bin

    1. i) Road Sweeping – this would be done once the second weed spraying had been carried out.
    2. ii) Hedges – The Clerk had arranged for the second lot of hedges to be cut – the road from Cregneash down to the Darragh – on safety grounds.; a short distance on Ballagawne Road; the triangle at Cregneash. These had all been done on safety ground, with the exception of the triangle at Cregneash which didn’t pose any danger but had been done just to tidy it up.

    More would be done at the end of August/early September with the Clerk suggesting that Fleshwick Road should be done then rather than left until the last round of cutting in early October. Mr Radcliffe asked that when Ballakillowey and Sloc were being cut (usually as far as the car park) that a stretch of hedge on the right hand side above the S-bed be cut down as it was impeding visibility, this was especially important now that the road had been retarmacked which had increased the speed of traffic.

    iii) Gullies – 122 ‘extra’. The Clerk had written once again to the Minister pointing out that the document which Local Authorities were given by DOI Highways telling them how many miles of roads and hedges they all had in their area and the number of gullies. This also gave an indication of what these may cost to have done. RPC (and others) had negotiated agreements with Contractors using these numbers (but not the indicated possible costs). The Clerk had indicated to DOI that this would be a one off request for payment and that in future they would only be cleaning the number of gullies indicated on their Contract.

    Minister Gawne had passed this on to the LGU and a letter and payment had been received.

    1. iv) Pavement from Ballachurry to Ballakillowey roundabout. The Clerk had contacted the Clerk of PSM to ask if their men could do this work. He said he would get his foreman to have a look at it and report back. He had subsequently been in touch to say that they couldn’t do it manually and that they would have had to contract it out. The Clerk was to speak with the sub-contractor who cuts the hedges as he had indicated in the past that he had a mini-digger and may be able to do the work.
    2. v) Ballakillowey white line pavement. The Clerk had written to the owners of the four houses whose banks are by the road to ask if they would agree to a part of their bank being dug away to bring back the painted pavement to the width it had been. Two replies received both agreeing.
    3. d) Bring Banks nothing further
    4. e) Lighting: lighting at Fairy Hill. Mr Radcliffe informed the Clerk where there had been a request from a resident for a new lighting column by her house. As a new column could cost in excess of £2,500t it was thought that perhaps the resident could install a security light herself. However, as this was a DHSS property permission may have to be obtained. The Clerk to investigate.
    5. f) Traffic & DoI Highways. .

    SLG –  

    Shore Road. Mr Radcliffe had pointed out at a previous meeting that there had been two accidents there very recently, one of which resulted in very serious injury. The Clerk had written to Ms Hawley, who chairs the STLG meetings, on 11th August 2016– as follows:

    “Dear Ms Hawley

    Re: Shore Road, Rushen. Recent accidents.

    Rushen Parish Commissioners remain very concerned regarding road safety on Shore Road, Rushen. They have instructed me to write with regard, in particular, to the two accidents which happened recently. A young woman was seriously injured in the one near Kentraugh and remains in hospital in the UK. The other one was near Fishers Hill.                                                         As you will recall Rushen Commissioners have made their concerns known on many occasions at Traffic Liaison Meetings and elsewhere. They suggested putting down a ‘shell surface’ for the stretch of road near Kentraugh where many accidents occur . They were told this is not an option but that signage would be effective.                                                                                My Commissioners would like to know if Highways and Road Safety have come to any conclusion in light of these and other accidents that shell surfacing may have prevented the accident near Kentraugh. Also, what action are they proposing to make to prevent more accidents.                                                                                                                                      I look forward to hearing from you in time for our next Board Meeting on 24th August.”

    Reply received from Ms Hawley:   “Traffic Management – Shore Road. Thank you for your letter dated 11th August 2016 in connection with the above.                                                           As you are aware through previous correspondence, the Department have been assessing the route from Shore Road to Fishers Hill, and as such, the Department have included these two areas within their works programme.                                                                                             Work is due to commence November of this year at Fishers Hill, with additional signage along Sore Road. In addition to this, road improvements and resurfacing of Shore Road is programmed to be undertaken early 2018.                                                                                   Please be assured that the design engineers will be taking into account all accident data, road surface data and speed data during design stage to eliminate where possible incidents on the highway.                                                                                                                                         If you require any further information please do not hesitate to contact me”                      Andrea Hawley, Traffic and Transportation Technician.

