**Document:** DEC Officer Report
**Application:** 23/00203/B — Conversion and extension of former mill to a dwelling, creation of access and closing off of existing access, installation of solar panels, reinforcement of bank around existing lake and associated drainage (retrospective) and landscaping
**Decision:** Permitted
**Decision Date:** 2023-06-05
**Parish:** Malew
**Document Type:** report / officer_report
**Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/10018-malew-ballakindry-mill-conversion-extension/documents/966758

---

# DEC Officer Report

## PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

**Applicant:** Mr Carl & Mrs Tracy Underwood Proposal Conversion and extension of former mill to a dwelling, creation of access and closing off of existing access, installation of solar panels, reinforcement of bank around existing lake and associated drainage (retrospective) and landscaping Site Address Ballakindry Mill Ballagawne Road Ballabeg Castletown Isle Of Man IM9 4PD Case Officer : Mr Hamish Laird
**Photo Taken:** 19.04.2023
**Site Visit:** 19.04.2023 Expected Decision Level Planning Committee
**Recommended Decision:** Permitted Date of Recommendation 12.05.2023

## Conditions and Notes for Approval

C : Conditions for approval

- N : Notes attached to conditions

- C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

- C 2. The roof over the Mill Building to be retained as part of the development hereby permitted, shall be clad in natural dark grey roofing slates only, a sample of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by DEFA. The development shall be carried out using the approved natural slates, and shall, thereafter, be permanently retained and maintained.

Reason: To ensure that a high quality roofing material is used which reflects and preserves the character and historic significance of the Mill structure in the interests of visual amenity.

- C 3. The roof over the new extension, hereby permitted, shall be clad in dark grey standing seam metal roof cladding.

Reason: To ensure that a high quality roofing material is used for the extension in the interests of visual amenity.

- C 4. The walls of the new extension, hereby permitted, shall be clad in untreated Western Red Cedar vertical cladding with a black metal chimney flue running up the gable.

- Reason: To ensure that high quality external wall and chimney materials are used for the extension in the interests of visual amenity.
- C 5. All new door frames and windows to be inserted in the Mill Building and the extension, in the development hereby approved, shall have either black powder coated, aluminium or wooden frames. The use of black uPVC for all window and door frames is specifically excluded from this planning permission.

Reason: To ensure that high quality materials are used for the Mill Building and the extension which reflect and preserve the character and historic significance of the Mill structure and impart a high quality finish in the interests of visual amenity.

- C 6. All new external doors apart from the ground floor bi-fold doors; and, the first floor Juliet Balcony doors in the south side elevation of the extension, hereby permitted, shall be of timber construction. The development shall be carried out using timber doors as described, and shall, thereafter, be permanently retained and maintained. The use of black uPVC for all new external doors as described above is specifically excluded from this planning permission.

Reason: To ensure that high quality materials are used for the Mill Building and the extension which reflect and preserve the character and historic significance of the Mill structure and which impart a high quality finish in the interests of visual amenity.

- C 7. Details of foul and surface water drainage provision, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such approved drainage scheme shall be installed prior to the development hereby permitted being first occupied and shall thereafter be retained and maintained at all times.

Reason: To ensure that the site is adequately drained and does not increase the risk of flooding elsewhere.

- C 8. A scheme of landscaping, shall be implemented and maintained in accordance with the details indicated on the approved plans. The landscaping around the pond should be sufficiently far enough away from the working area in the south to be un-impacted by the works. The landscaping in this area shall be undertaken prior to the first occupation of the dwelling taking place. All other planting, seeding, and earth works comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the occupation of the dwelling or substantial completion of the development, whichever is the sooner, and any plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species.

Reason: In order to give planting a sufficient time to establish and to mitigate previous negative impacts to help assimilate the development into its surroundings in the interests of the visual amenities of the site and surrounding area.

- C 9. Prior to any works of development being carried out on the site, a construction exclusion zone shall be established on site as per the site plan, and protected by Herras fencing. Such fencing shall be maintained in situ for the lifetime of the development works on the site. No works, other than landscaping shall take place within the construction exclusion zone.

Reason: In order to give planting a sufficient time to establish and to mitigate previous negative impacts to help assimilate the development into its surroundings in the interests of the visual amenities of the site and surrounding area.

- C 10. No works of development shall be undertaken on site until a bat and bird box plan has been submitted to DEFA Planning and approved in writing. Such plans shall include details of at

least 2 bat boxes/bricks and at least 2 birds boxes/bricks suitable for swifts on the mill building. Bat boxes should be places high up on the southern elevation and bird boxes on the north elevation, not above windows or doors.

Reason: To provide suitable mitigation against the wide scale loss of habitat through the unauthorised removal of trees from the site.

- C 11. The submitted details and use of planings for the surface material to be provided for the vehicular access surface to serve the development, herby approved, is acceptable to DEFA Planning. The surface covered by these details shall relate to the first 5.0 metres as measured back from the edge of the public highway. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details, and shall thereafter, be permanently maintained.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety by ensuring that a bound surface for the access is used to prevent loose material being brought onto the public highway through vehicle movements onto and off the site.

- C 12. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no extension, enlargement or other alteration of the dwelling, including the installation or replacement of any windows or doors, hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, shall be carried out, without the prior written approval of the Department. Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area
- C 13. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no garages or other free standing buildings shall be erected or enclosure, swimming or other pool, container for domestic heating purposes for storage of oil of liquid petroleum gas, or the erection of a gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure, within the curtilage of the dwelling hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, without the prior written approval of the Department. Reason: To control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area
- C 14. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no satellite dish, or solar panels shall be attached to any building or erected within the site, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, without the prior written approval of the Department. Reason: To safeguard the residential character and amenities of the area.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. Overall it is concluded that the planning application accords with the provisions set out in Housing Policy 15, Environment Policy 1 and Environment Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the following plans and documents: Drawing No. 1970-01 - Site Location Plan; Drawing No. 1970-03 - Proposed Site Plan;

- Drawing No. 1970-05 - Proposed Elevations;

- Drawing No. 1970-06 - Proposed Floor Plans;
- Drawing No. 1970-07 - Proposed Sections; all date stamped and received 2 March 2023.

