Case for applicant

Not all documents to be read out but inspector will report all cases in full.

Opening statement from Mr Ryzner.

Chartered Town Planner.

Assist applicant.

To provide clarification on planning policy.

Change of order

Mr Podmore unable to attend, Paul Barnett to deputise.

Change in order of presentations.

Listing relevant planning legislation.

"Not in conflict with any regulations".

Issues raised as objections carefully considered. Key concerns may be responded to. No mention of the number of objections.

Different aspects of objections to be dealt with by different officers.

Not here to defend application only to explain.

Mr Hannay questioning.

Status of conservation area?

mr Ryzner explaining.

Murray Lambden asked whether it was unusual not to mention number of objections? Answer from mr Ryzner not a high number.

Mr quirk asked about "tweaks"

Jim Davidson to speak

In highways system for 16 years.

Includes Phase 1 development,

Prom unchanged for 80 years . Lock prom in 30s.

Sumarise use. Gateway to Isle of Man. Horse trams in 1978.

Driving demonstrates how bad the roadway is. Complete reconstructoin required. drainage system also failed. Skidding resistance below safely levels. "Unnecessarily pedestrian segregation."

Large vehicles unable to pass horse trams. Unless horse trams moved can design road safely.

2014 scheme modified to include walkway.

Department believes application best solution.

Mr Hannay - has corporation raised safety issues? Yes.

Mr Pennington asked re accidents?

Mr quirk - who owns tracks? Corporation.

Mr Butt - clarify history? Was previous reconstruction done with horse trams in place? Yes, they moved. Can it be reconstructed with trams in place?

Mr Barnett to speak in place in Mr podmore. mr podmore's statement.Senior design engineer. 13 years.

Supplementary information.

Objections relate to safety. DoI have addressed these.

Engaged with groups representing vunerable groups.

Broadway to Queens Gardens widened in response to Facebook representations.

Overall size of walkway increased.

Inspector confirmed that route does take splice off Queens Gardens.

Mr Hannay - lack of taxi rank spaces? Are they needed at all.

Mr Barnett - taxi ranks to be maintained or increased.

Mr Hannay questioning speed of trams? Mr Barnett accepts speed inaccurate in document.

Mr churcher are lines still there? Yes.

Mr Churcher challenging increasing space? Clarifying use of pavement.

Inspector not clear that there is extra space either.

Mrs Churcher - questioned marking.Width of tram or overhang.

Murray Lambden said total width  7 ft. argument about metric and imperial but basically agree.

Mrs Murray asked about cycling. answer it will still be permitted.

Mrs Murray also mentioned campaign for safe distance between bikes and cars. Not considered.


Mr Hannay refers to "walls of cars" by consultant.

Mr Barnett says design changes.

Mr Hannay - has DoI accepted Douglas Corporation Parking review. Can't answer.

Mr Ryzner not adopted 2013 parking report. A REVIEW OF PARKING IN 2013 NOT CONSIDERED IN SCHEME

Mr Thomson to speak. Chartered Landscape Engineer. Consultant. Involved since 2011.

Explaining what they are trying to achieve. Roundabout at Gaiety not good.

Cultural area. Explaining different surfaces.

Seating "under consideration."

Connectivity important.  With lighting too. Positive boost for town.

Responses to objectiions

Tramway defined by different colours.

Different paving.

Example Spain, and Blackpool.

Plenty of space to move away from tram. Better safety than now.

Crossing points defined.

540 to 485 car parking reduction (check)

Crossing given priority.

Re loss of amenity.

Current policy to maintain open space no conflict with open space policy.

seating not shown - that is only detailed  design.

Mr quirk questions about positioning of trams.

Murray Lambden was tram corrider marked during period of planning application? given that is the area where old people sit in shelter. Black looks but no.

Monica Floding asked about shelters. Yes there will be.

Gill Churcher - what is width of narrowest part? 4.6 metres to allow tram overhang but safety distance for cycling.

Gill Churcher - questioning demarcation of tram track.

Question re seating from senior building officer. answer - can't stay where it is.

Marie Lambden - given a number 267! Second question re marking of corridor or the tracks. Jim Davidson - preferred to mark just tracks. Inspector supported questioner.

Mr Ryzner said they did offer to explain to anyone and has offered to mark tram corridor.

Gill Churcher - further question re width of corridor, safety margin and net width.

Mr Barnett giving sizes. 1.m metres safety zone. 900 track 600 overhang and 600 safety zone on other side. A bit of confusion.

Inspector calculating total width! Everything stopped trying to work out sizes.

Inspector asked for more measurements.

Mr Quirk asked questions about railway legislation.


Sorry. I think I have lost some comments from Mr Allan re traffic modelling.

thinks that traffic flow will improve.

Questionned by Mr Hannay re basis of improved traffic flow. answer evidence re shared space.


Further explanations about traffic modelling. Can't understand.

Inspector summarised that model takes account of additional crossing.

Mr quirk - no comparison with model for road with tram tracks. Clarification, yes it has been compared with current situation.

Mr C? Various professional qualifications. Another consultant. Has investigated over 300 accidents. Road safety audit team.

4 stages to road audit.

This audit just stage one based on application.

Audit finalised on 18 May. Not seen full set of drawings.

14 safety problems, All addressed. Mitigated in revised plans.

Mr Quirk - any advice on walkway. Yes, included safety audit of whole scheme.

Mr Quirk - who provided information on stopping distance on trams. NOT PROVIDED. but did ride on "to get a feel" of stopping distance.

Mr Burroughs. Next consultant to talk. Project management.

Concept forming basis of application.

Talking about emissions.

No adverse impact on air quality.

No negative noise levels.

Removal of potholes may reduce noise.

Tramway capable of being risk assessed and safe.

footway alterations improve public space around Gaiety.

Summary: everything will be better.

Shared space of trams and other can be safe.

Moving horse trams will make it safer.

Railway experts consulted.

Statement by Mr Burroughs submitted to environment safety and health,

Mr Hannay asking what "a lot of opposition" to positioning of tram tracks alongside road in 2014 amounted to. Where is evidence?

NO MINUTES OF MEETING WITH STAKEHOLDERS

Inspector reading out results of 2014 consultation.

Murray Lambden whether the 2014 consultation included any online consultation. (using the MHK approach of knowing the answer)! NO

 2010 consultations were much more extensive.


Mr Yellop now talking about health and safety.


Risk profiling - reduced risk as far as possible, Horse tram operator consulted.

Defines reasonable foreseeable.

Job to ensure there is co-operation between all parties to make it safe,