    Members discussed this and it was agreed that to wait until 2018 for this part of the road to be ‘improved’ was totally unacceptable especially in light of DOI commencing at the Fishers Hill end in November 2016. There was clearly a problem near the Kentraugh gatehouses and this seemed likely to be caused by lack of road adhesion. The cost of an accident, which had been given a few years previously as more than £1million pounds for a fatal accident, was discussed regarding the recent serious accident in which a young woman had been seriously injured and had been air-ambulanced to a UK hospital where she remained in a serious condition. The cost to DHSS of such accidents and the subsequent care, perhaps lifetime care should be balanced against the cost of putting down shell surfacing and other safety measures on this road. In the short term and as a matter of urgency speed limits should be introduced, even if they were only temporary. Would the Highways Officers be prepared to explain to the family of another possible victim why they hadn’t heeded the concerns of the Local Authority and others.

    The Clerk was to draft a letter and circulate it for changes or approval before sending to Highways.

    g) Police Neighbourhood Watch for the Ballafesson area – Mr Young.   The Clerk had contacted the Police and eventually got hold of an officer who she asked to contact Mr Young. The contact was PS Adrian Shimmin, Southern Neighbourhood Policing Team at Castletown Police Station. The Crime Prevention Officer was Rob. Midgehall, based at Multi Agency Protection, Douglas HQ.

    Mr Young and Mr Radcliffe were also concerned about alleged drug dealing in Ballafesson, which they had brought to the attention of the Police but it seemed that no action may be taken. The Clerk to mention this at the next Police Meeting.

    h) Dog bins; fouling; Litter bins; Beach Cleans;

    Stickers for dog and litter bins. The Clerk had asked Quine & Cubbon if they had the old red and yellow crest which had been used many years ago. They didn’t have it anymore. The Clerk had asked Colas, who make Rushen’s road signs and put the crest on them if they had a digital copy which they could send her. A reply was awaited.

    Picnic area – litter bins:- There seemed to be no problem with those at present.

    1. i) Playing field, Howe Car Park. Nothing at present.
    2. j) Web Site Mr Pilling was keeping this updated.
    3. k) Southern Civic Amenity Site  (Southern Recycling Centre)

    Mr Pilling gave a report on the most recent meeting.

    Beachbuddies. Email received (fwd 10/8) from Bill Dale re the refusal to accept beach clean waste which contained dog fouling and tampons. Mr Pilling gave an update on this .   It had been pointed out that the SCAS was not licenced to accept organic material, which the rejected items were. The Clerk to the Amenity Site was sorting out this problem. The Southern Amenity Site was the only one where rubbish wasn’t put straight into skips by the public. Rubbish was piled on the concrete apron at the southern site and had to be transferred by digger and loaded into skips. This was why Beachbuddies didn’t have a problem at other Amenity Sites.

    1. l) Municipal Association

    Mr Gunn attended the meeting held on 18th August. Mr Eddie Teare, currently Treasury Minister until after the Election, had attended and spoke to Members.

    The Municipal Association were organising some training sessions for all Local Authority Members. The next one would be on Planning and all Local Authority Members were invited to attend. This would be held in October.

    1. m) Southern Swimming Pool Authority

    Mr Radcliffe said that everything was ticking over. The new cover for the pool which had been bought to conserve heat and thereby save on fuel had arrived but had to be sent back as it was the incorrect size for the pool.

    1. n) Marashen Crescent Elderly Persons Housing Authority

    Mr Radcliffe reported that the latest meeting had not been quorate so couldn’t be held.

    1. o) Southern Healthcare Committee  Mr Pilling said there had been no meeting since the AGM.
    2. p) Rushen Ambulance   The AGM would be held on 5th September and Mr Pilling would be attending..
    3. p) Manx National Heritage  
    4. i)   Meayll Hill – dog fouling (dogs and trial bikes).                                                                                 ii) The Sound. – dog fouling.   Suggested dog bin.

    Dog fouling and Trial bikes on Meayll Hill.    RPC’s Chairman has sent a reply to Mr Southworth letter wherein he had replied to RPC’s concerns about reported dog fouling and trial bikes:-

    “Mr E Southworth , Director, Manx National Heritage.       9th August 2016.

    Dear Mr Southworth

    Re: Dog fouling and Trail Bikes on Meayll Hill.

    Thank you for your reply to my letter regarding the concerns of both Rushen Parish Commissioners and members of the public about the above subjects. Your reply was discussed at our monthly Board Meeting and my fellow Board Members had some concerns regarding some of the content.