_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None. ________________________________________________________________

## Officer’s Report

THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is the parcel of land located to the east of the (B43) Ballagawne Road. The property sits within a former wooded area (a number of trees now removed) with a pond to the north of the site. - 1.2 Adjacent to the highway is a Manx stone building referred to as Ballakindry Mill which has been abandoned for a number of years. The building has a footprint of approx. when measured externally 18m long and 7m wide (126sqm) on the ground floor and at first floor 14m long x 7m (98sqm) wide (total 224sqm) with 600mm thick external walls. - 1.3 The Mill is characterised by its Manx stone construction where the stone is laid in a horizontal form with prominent stone quoins and some bricks installed at later date. The building has a basic rectangular form and is predominately two stories in height with a lean-to extension on the southern elevation. The building is clearly of historic and traditional character with only limited fenestration in the elevations reflecting its former use as a mill as opposed to a dwelling. - 1.4 There have been a number of works undertaken on site that currently do not benefit from valid planning approval that has altered the appearance of the building (roof removed and fenestrations altered; engineering works to remove the earth to the East of the building; a number of trees have been felled; and, two vehicular access points into the site have been formed. - 1.5 A previous case officer described the property under application ref; 17/00725/B (see planning history) before any works were undertaken as follows: "There is a prominent vehicular sized entrance situated centrally within the front elevation, which has a slightly curved head, also formed of vertically oriented brickwork. There are no other openings at the ground floor level besides a pedestrian access into the side elevation and a very small square aperture to the right of the vehicular entrance. On the first floor of the front elevation are five openings of differing sizes. One would appear to have formed some kind of delivery access as it is - at - 1.6m in height - just large enough for a person to stand within. The other four openings are more clearly windows, fitted with robust timber lights albeit that the glazing is no longer present and boards behind those openings are apparent. To the rear, there are five, similarly high-level, openings, albeit that these are (or would have been) all windows: they are identical in size".

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The application proposes the conversion of the existing Mill building to form a single residential dwellinghouse with a two storey extension to the east elevation, creation of a new

- access and closing off of existing access, reinforcement of bank around existing lake and associated drainage (retrospective), installation of solar panels on the south facing slope of the bank, and landscaping. The previously refused application ref: 21/01258/B proposed the conversion of the existing mill building to form a single residential dwellinghouse with a three storey extension to the east elevation with integrated garaging and the creation of new vehicle entrances. The current application proposes a much smaller scale development.
- 2.2 The built form would see a contemporary extension being constructed perpendicular off the east elevation to provide additional living accommodation.
- 2.3 Planning permission is sought for the following works:

- Conversion and extension of the existing mill building to provide a single residential dwelling O Creating of a single access point to serve the site, closing off the existing opening to the south of the building with a new sod hedge O Creation of a new hard surfaced car parking area and access drive (stone chippings) O Installation of a bank of twelve solar panels to the north of the building O Retrospective approval for the re-profiling of the bank between the mill and the lake which was undertaken to address leakage from the pond O Installation of a new Klargester biodisc sewage treatment plant to the south east of the building O Landscaping of the site including the formation of a construction exclusion zone during works to protect existing trees, all of which are to be retained

2.4 The previous application Ref: 21/01258/B was accompanied by a Structural Survey dated 29 July, 2020, that provided a comprehensive description of the built form and materials used, its general appearance through observations, with comments on the integrity of the walls, floor and roof and details how the renovation works can be sympathetically and safely undertaken. The report concluded; "The sequence of works noted in 3.1.1 (of their report) should be followed to ensure the structural integrity of the building is maintained and further ongoing inspections of the existing structure may require an alteration to the sequencing however, we feel confident solutions can be found to resolve any issues encountered". - 2.5 The applicant also noted in the consideration of the Ref: 21/01258/B proposals in their correspondence dated 14.12.21 - "Remedial and Emergency Works Following Purchase: Following our purchase the building was deemed unsafe due to the rotten and decayed first floor beams, the rotten remains of the roof trusses, rotten A-frames and the few remaining small patches of loose slates therefore, emergency works had to be carried out to save the building from total collapse. All rotten roof timbers were removed and the rotten beams spanning and supporting the width of the building were replaced with steel, the gable end peaks were leaning dangerously inward and therefore were removed and the inside of the building has since been cleaned, stonework treated and rendered and made good with fresh lime and mortar. This emergency work has since been inspected by building control who were content with the work carried out and it was agreed that the external stonework could also be made good". The Mill building, therefore, has no roof over it. - 2.6 There is no indication in the current Ref: 23/00203/B application what would be the residential curtilage and what would be land outside the residential curtilage but associated with the dwellinghouse proposals. It is noted that all the proposed built forms of development and the formation of the new vehicular access serving the site are located in the area of the land to the south of the re-profiled bank between the Mill and the lake. In these circumstances, it is considered that in this regard, the land to the south of the re-profiled bank between the Mill and the lake which was re-profiled to address leakage from the pond, and for which

retrospective planning permission is sought, would represent a natural break between the domestic curtilage and the fishing lake on the site.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY - 3.1 The land as designated, is not zoned for development and sits within a rural part of the open countryside on Map 6 (Colby & Ballabeg) of the Area Plan for the South. The site is not within a Conservation Area. - 3.2 The land is also linked to Map 2 Landscape Assessment Areas; that identifies site is within an area that is broadly classified as D14 or 'Incised Slopes' - 3.3 Within the written statement under section 3.0 Landscape Character Area (LCA), page 16, para. D14 is broadly referred to; Ballamodha, Earystane and St Marks (D14) notes that the; "The overall strategy is to conserve and enhance the character, quality and distinctiveness of the area, with its wooded valley bottoms, its strong geometric field pattern delineated by Manx hedges, its numerous traditional buildings and its network of small roads and lanes. The strategy should also include the restoration of landscapes disturbed by former mining activities…. Distant views prevented at times by dense woodland in river valleys and by the cumulative screening effect of hedgerow trees, which tend to create wooded horizons… Open and panoramic views out to sea from the higher areas on the upper western parts of the area where there are few trees to interrupt views." - 3.4 Part of the site (body of water to the north of the site) is identified as being at a High Flood Risk from Surface water and the adjacent highway is at a low risk of surface water flooding. It is noted the building and its footprint is not identified as being at flood risk. - 3.5 The site sits within a Registered Tree Area RA0270 (10,459 sq. m) that encompasses the site and also that to the south of the site outside of the application site. - 3.6 The following policies from the 2016 Strategic Plan are considered pertinent in the assessment of this application: Strategic Policy

