13 January 2006 · Planning Committee
Hardstanding Area Adjacent To, Cronkdhoo Farm, Main Road, Greeba, Isle Of Man, IM4 2dx
The proposal sought permission to change the use of an existing hardstanding area (28m x 16m) next to the campsite facility building at Cronkdhoo Farm for parking motor homes, mainly for short stays but also year-round, with access to cleaning facilities.
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 noted that Cronkdhoo Farm has seen incremental growth of activities and buildings, leading to visual clutter detrimental to the Area of High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance, and in…
no adverse traffic impacts
Should approval be given it is on the basis that there is sufficient capacity to take extra waste and there is a proper method for removing the waste from camper vans.
Highways Division raised no objection due to no adverse traffic impacts, while German Parish Commissioners objected due to visual impact and traffic concerns on the busy A1; Food Safety expressed conditional concerns requiring septic tank capacity and waste removal method.
Key concern: visual impact in area of high scenic value
Highways Division
No ObjectionNo adverse traffic impacts.
Food Safety
Conditional No Objectionif planning approval is to be given, it is on the basis that there is sufficient capacity to take the extra waste and there is a proper method for removing the waste from the camper vans.
Conditions requested: sufficient capacity to take the extra waste; proper method for removing the waste from the camper vans
German Parish Commissioners
ObjectionMy Commissioners object to this application on the grounds that the visual impact from the highway and the elevation of the site will make this development intrusive.; Also the Commissioners are concerned that large camper vehicles will be ingressing and egressing the site on the busy A1.
SPMCE
The Society therefore must express concern.; Is this the first?; if approved, how can we limit it to just that and won't it set a precedent?
The original application sought alterations to a 1996 agricultural building for seasonal campsite facilities (toilets, showers) and additional dog kennels with external pens. The Planning Committee refused due to insufficient agricultural underuse, intensification of campsite and kennel uses, noise nuisance to residents, visual harm in High Landscape Value area, and drainage concerns. The appellant argued the farm required diversification, existing camping and kennel uses were long-established, alterations were internal and screened, no noise evidence existed, and seasonal use avoided conflicts. The inspector found no visual harm as changes were not visible, accepted existing campsite use from prior permissions, deemed noise risks low due to screening, distance, and existing similar uses, and considered diversification appropriate. The appeal was allowed subject to seasonal use and fire safety conditions.
Precedent Value
This appeal shows inspectors will allow farm diversification into tourism/kennelling in rural areas if changes are contained in existing buildings, screened, and no proven amenity harm, even in High Landscape Value zones. Applicants should document established uses and officer lacks of evidence.
Inspector: David G Hollis