    It is noted that you say that Manx National Heritage will not be installing a dog bin on their land on the Meayll Hill. Whilst it is understandable that they don’t wish to incur extra costs my Board feel that at the very least MNH should be putting signs there asking people not to let their dogs foul the area and to use the dog bin which Rushen Parish Commissioners placed at the bottom of the lane several years ago. Likewise there should be notices stating that the use of trial bikes is not permitted on MNH land. This would not be costly but may have the desired deterrent effect. Having the notices there would also be helpful should MNH have to prosecute anyone who may cause major damage.

    You suggest in your letter that the only practical way of physically preventing trial bikes from using the Hill would be to exclude all vehicles from it by fencing the roadside along the Cregneash to Port Erin Road together with lockable field gates and kissing gates to all of the access points onto the Hill. All the Members of my Board would not support this. MNH could not close the Hill to the public as there are various other owners, known and unknown, who may object and it is very certain that the public would be vociferous in their objections.

    Rushen Parish Commissioners are of the opinion that the content of your letter is not a productive way forward and that MNH need to actively preserve the land which is in their care.

    Yours sincerely   Peter Vernon.   Chairman.”

    The letter had been acknowledged by Mr Southworth’s Secretary and a reply was awaited.

    1. q) Risk Assessment  Health and Safety.  Mr Vernon and the Clerk had reviewed the Risk Assessment and sent the changes to the Consultant, Mr Edwin. The Clerk had also requested an up to date Risk Assessment from Jones Services for both their refuse collection services and the roads, hedges and gullies. These had been received.
    2. r) Grass Cutting : This has been carried out as usual. Weeds – there were a few places which needed sprayed again. Mr Booth had sent an email asking when he should commence spraying. It was agreed that he should go ahead when the weather was suitable.
    3. s) Meayll Book. The Clerk suggested that a re-launch be held in time for Christmas sales and suggested that, should Mr Rimington, the author, be on the Island before then, perhaps a photograph of him on Meayll could be taken to publicise the book.
    4. t) World War 1 Commemorations 2014-2018.


    1. u) Port Erin Commissioners – boundary extension proposed by them to take part of Ballakilley residential development.

    Documents had been received from the Local Government Unit on Friday 29th July, with an enclosed letter and plan from Port Erin Commissioners to the LGU dated 25th July. This indicated that Port Erin Commissioners were intent upon taking all of the large field where the main part of the housing development was taking place and right up to the boundary wall of Rushen Churchyard. As there would not be a full Board of Members available until October due to various Members being on holiday during that time, including the Chairman, this matter couldn’t be considered until there was a full Board. It was agreed that it was essential that this matter be considered until the October Meeting at the earliest. The Clerk to inform the Local Government Unit Manager that the timescale suggested in his letter was unrealistic given the time of year when not only Local Authority Members and staff may be on holiday but also government officers who RPC may need to contact.

    It was noted with disappointment that when RPC had held the meeting on 27th July regarding the Rushen Recreational Area at Ballakilley, with members of Port Erin Commissioners and their Clerk and also of Port St Mary Commissioners having been invited and attended, that neither the Members nor Clerk of Port Erin had mentioned that they had sent the letter to the Local Government Unit two days previously. This was despite part of the land being discussed as suitable for paths, seats and recreational being within the land they were seeking to take into their boundary.

    1. v) Notice Board. It was agreed to order a slightly smaller notice board and place it near to Rushen School as it would be seen by a lot of parents and people who use the area for walking and exercising their dogs.
    2. w) Flooding and Wave Overtopping and Shore Road.

    No reply had been received from Mr N Black, Chief Executive of DOI to RPC’s letter of 14th March. A reminder had been sent and an email had been received on 12th August from Graham Smith, Senior Asset Engineer, Highways Services, DOI. :-                                             “Further to your letter of 9th August concerning the above. (Bay ny Carrickey maintenance work). I can report the following: I met our contractor on site this morning to inspect the area and agree a suitable method of maintenance. The rocks that have been moved by the sea over the winter months are to be moved back against the face of the concrete steps. This work is programmed to be undertaken within the next fortnight. This work was entered into an annual maintenance programme in 2014 and would have been undertaken this summer anyway as a matter of course.                                                                                                                                             I have also been in discussion with our construction manager who is investigating the possibility of sourcing larger rocks for the area to try and reduce the amount of rock movement. I hope this will help relieve your concerns.”