- 2 Priority for new development to identified towns and villages 4(b) Protection of built heritage and landscape conservation 5 Design and visual impact

- 10 Sustainable transport Spatial Policy

- 4 Remaining villages
- 5 Building in defined settlements or GP3 General Policy

- 2 General Development Considerations
- 3 Exceptions to development in the countryside Environment Policy

- 1 Protection of the countryside

3 Protection of trees and woodland 4 Wildlife and Nature Conservation 7 Protection of existing watercourses

Housing Policy

- 4b New Housing in the Countryside

- 11 Conversion of rural buildings to dwellings

- 15 Extension or alteration to traditional styled properties in the countryside

Transport Policy 4 Highway safety

- 7 Parking provisions

3.7 Paragraph 8.10 - Conversion of Rural Buildings to Dwellings - 3.8 Paragraph 8.11.1 - Replacement Dwellings in the Countryside - 3.9 Planning Circular 3/91 - Guide to the residential development in the countryside. - 3.10 Residential Design Guide (2021) This document provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential properties and sustainable methods of construction.

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 4.1 A note on file advises: Please note that the below building has been assessed for inclusion on the Protected Buildings Register, and was judged to not be of sufficient special historic or architectural interest to proceed. Case closed 23.08.2022. - 4.2 21/01258/B - Conversion and extension of existing mill building to form a single dwelling with associated landscaping, garaging and new vehicle entrance. - 4.3 The application was presented to the Planning Committee on 23/5/2022, where Members resolved to refuse it. It was REFUSED for the following reasons:

- 1. The site is not zoned for development and the building is not within a named settlement and in accordance with the settlement hierarchy, would encourage unsustainable development. Accordingly it is considered contrary to Strategic Policy 2 and 10 and also Spatial Policy 4, of the Strategic Plan.
- 2. Although an argument could be made that the existing building is of sufficient interest to warrant its retention and conversion, the extent of the structural works required with the intervention to the fabric of the building to make the structure sound coupled with the unacceptable upwards extension, the overbearing rear extension, the inappropriate modifications to the exiting apertures and spread of hard standing and domestic curtilage would have a significant and adverse impact on the original appearance, character, historic interest and materials of the original building contrary to General Policy 3 (b) and Housing Policy 4b and Housing Policy 11.
- 3. The proposed extension is much larger than 50% which results in a built form that would not be subordinate to the existing building and would be viewed as inappropriate development which would see a loss of its individual character which does not respect the proportion, form and appearance of the existing Mill property and would be contrary to Housing Policy 15.
- 4. The application site is not zoned for development and is within an area of countryside. The proposed alterations and extensions and the subsequent introduction of large areas of hard standing would result in an unacceptable visual impact on the wider rural landscape and countryside setting of the site contrary to Environment Policy 1 and paragraphs 8.10.1 and 8.10.2.
- 5. The design, size and scale of the proposed extension, and its finishes, are not sympathetic to the rural character of the area and is considered over development with an

- adverse visual impact that affects the character of the setting, contrary to Strategic Policy 5 and General Policy 2 (b & c) of the Strategic Plan.
- 6. The use of the proposed entrance in a safe and appropriate manner would create an adverse impact on the existing highway or upon those users entering and or exiting the site contrary to the principles of General Policy 2(h&I) and Transport Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan

(2016).

4.4 17/00725/B - Conversion of existing redundant mill to single dwelling with associated parking. APPROVED - with Conditions:

- 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice. Reason: To comply with article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
- 2. Prior the commencement of any other works, the works to the roadside hedge to the north of the site to improve visibility, as shown in drawing 1758-04C, must be undertaken and the hedge maintained as such thereafter. Reason: in the interests of highway safety.
- 3. Following the creation of the visibility splays in accordance with condition 2 above, no further work may commence until such times as the protective fencing has been erected as shown in drawing 1758-02A and agreed on site with the Department as being in accordance with the drawings, and such fencing must remain in situ for the duration of the construction and engineering works. No trees other than those shown for removal on this drawing may be removed under the terms of this approval. Reason: to protect the trees to be retained in the interests of the character of the area.
- 4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no extension, enlargement or other alteration of the dwelling, including the installation or replacement of any windows or doors, hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, shall be carried out, without the prior written approval of the Department. Reason: to control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.
- 5. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no garages or other free standing buildings shall be erected within the curtilage of the dwelling hereby approved, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, without the prior written approval of the Department. Reason: to control development in the interests of the amenities of the surrounding area.
- 6. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no solar panels shall be attached to any building or erected within the site, other than that expressly authorised by this approval, without the prior written approval of the Department. Reason: To safeguard the residential character and amenities of the area.
- 7. No windows or doors shall be installed until full details of them, including (1:20) scale elevations showing the sections of the elements and their position within the apertures, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The works shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details. Reason: to ensure the satisfactory preservation of this building of interest.

- 8. Planting must be carried out in accordance with the details provided by Roots to Shoots Landscape Proposal and in the first planting season (November to March) following the completion of the development. Any trees which, within a period of 5 years from their planting die, are removed or in the opinion of the Department, become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced as soon as is reasonably practicable or in the next planting season, with others of similar size and species and number as originally approved, unless otherwise approved by the Department. Reason; to provide an appropriate visual and environmental setting for the development.

