6 June 2005 · Planning Committee
Ballachrink Farm Cottages, Lane From Ballaragh Road To Ballachrink Farm Cottages, Ballaragh, Laxey, Isle Of Man, IM4 7pj
The proposal involved erecting 25 new holiday cottages on the upper part of an open field adjacent to existing tourist accommodation at Ballachrink Farm Cottages, creating a serviced camping site on the remaining sloping field, and improving visibility at the existing highway access from Ballaragh Road.
Click a button above to find applications similar to this one.
See how this application compares to similar ones — policies, conditions, and outcomes side by side.
The officer recommended refusal because the site is not designated for development under the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982, and the emerging Laxey-Lonan Plan only designate…
Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Development Plan) Order 1982
Site presently not designated for development. Emerging Laxey-Lonan Plan designates only existing developed area and prior permissions as Tourism, rejecting expansion despite applicant submission. Proposal fails as significant intrusion into undesignated open area without justification.
Emerging Laxey-Lonan Plan
Designates only built/permitted areas as Tourism (para 3.9, 3.16); no presumption for tourism over countryside protection unlike prior Eastern Sector Plan. Department retained limited designation based on built reality, rejecting full field inclusion as unjustified expansion.
No objection in principle, subject to conditions on private treatment plant and consultation with Environmental Protection
Business successful; need for more bedspaces and better campsites; concern if campsite intrusive on landscape
Provides much needed tourism accommodation; mixture of facilities; access to be designed with DoT; upgraded water supply
Multiple local residents submitted objections citing landscape impact, water supply inadequacies, road safety, and policy non-compliance; Drainage Division offered no objection subject to private maintenance of sewage systems and consultation with Environmental Protection; Enviro…
Key concern: Potential failure of soakaway system leading to foul breakout due to insufficient design or unsuitable ground conditions
Drainage Division, Department of Transport
Conditional No Objection**NO OBJECTION** In principle subject to:; this treatment plant together with any proposed foul and storm water sewers within the development will not be adopted by the Drainage Division and will remain private once in use
Conditions requested: Treatment plant and foul/storm water sewers will not be adopted and remain private with maintenance responsibility on applicant or successors; Applicant to consult Environmental Protection Unit of DoLGE regarding effluent discharge into watercourse; Submit detailed operation and maintenance programme for consideration; Incorporate comments in approval notice if approved
Environmental Protection Officer, Department of Local Government and the Environment
No CommentIt is essential that any soakaway system is designed correctly and is of sufficient size to cater for the volumes produced by the proposed development otherwise foul breakout could occur; I have enclosed some guidance and a questionnaire based on BS 6297: 1983
Conditions requested: Complete and return questionnaire based on BS 6297:1983 to calculate soakaway area
The original application for five additional holiday cottages alongside existing ones at Ballachrink Farm was refused due to policy concerns over intrusion into the countryside in an area of High Landscape Value and potential precedent. The appellant argued strong demand for holiday accommodation, support from the Department of Tourism and MHK, compliance with Eastern Sector Plan policies encouraging tourism, and no visibility or precedent issues. The Council defended the refusal citing Policy 4.5 against sporadic development, lack of policy for new buildings, opposition from parish and conservation groups, and precedent fears. The inspector found the proposal fits exceptions for tourism facilities under Policy 13.6, precedent concerns invalid due to site uniqueness, no visual or amenity harm, and recommended allowance with conditions ensuring holiday use only. The appeal was allowed.
Precedent Value
This appeal sets precedent that modest new-build tourist extensions to established rural complexes can qualify under tourism exceptions in High Landscape Value areas if invisible and site-unique. Future applicants should emphasise existing use success, official tourism support, and clear distinctions from refused precedents.
Inspector: JR Moseop
