11 July 2012 · Deputy Minister for Infrastructure, Mr P Gawne MHK
Ard Na Mara House, Quines Hill, Port Soderick, Isle Of Man, IM4 1ba
The proposal sought retrospective permission for demolishing existing barns and constructing a new two-storey building containing seven self-contained tourist units, plus decking with a swimmer pool and hot tub, at Ard Na Mara House (formerly Southampton Farm) in open countryside.
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 Deputy Minister refused the appeal against the Planning Committee's refusal, stating the proposal is contrary to General Policy 3 and Business Policy 11 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 as i…
General Policy 3
Prohibits development outside zoned areas except specific cases like conversions (HP11). Officer assessed no exceptions apply as this is new build post-demolition, not conversion of intact redundant rural buildings.
Business Policy 11
Tourism must comply with countryside protections; allows rural building reuse per ENV16. Failed as new build, not reuse, in open countryside.
Environment Policy 1
Protects countryside unless overriding national need. No such need demonstrated; harms countryside character.
Environment Policy 2
Protects Areas of High Landscape Value (site designation). Development harms landscape character; not essential location.
Housing Policy 11
Allows rural building conversion if intact, of interest, no major rebuild. Explicitly prohibits replacement buildings; site involved full demolition/rebuild.
Business Policy 14
Rural tourism must comply with GP3/BP11/12. Failed countryside tests despite self-catering intent.
Self-catering tourist lets are valuable additional accommodation with high occupancy and economic benefit. Fits Visitor Economy Strategy for outdoor activities. Four-unit property achieved 4-star rating.
no objection
Mixed responses to retrospective application 12/00233/B for demolition of barns and erection of seven tourist units at Ard Na Mara House, Quines Hill, Port Soderick; Braddan Commissioners and Highways Division had no objection, while Community Planning Service objected on zoning grounds, and Manx Electricity Authority requested contact for utilities.
Key concern: site is not zoned for tourist use
Braddan Commissioners
No ObjectionThe Commissioners had no objection to the following planning applications:; PA12 00233 - Mr Martin Marlow - Proposed Demolition of Barns and Erection of Seven Tourist Units (Retrospective)
Manx Electricity Authority
Conditional No ObjectionThere are Underground Cables/Overhead Lines present in the area indicated in you Planning Application; The Authority wish to express their interest in the following planning applications, and request that a condition of planning be that the applicant must contact the Authority
Conditions requested: The applicant must contact the Authority; Contact our Network Operations Department, Manx Electricity Authority, (Tel. 687687) to discuss working practices around Cables and Overhead Lines; Contact the M.E.A. for Electrical Site Safety 5 documents, (Tel. 687766), before any work is carried out on site; Contact the M.E.A. Planning Department (Tel. 687781), to discuss the electricity supply for this application; MEA requires 24 hours unrestricted access to the cables in the Public Highway
Department of Environment, Food & Agriculture
No Commentthe proposed flats/apartments must, on completion of the intended works, comply with the requirements of the Housing (Flats) Regulations 1982 and be registered thereafter under the same Regulations PRIOR to any of the flats being occupied
Conditions requested: the proposed flats/apartments must, on completion of the intended works, comply with the requirements of the Housing (Flats) Regulations 1982 and be registered thereafter under the same Regulations PRIOR to any of the flats being occupied
Highways Division
No ObjectionRecommend approval has no adverse traffic management, parking or road safety implications
Community Planning Service
ObjectionThe site, whilst having been permitted to introduce some tourist units, is not zoned for tourist use; To now ask to convert them to tourism is laughing at planning policies
The original application for demolition of redundant farm barns and erection of seven tourist units was refused as new development in open countryside without justification and failing to enhance visual amenities. The appellant argued the site was previously developed land within a long-standing farmstead enclosure, with prior approvals for partial conversion to tourist use, minimal changes from approved schemes, compliance with landscape character assessments, support from Tourism Division, and economic benefits under draft PPS 'Planning and the Economy'. The inspector found the development conflicted with General Policy 3's presumption against countryside development, as agricultural buildings are excluded from previously developed land, prior approvals lapsed upon demolition, and the new build lacked rural character, making the locality less rural. The Minister accepted the inspector's recommendation to dismiss the appeal, despite acknowledging planning history and tourism benefits, prioritising countryside protection.
Precedent Value
Reinforces strict application of GP3 excluding agricultural buildings from PDL; retrospective new-build replacements in countryside unlikely even with tourism support or minor footprint changes unless clearly policy-compliant conversions. Applicants must secure approval before demolition and demonstrate rural character retention.
Inspector: Alan Larigton