4.5 16/01283/B - Conversion of existing mill building to single dwelling with associated parking. REFUSED for the following reasons:

- 1. The building the subject of the application is of architectural and historic interest. The manner of its proposed conversion would fail to re-establish the original appearance of the building where it is clearly desirable so to do. The application is therefore contrary to Housing Policy 11 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
- 2. The application fails to quantify the proposed development's impact on trees that form such an integral part of the natural character of the area. Accordingly, the application is contrary to Environment Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
- 3. The application fails to provide sufficient information on which to conclude that it would be acceptable from a highway safety point of view, contrary to parts (h) and (i) of General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
- 4. The application fails to provide sufficient information on which to conclude that it would be acceptable in terms of its impacts on protected species, contrary to Environment Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

4.6 05/01102/B - Conversion of mill to single dwelling. APPROVED.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS (in brief - full reps can be read online)

5.1 Arbory and Rushen Commissioners commented (16/3/23): "In relation to application 23/00203/B the Commissioners felt the new application was an improvement on the previous application. The Commissioners were a little concerned that the application appeared to be encroaching on to the highway and asked that this be checked by DoI highways and planners." - 5.2 DoI Highways Services (11.11.21) Highways Comments:

"Proposals for development on this site have gone through various iterations, using different points of proposed access. This proposal would see the conversion of the mill building into a single dwelling, with access point to the north of the building. Highway Boundary

The extent of the highway is uncertain. The location plan has indicated that the verge and ditching running alongside the road is under the ownership of the applicant. This may be the case as it is possible to own the subsoil underneath adopted Highway. However, it is not possible to develop on adopted Highway without agreement from the Department. To the north of the access, no change is proposed to the edge of carriageway/highway area. To the south of the access, a sod hedge is proposed to delineate between the carriageway and applicant land. It is possible that this sod bank is built upon the highway. However, the sod bank is shown to be built upon an existing roadside ditch. As a result, the sod bank would create a more defined

and safer edge of carriageway marker and would not be encroaching into the running lanes of the existing traffic narrowing the useable road.

Visibility The clarity of the edge of highway also has implications on the visibility splay from the access. The splay has been shown 2.4m back from an indicated carriageway. At this point in the road the tarmacked area widens and vehicles are likely to running closer to the verge. It is possible that as drawn an emerging vehicle could be sitting in the running lane of an approaching vehicle.

Ballagawne Road is classified as a B-road local access road. Vehicle movement along this road will be infrequent. Highway Services believe a safer arrangement would be demonstrated by beginning the setback further off the running lane, however, in this instance where the extent of highway is uncertain and the vehicle flow is light, Highways will accept the location of the setback. Visibility has purposely been drawn to a 40m extent. This is not compliant with any Manual for Manx Roads requirement or DMRB requirement. To the north, achievable visibility is greater than that drawn, reaching up to 60m to the nearside edge of carriageway. This splay is acceptable to Highways.

To the south, visibility has been drawn to the middle of the southbound lane. If taken from an acceptable offset distance of 0.5m from the nearside edge of highway, visibility is approximately 35m.

The section of Ballagawne Road is bounded at either end by bends. The road is rural in nature and does not serve many properties past the mill site and vehicle speeds would not likely exceed 30mph at this point. MfMR standards would require a 43m splay for this speed with DMRB standards requiring 70m. Whilst visibility to the south would not meet either of these requirements, Highways accept the visibility achievable from the access point as it is considerably better than previous accepted access proposals for the location as well as the existing access arrangement to the site. Further to the visibility requirement and uncertainty of highway boundary, if the 2.4m setback distance was to be moved inwards, Highways consider this to have no material effect to the visibility achievable. To the north, the inward setback may improve visibility due to the alignment. To the south, visibility is limited by the placement of the mill building on the boundary line.

The alteration to highway, in the form of creating a new access, will require a Section 109(A) Highway Agreement to be made post planning consent.

Access Arrangement Plans have indicated an access construction of stone chippings. Without correct mitigation, this material would not be considered bound and consolidated and could increase the risk of loose material being brought on to the highway. Loose chippings would need to be set into a grid and be large stone in order to be acceptable. In addition, with the uncertainty of the highway boundary, any surface within the running lane of vehicles on the road should be constructed of a similar surface material to prevent change of road friction leading to risk of vehicle loss of control. This material should be provided for the first 5m back from the highway edge. Access gates have been provided at the required 5m back from the indicative highway edge.

The stone chipping was chosen for use for its drainage capabilities. Now that the material is requested to be altered, suitable alternative surface run-off drainage must be provided near the connection of the access and the highway to prevent water run-off onto the highway. A change to hard material could still be made porous for the desired design outcome. The drainage proposal should be agreed to by Highway Services Drainage Team.

Internally, the vehicular arrangements are acceptable. Four parking spaces have been provided, exceeding the Strategic Plan minimum requirement of two spaces. There is sufficient turning space within the site to ensure entry and exit in a forwards gear.

No area has been provided for the storage of bicycles. Manual for Manx Roads standards require bicycle parking in a secure and covered location at a rate of one space per bedroom. The applicant should consider the provision of an electric vehicle charging point to support the islands sustainable travel goals.

Highway Services Development Control request the following alterations to be made to the proposal in order for the application to meet all requirements: -

A bound and consolidated surface material provided for the first 5m back from the edge of highway; and Bicycle storage in a secure and covered area at a rate of one space per bedroom.

Recommendation: Request further information / alterations.

5.3 DEFA - Environmental Protection Officer (22.3.23) comments: With regard to PA 23/00203/B please can the following information be confirmed by the applicant or agent:

Discharge method for the new Klargester Biodisc sewage treatment works. If the sewage treatment works is connected to a drainage ditch or watercourse a discharge license will be required. Further information including the application form can be found at; https://www.gov.im/about-thegovernment/departments/environment-food-andagriculture/environmentdirectorate/environmental-protection-unit/river-water-quality/dischargelicenses/

If the discharge is connected to a soak-away; percolation tests will need to be carried out in accordance with Building Regulations.