    This was noted. The Clerk was also to write to Mr Salmon, who had spoken at the Public Meeting arranged by RPC in November 2015 to ask what progress he was making with regard to the proposed concrete blocks which he had indicated could be put there instead of large stones.

    x) Roads in poor condition.

    Honna Road ,Surby Road, Glen Chass Road and others. Sloc Road re-tarmacked.

    The Clerk had written to the Director of Highways:- 1st June. No reply yet but she had mentioned it again at the Traffic Meeting which he attended. She had written again and a letter has been received from Bill Corlett, Highway Engineer, DOI:-

    Roads in Rushen and the South. Thank you for your letter concerning the state of the roads in the south of the Island and specifically around Rushen which was sent to Jeffrey Robinson who has passed it to me to respond on his behalf.                                                                               All of the roads mentioned in your letter have now been inspected. In the opinion of the Inspector none of the roads are in a dangerous condition, but there are sections of which require patching. Some of the smaller roads, such as the Honna/Bradda East Road and the   Glen Chass do need extensive patching works carried out. I could not justify the expenditure of completely resurfacing these roads, as they are very minor roads, but I will ask that they be put onto the patching schedule. The section of road from Fistard down to Port St Mary was in a particularly poor state but this has been treated recently to make it safe.                                The Colby to Ballakillowey Road is on our schedule to be resurfaced. However, it is not on this year’s schedule, but it does at the moment appear on the schedule for 2018. Some patching work has been carried out very recently on this stretch of road in the Colby Level area.      With regards to the Sloc Road, this work was carried out primarily to enable a motorsport event, namely the Hill Climb, to carry on using this road. They had stopped using this road a number of years ago, as the ride quality of the road was too bad for them to continue with the event. This was also noticeable to normal road users. As Government is promoting such events as a source of income to the Island, it seemed sensible to ensure that the roads they use are suitable. Unfortunately a cheaper option, such as surface dressing or micro-asphalt, would not have been suitable as the old road surface was too rough for these to be effective. I quite agree that the Main Road through Colby is a lot busier but it is in our programme for 2018.  The surface of the Corlea Road had degraded to such an extent that it had very poor skid resistance. There had been a number of accidents recently which could have been put down to this poor skid resistance. The road was not suitable for surface dressing to improve the skid resistance, because it had already had a number of layers of surface dressing on it which had the effect of making the surface very bitumen rich (shiny in appearance).   I hope this addresses the issues raised in your letter.” Bill Corlett, Highway Engineer.

    This reply was noted.

    1. y) Parking at Rushen School.  This had mentioned at the Traffic Liaison Meeting and the Clerk had been given a plan showing where DOI would be putting down the yellow lines. These had now been installed.
    2. aa) Derelict Properties. Nothing at present.
    3. ab) Litter Mr Radcliffe’s letter to all MHKs.  Although he had drafted this it was agreed that it should not be sent out until the new House of Keys had been elected and had time to settle in.


    This can be read at the Commissioners’ office by contacting the Clerk on 934501.

    2. a) 2nd Supplemental List 2016. Valuations with effect from 1st August. Noted.
    3. b) Data Protection Registration Renewal

    Letter and form received for renewal by 22 September. The fee had remained at £50. The Clerk to check to registration and return with the payment cheque.

    1. c) Housing – Project Management Unit within the DOI.

    Letter from the Director, Housing Division clarifying the role of the new Project Management Unit within the Housing Division of DOI. Members had been given a copy. Noted.

    1. d) Digital Inclusion Strategy 2016-2021.

    Approved by Tynwald on 20th July. Digital inclusion webpage is www.gov.im’digitalinclusion.

    1. e) consultation – Proposals to Accelerate Economic Growth

    Rec. from Steven Tallach, Legislative Officer, DED.  Responses by 30th September. This was noted but individual members could respond if they had any proposals to put forward.

    1. f) Electronic Transaction Act (ETA)

    Briefing support documents received (this was part of the presentation given at the all-Island Clerks’ forum in June). They required two lists – 1. A list of anything that you are statutorily required to carry out which is performed electronically or that you offer the option of doing online or by email.   2. A list of tasks/services that cannot be provided electronically now or in the future (with reason). Lists to be sent in by end of August. The Clerk would consider this and reply accordingly.