5.4 DEFA - Inland Fisheries (31.3.23) comments:

With regard to PA 23/00203/B, EPU have asked for information from the applicant or agent which are of interest to Inland Fisheries including:

Discharge method for the new Klargester Biodisc sewage treatment works. If the sewage treatment works is connected to a drainage ditch or watercourse a discharge

license will be required.

- As the proposed works are in close proximity to a watercourse, precautions will be needed to reduce the possibility of harmful materials entering the pond and associated watercourses including concrete washings, oils, detergents or other materials toxic to aquatic life.

5.5 DEFA - Biodiversity Officer (29.3.23) comments:

Aerial photographs clearly show that the area included in this application has been subject to much modification and habitat destruction over recent years. The details contained in the site plan show that the proposed planting of native and fruiting trees, blackthorn and hawthorn hedges and sod banks, will help to mitigate these impacts. However, we believe that all of the land to the north of the pond should either be planted up with native or other well established tree or shrub species, or otherwise allowed to convert back to habitat, as it has all previously been cleared. We therefore request that a landscaping plan is provided prior to any further works on site taking place, which secures the planting as shown on the site plan but also includes additionally landscaping details to the north of the pond.

This landscaping around the pond, should also be far enough away from the working area in the south, to be un-impacted by the works and so landscaping in this area should be undertaken prior to any further works on the property taking place, in order to give planting a longer time to establish and mitigate previous negative impacts. We therefore also request a condition on approval for a landscaping phasing plan which secures this early planting.

The photos provided with the application shows that the large pond is already a habitat of interest, containing yellow iris, some form of water lily and other plant species, and will be providing habitat for a variety of wildlife, so we would highlight the importance of the incorporation of a construction exclusion zone on the site to protect this habitat feature.

A condition should be secured for the construction exclusion zone to be enacted on site as per the site plan, and for no works, other than landscaping to take place within this zone.

Lastly, we request that a condition is secured for no works to take place until a bat and bird box plan has been submitted to Planning and approved in writing. The plans should include details of at least 2 bat boxes/bricks and at least 2 birds boxes/bricks suitable for swifts on the mill building. Bat boxes should be places high up on the southern elevation and bird boxes on the north elevation, not above windows or doors. Our preference would be for the incorporation of bat and bird bricks into the building, as these are more permanent features. This again is mitigation for the wide scale loss of habitat on site.

Manx National Heritage (ecology) commented (10.11.21) regarding roosting Bats and records of pipistrelle bats are present in the area, comments on the Wildlife Act and recommend a bat survey. (19/11.21) to retract their comments as there is no roof, windows or opportunities for roosting bats to shelter.

5.5 Manx National Heritage - No comments had been received by the Report Drafting Stage. - 5.6 DEFA Fisheries - No comments had been received by the Report Drafting Stage. - 5.7 DEFA Arboricultural Officer - No comments had been received by the Report Drafting Stage. - 5.8 The applicants have provided commentary, photographs and images, specifically to address those comments as noted above from the statutory consultees (available online) that has also copied in the planning department for their record. The Information was received on 10.04.2023. - 5.9 No comments comprising any third party or neighbour representations had been received by the Report Drafting Stage

## - 6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are;

- (i) Principle (STP2,10 and SP4)
- (ii) Exceptional circumstances (SP5, GP3b, HP4b, HP11,)
- (iii) Visual Impact (GP2 b,c; EP1, EP15)
- (iv) Neighbouring amenities (GP2g)
- (v) Highway Safety (GP2 h&i; TP 4&7)
- (vi) Trees and Ecology (STP4b, EP3, GP2d)
- (vii) Drainage / flooding (GP2l, Ep7)
- (viii) Other

- (i) Principle

6.1 The starting point here is the land designation, it is clear from the Area Plan for the South, the application site is within a rural and protected part of the countryside where any

- development is strictly controlled with the site not being allocated specifically for any development. However, it is noted that the principle of the conversion of the Mill to a residential dwelling was, prior to the refusal of application Ref: 21/01258/B, acceptable, and despite the fact that the site lies within open countryside where ordinarily the provision of Strategic Policy 2 and Spatial Policy 1-4 - which identify areas of development to be located, generally within existing towns and villages and development in the countryside to only be permitted in exceptional circumstances, as detailed in Spatial Policy 5 and cross referenced to General Policy 3, it has a history of approvals for residential development as exceptions to Adopted Planning Policy.
- 6.2 Previously application Ref's: 04/01655/A for approval in principle for the conversion to a single dwelling; Ref: 05/01102/B - full permission for conversion to a single dwelling; and, Ref: 17/00725/B - Conversion of existing redundant mill to single dwelling with associated parking, have been approved. Conversely, application Refs: 16/01283/B - Conversion of existing mill building to single dwelling with associated parking (which followed on from the 04/01655/); and, 21/01258/B - Conversion and extension of existing mill building to form a single dwelling with associated landscaping, garaging and new vehicle entrance; were refused.
- 6.3 In both refusal cases, design; the extent and scale of the development proposed and its impact on the character of the countryside, and historic significance of the Mill; plus site specific issues relating to trees and access, have been contentious. In the case of the Ref: 16/01283/B, proposals, the extent and adverse impact of the development proposed was such, that the countryside location of the structure was a reason for refusal on the grounds of it being contrary to the principle of residential development in the countryside.
- 6.4 The site sits outside of the 'main settlement boundary' for Ballabeg and Colby as noted in SP4 and is very much part of the open countryside as previously identified and development would be contrary to those policies in principle. Officers have assessed whether the Mill was worthy of inclusion on the Protected Buildings Register. The existing structure has been abandoned for many years; its physical remains being a reflection of agricultural / industrial heritage and social change across the Island, often such features in the rural landscape are not unacceptable in their present and ruinous state and are attractive as they are. In the case of this application, the building is of sufficient historic interest to warrant its retention which would require sensitive development in order to convert it to a habitable dwelling (as demonstrated in the 2017 approval) and in visual terms, seeking to continue to positively contribute to the Islands built heritage. However, whilst considered to be of historic interest sufficient to warrant its retention, it was judged to not be of sufficient special historic or architectural interest to proceed to add the building to the Registered Buildings List, and a case for its inclusion on the List was closed on 23.08.2022.
- 6.5 Previously, some reservations were raised with respect to the lack of a structural survey - a situation replicated here and, as noted with respect to the previous application, "this part of HP11 is largely intended as a means to provide certainty and security for applicants when they submit applications such as this, by way of ensuring the building will not collapse during construction work". However, the agent has previously advised that he is a Structural Engineer and confirmed that the walls are sound, showing no sign of movement, bowing or cracking and as a new first floor is to be introduced, this will further strengthen the building. The structural integrity of the building is not, therefore, considered to be an issue.
- 6.6 In respect of the current Ref: 23/00203/B, the scale of the development proposed is much less than that of the two previously refused schemes, and the principle of development is considered to be acceptable as an exception to the normal restrictive countryside planning policies.

- (ii) Exceptional circumstances

6.7 In terms of planning policy there is a long established presumption against new residential development in the countryside. General Policy 3(b), and Housing Policy 4(b) both allow for exceptions for the conversion of redundant rural buildings and the sequential test through HP11 subject to various caveats, including that the building is redundant and of architectural, historic or social value. In this instance, it would be prevalent to focus on HP11 for the conversion of the building to residential and the proposed extension (visual impact) against HP15 given the traditional appearance. - 6.8 When considering HP11 and the conversion of the remaining fabric of the building, which precludes the rebuilding of ruins or the erection of a replacement dwelling of similar or even identical form. In this case, there is an existing structure on site that has been assessed by a competent structural engineer whom are of the professional opinion (as noted in para 2.4) that a solution can be found for its conversion. - 6.9 When cross referencing the proposal with HP11 and the sequential test the following is summarised, as noted below:

- (a) It is clear from the survey and the site visit that the building is redundant from its original use in that it cannot be inhabited and is border line ruinous on the landscape. - Pass.
- (b) The building appears to be intact with 4 Manx stone walls standing (albeit no roof) and clear fenestration detailing around the building showing existing openings. The structural survey confirms the existing fabric of the building can be sympathetically restored and has clearly identified how this can be achieved. This is further shown on the architects' drawings how theoretically the building could be brought back into a habitable use and proposed extensions. Pass.
- (c) The former Mill building does feature a strong degree of architectural, historic and social interest and is heavily referenced by Manx National Heritage who seek a sympathetic approach to conversion. Its former use as a mill, its layout and design with the traditional proportions and limited fenestrations reflect its former use and the utilisation of local stone and quoins sourced locally are all aspects that are worthy of preserving. - Pass.
- (d) For reference the 2017 permission did not propose an extension but comfortably restored the building to provide a comfortable standard of living with 4 bedrooms on the ground floor level and open plan living on the first floor (upside down living arrangement). This proposal shows how the building would accommodate accommodation but now includes a two-storey extension (three storey extension in ref: 21/01258/B application). The submitted drawings show that the design of the extension would be subordinate in scale, size, and form. It would be located on the east side of the Mill building, furthest from public view from the road, and would not adversely affect the character and interest of the existing Mill building to an unacceptable degree. It is further noted that the Arbory Parish Commissioners (local authority) and MNH (no comments received) have not, in this instance, objected to the proposed extension. - Pass.
- (e) The proposal for residential use in this application could be read to be at odds with the existing stricture and whilst permission was formerly granted for its conversion to residential this was more sympathetic as previously discussed. Following the refusal of the ref: 21/01258/B application, it is considered that the size and massing of the built form and the intervention into the existing fabric of the building would not unacceptably alter the existing character of the Mill Building or unduly domesticate its appearance. It is considered that the subservient nature, scale and extent of the extension now proposed, and the use of untreated western red cedar vertical timber cladding for the walls; and, Zinc standing seam roof with black powder coated aluminium framed doors and uPVC for the windows, are now proposed. Additionally, Redland Cambrian slate type roof tiles are proposed for the Mill building's roof. The use of uPVC and Cambrian slate tiles would not retain the industrial heritage of the Mill as the policy seeks, and

- would be unacceptable. The use of black powder coated window and door frames for all new and replacement windows and natural slate for the roof of the restored Mill would be acceptable, and should be conditioned. The residential curtilage is now better defined by this proposal due to the employment of a retaining bank to prevent leakage from the Mill Pond located on site to the north of the Mill Building, and for which retrospective planning permission is sought as part of this application. - Pass.
- (f). Whilst there is an engineering solution to enable the building to be connected to the necessary services (electricity, water, telecoms, drainage), at the expense of the applicant, (private drainage via a Klargester). This has not been demonstrated in the application. Apart from the proposed Klargester system, 12 No. solar panels on a ground mounted frame are proposed to be sited on the above-mentioned pond retaining bank on site to the north of the Mill Building. The application form notes, as did the former 2017 application, that connections to Electricity, water and telecoms are required. As it stands there is a degree of ambiguity and on balance the application fails to provide sufficient information on which to conclude that it could be connected with satisfactory services. - Fail. Whilst this element of the proposals fails to meet the requirements of Policy HP11 (f) it would be for the applicant to demonstrate that connections to these services could be made. Telecoms can now be derived without the need for a landline connection; water from the pond could be treated for use as drinking water or at least as grey water; and, as outlined above, the proposed installation of the 12 No. solar panels would off-set the requirement for an electricity grid connection, especially if connected to a battery. On reflection, whilst these issues may prove challenging, they are not insurmountable and should not be viewed as being achievable only with a large degree of Public expenditure. On their own, they do not amount to a reason to refuse planning permission.

6.10 Such conversion must:

- (a) The proposed extensions and alterations, due to their reduction is size and scale etc. compared to those of the 21/01258/B proposal, would not dominate the original Mill Building, and it is considered, would be seen to retain much of the original appearance of the building. The proposed alterations and extension would be sufficiently subservient and different in character to not lead to a loss of the original interest and character of the Mill Building and a dominant addition to it and, as such, are now viewed as sympathetic works attached to the east (least visually sensitive) side of the building, and would be seen as appropriate in this rural setting. - Pass.
- (b) The proposal does not seek to utilise the same materials as those on the existing building and proposes a contemporary palette of materials and finishes. - Fail.