    1. g) Civic Service. Marown Parish Commissioners. Civic Service to be held at Marown Parish Church at 11.15am on Sunday 18th Chains of Office may be worn. As the Chairman and Vice Chairman would be away there would be no representative.
    2. h) Cost Limit for freedom of Information Requests 2016. Noted.
    3. i) Draft Fraud Bill Comments by 7th October.   Noted.


    2. a) 16/00788. Croit-e-Caley Methodist Church, Croit-e-Caley. Architectural Outsourcing Services. (the owners are still the Trustees for Manx Methodist Church Purposes – the applicants are potential the purchaser). Proposed internal and external alterations to existing Chapel to create residential dwelling. It already has permission for ‘change of use’ PA 15/00521.   No objections.
    3. b) 16/00904. Former Fruit Farm, Croit-e-Caley. (retrospective) Mr Ian Kelly. Erection of timber clad shed to accommodate horticultural machinery and implements including other associated horticultural management products. “This application seeks retrospective approval for erection of timber shed used for storage of horticultural machinery, tools, implements and associated products. The materials used to construct the shed are wholly appropriate for purpose and location. The shed is located so as not visible from any public viewpoint and is not visually impacting. The shed is required to service the ongoing reinstatement of the fruit orchard that has been neglected. No objections.
    4. c) 16/00936. retrospective –     part of field number 411755 off Mull Road. Cheeseden Investments Ltd. Deposit of inert waste material with remedial restoration work. This is a ‘follow on’ PA from previous 16/00102 which has been withdrawn following discussions with the planning office. The previous submission proposed that the site be used for agricultural purposes, whereas this PA proposes to return the site back to heathland, which was the original status of the field. No objections.
    6. a) 16/0567. Fern Cottage, Howe Road. Dr & Mrs J McDonald. Erection of an extension and creation of an additional window to dwelling. Usual conditions. Decision – Interim Director of Planning and Building Control. Issued 26th July 2016.
    7. b) 14/01075. Extension to graveyard and creation of car park, part of field 414214, Church Road. Letter from planning to Guy Thompson ,architect re the proposed block paviours which he had sent a photograph of to them. They have been approved
    8. c) 16/00740. Former Motorlands & Nooklands, Shore Road. Hartford Homes. Erection of three dwellings and erection of garden store to replace garge (amendment of PA 15/00738) Conditions include 3. Prior to the occupation of each dwelling, the respective visibility splay identified on Plan 02 Rev C, date stamped as having been received on 8th July 2016, shall be constructed in accordance with the approved plans and thereafter kept permanently clear of any obstruction exceeding 1050mm in height above adjoining carriageway level. Reason: in the interests of highways safety. 4. Notwithstanding the approved plans, the high close-boarded fence shown running in a southwest /northeast direction to the rat of plot 3 shall be no higher than 1.05m in height for a distance of 2m back from the highway, and retained permanently as such thereafter. Reasons: in the interest of highway safety.   Decision – Planning Committee. Issued – 24th August 2016.
    9. PLANNING REFUSALS   none.
    11. a) 14/07604/DEX. Elysian, Glen Chass. Mr and Mrs Salinardi. Internal alterations and single storey extension to a private dwelling and a first floor extension over the integral garage. Issued 4th August 2016.
    12. PLANNING APPEALS       none.
    14. a) Planning Appeal fees increase – The Town and Country Planning (Application and Appeal Fees) (No 2) Order 2016, Building (Fees) Regulations 2016.

    Tynwald had approved an increase in fees in respect of planning and building control applications with effect from 1st August 2016. Also includes an increase to the charges applied where an appeal is lodged against a planning decision. Both Orders had a fee rate increase with effect from 1st August 2016, including a further effective from August 2017. The Clerk had forwarded the letter to all Members so that they could see the various increases.

    2. a) Policing concerns – Mr Young. Mr Young and Mr Radcliffe expressed their concerns regarding policing in the Ballafesson area and in particular with possible drug dealing.   This would be brought up at the next Police Meeting with particular mention as to what steps an individual and concerned member of the public/resident is legally able to do.                                                    The Clerk was also to write to the DHS with regard to what their policy is for tenants/tenant’s family members possibly involved with drugs.
    3. DATE OF NEXT MEETING   The Hall would be used at one of the Polling Stations for the Election on 22nd September and would be getting set up the day before and the Chapel were also holding a Coffee morning on the Tuesday. It was agreed that the September Meeting would be held on Monday 19th September.

    As there was no further business for the public session this finished at 10.35pm and went into private session.