6.11 In the Planning Statement accompanying the application, the applicant advises that: "5.6 This latest scheme seeks to address these concerns through: The reduction in area of hard standing and remediation of the leakage from the lake (flood risk) The reduction in size and change in design of the extension The alteration of the proposed means of access to a position which maximises visibility splays The retention of the sycamore and all other existing trees on site The closing up of existing openings in the roadside boundary and the introduction of native hedging and sod banks

5.7 The existing building will remain as it is/originally was; the extension is smaller and lower than the existing building and not significantly more than 50% of the existing floor area. Whilst the appearance and materials of the extension contrast with those of the main building to which it would be attached, we have demonstrated with the reference to other positively considered applications, (at Tynwald Mills, St. John's (RB 83) approved for extension and conversion to offices under 00/01131/B; Scholaby Mill 18/00219/B; and, The Granary, Balladoole, Arbory 17/01196/B) that this approach is neither uncommon nor unacceptable, depending upon its merits.

5.8 The application avoids further tree loss and retained trees should not be affected by the design or location of the proposal. - 5.9 The proposal minimises new hard surfacing for both visual and surface water reasons. - 5.10 Access is clearly difficult and whilst this was a reason for refusal, previous approvals have accepted that the full visibility splays are probably not possible at all and if they are, not without significant and adverse visual changes. In previous applications the benefit of using and saving the existing building was considered to outweigh the deficiencies in access provisions. We have liaised with the Highway Services Division of Department for Infrastructure and are now proposing an access in the position which affords the greatest visibility and are closing off the other alternatives which will be of benefit to both the appearance of the area and highway safety. - 5.11 Whilst the works to the bank to address the water leakage should have had planning approval, the applicants were concerned about the impact of the water on the stability of the site and potential damage to trees and the building. As such, they continued with the required works without first securing planning approval. We now seek that permission and would add that the unremedied situation may have had a fatal impact on the building as well as the trees which were lost as a result of the works and with a further threat to the remaining trees which are now to be retained. We would suggest that the new bank does not have an adverse impact on the character or appearance of the area. - 5.12 We would hope that this revised scheme is now considered to accord with the relevant

planning policies and will secure the future of an interesting and publicly visible building in the interests of the character of the countryside. The applicants would be happy to accept conditions which suspend the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 in respect of garages, sheds, extensions, walling and fencing between the building and the highway and for the required tree protection to be in place prior to the continuation of any works on site."

6.11 On the whole it is considered the proposed interference with the fabric of the building to convert to a dwelling and the proposed extension works with hard and soft landscaping would not lead to an unacceptable loss of the original character and, overall the development now proposed, satisfies the main test under HP11 (d,e,f (a-b)) for conversion of existing rural building into a dwelling. - 6.12 For reference, in the 2017 application the Case Officer noted that the proposal was acceptable because: "The design proposed here is judged appropriate and overcomes the previous reasons for refusal through a greater respect for existing window and door openings and the omission of more fussy and modern annexes and detailing. The building has a clear character and what is proposed will alter without affecting that character: the new window openings are subtle and reflect the scale and positioning/arrangement of the existing openings. The interventions are limited in number and form and would not affect the historic character of the mill. As such, it is concluded that the conversion would meet the requirements of Housing Policy 11 with regards a design approach for such conversions."

- (iii) Visual Impact

6.13 In terms of the proposed extension to the Mill building, Policy HP15 applies where extensions to traditional rural properties are generally only permissible when these respect the proportion and form of the existing property and only exceptionally will an increase over 50% being acceptable. However, this is not absolute and more of a guide figure but the key is that it should appear subordinate to the original building (in terms of floor space of no more than 50% of the original) with minimal visual impact to the wider countryside.

6.14 The floor area proposed by the extension (124.25m2) would be more than 50% greater than that of the original building (217m2) - which amounts to at 57.6%. This limit is outlined in Policies H13, H14 and H15. Housing Policy 11 does not quantify what "modest" or "subordinate" are although Housing Policy 13 which refers to the renovation of existing residential properties, also refers to "subordinate" and clarifies that this is less than 50% of the original floor space. Housing Policy 15 also refers to 50% increases in floor area, considering this not to be "substantially different to the existing". Whilst over the 50% margin, it is relevant that the extension's roof ridge and eaves are 1.8m lower than the roof ridge and eaves of the main building. Its ridge is no higher than the eaves of the main building and in terms of its width, this is less than that of the main building to which it would be attached. - 6.15 The proposal has been designed to be larger than the existing mill as demonstrated in the architects own numerical analysis of internal floor area calculations even though in planning terms the reference is to "external floor area", (Definition of Floor area in the Strategic Plan) for the assessment. As such, this results in a design that is subordinate in appearance and it is considered that this now overcomes the respective concerns previously raised in the detailed comments received from MNH (which has not commented on this application); and, that of the Local Authority - with the Commissioners commenting: "the Commissioners felt the new application was an improvement on the previous application". - 6.16 In terms of the visual impact, the main part of the proposed two storey extension comprises one built form. Owing to its subservient design, scale and nature; and, proposed finish in contrasting materials without overly large areas of glazing, and the use of untreated western red cedar, vertical wood cladding; and, a zinc profiled roof, it is considered that the visual impact would be acceptably minimised. In this case the proposed extension would appear subservient and would take account of the particular character and identity Mill Building to strike a balance reflective of what the Adopted planning policies seek to achieve. - 6.17 The application seeks to overcome the shortcomings of the previously refused 21/01825/B proposals and in so doing, strives to re-establish the character of the building. It is notable that MNH has not commented on the application, whereas previously it had expressed that the number of changes proposed would irretrievably remove the building's mill character, and would alter its historic fabric for no demonstrable good reason, which would result in a building that would have the appearance of a new-build residential dwelling, in the countryside. The conversion and extensions now proposed, would respect and reflect the attractive and characterful nature of the building that should be protected, and in so doing, would provide it with a sustainable future use. In respect of the works proposed to the original Mill building, which is now without a roof covering, Environment Policy 34 advises that Work to pre-1920 buildings should use traditional materials. In this case, the Planning Statement at paragraph 4.3.1 advises:

"The existing building will be retained as it currently exists: the upper floor window cill levels have been raised by 300mm to accommodate the structural elements required to preserve and retain the building for its new use, particularly due to the height of the first floor beams (set approx. at 3.0m (10ft) from the ground floor) which meant that windows if left at that height would have been too low for a dwelling remembering that these windows originally allowed light into what was then a threshing mill. The front elevation will otherwise be retained as existing with glazing inserted into the large existing opening on the ground floor and the brick arch retained above. The existing openings will be respected and fitted with simply glazed side hung casements and a single light in the door length opening on the first floor. The roof will be reformed and finished in Redland Cambrian reconstituted slates with two black aluminium Conservation style roof lights in the mono pitch roof on the lean to annex to the south. Window frames will be black aluminium."

6.18 It is considered that the proposed materials and finishes to be used for the Mill building are acceptable, although the use of natural slate, preferably Welsh or Borrowdale as opposed to

- Spanish, should be conditioned instead of the proposed reconstituted slates, which have a relatively thick upstand and shiny surface, unlike natural slate. Redland Cambrian slates would appear out of keeping with the Mill's historic character and appearance.
- 6.19 In terms of the views of the extended Mill Building obtained from the public highway running past the site, the proposed extension would in terms of its siting, scale, massing, height and finishes would be much less clearly visible from the public views from the highway when travelling in either direction than the refused 21/01825/B proposals given the general topography of the area and the open. It is noted that the massing of the extension is contained to the rear (East), and new boundary treatment and on site planting would assist it screening some of the built form in years to come. In this regard, the proposed landscaping and planting would help assimilate the development into its surroundings, rather than seeking to hide it as this would suggest that if such a degree of screening is required, the development should not be there.
- 6.20 When considering extending or building onto properties in the countryside, the rationale is that they should ideally follow that of more traditional vernacular to fit in with the age when general development was emerging on the Island in the 1980's as noted in planning circular 3/91 to ensure any visual impact is appropriate for the countryside. In this case, the proposal should be supported and as it would accord with the aims and objectives of STP5 and GP2 b &

c where the built form of the proposal represents a subservient, proportionate and visually acceptable form development for the site and building while have a positive visual impact through its siting, scale, form and design.

6.21 The proposal would be introducing an element of built development on site where at present there is none. Environment Policy 1 of the Strategic Plan provides that, in the absence of an over-riding national need, development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted. It indicates that in such areas, the protection of the countryside and its ecology will normally be the most important consideration which are clear and consistent. However, in this case it is noted that previous proposals for development to provide a single unit of residential accommodation that re-uses an historic building that may otherwise be lost, have been approved. As such, it is considered that this proposal would have an acceptable visual impact upon the openness of the countryside reflective of the character of the area Policy EP1 seeks to protect.

- (iv) Neighbours Amenities

6.22 The site sits remote on the landscape with considerable distance to the nearest neighbours, as such there are no immediate neighbours that are considered to be impacted by the proposed development. In this regard, the proposed development accords with Section (g) of General Policy 2; and, the relevant advice contained in the Residential Design Guide 2021.

- (v) Highway Safety

6.23 The application site already features an existing access that already serves the site, opposite the entrance to the Mill building. Proposals for development on this site have gone through various iterations, using different points of proposed access. This proposal would see the conversion of the Mill structure into a single dwelling, with access point to the north of the building. - 6.24 The application site already features an existing access that serves the site, opposite the entrance to the mill building. It is noted that previously highways did not accept the proposed access 'as existing' (nor too did the Commissioners) and did not consider the visibility splays appropriate for highways safety.

6.25 With regard to the current application, a setback is proposed to be used opposite an area in the road where the tarmacked area widens and vehicles are likely to run closer to the verge. Whilst Highways note it is possible that as drawn an emerging vehicle could be sitting in the running lane of an approaching vehicle, and that a safer arrangement could be demonstrated by beginning the setback further off the running lane; in this instance the extent of highway is uncertain and the vehicle flow is light, Highways have, as a result, accepted the location of the setback. - 6.26 In terms of visibility, clarity of the edge of highway also has implications on the visibility splay from the access. Highways comments that Visibility has purposely been drawn to a 40m extent. This does not comply with any Manual for Manx Roads requirement or DMRB requirement. To the north, achievable visibility is greater than that drawn, reaching up to 60m to the nearside edge of carriageway. The visibility splay to the north is acceptable to Highways. - 6.27 To the south, visibility has been drawn to the middle of the southbound lane. If taken from an acceptable offset distance of 0.5m from the nearside edge of highway, visibility is approximately 35m. - 6.28 The section of Ballagawne Road contiguous with the sites road frontage is bounded at either end by bends. The road is rural in nature and does not serve many properties past the Mill site and Highways advise that vehicle speeds are unlikely exceed 30mph at this point. MfMR standards would require a 43m splay for this speed with DMRB standards requiring 70m. Whilst visibility to the south would not meet either of these requirements, Highways accept the visibility achievable from the access point as it is considerably better than previous accepted access proposals for the location as well as the existing access arrangement to the site. Further to the visibility requirement and uncertainty of highway boundary, if the 2.4m setback distance was to be moved inwards, Highways consider this to have no material effect to the visibility achievable. To the north, the inward setback may improve visibility due to the alignment. To the south, visibility is limited by the placement of the mill building on the boundary line. - 6.29 It is considered from Highways comments, that whilst the highway boundary may be indistinct where it adjoins the site, and that the provision of a 35m distance visibility splay does not meet the required 43m splay for vehicle speeds of up to 30 mph, an objection to the visibility that the proposed access offers is not made. Whilst the 2.4m setback could be moved inwards, visibility would not be improved as a result. On balance, it is considered that the position of the proposed access in relation to the highway and the visibility splays it affords are acceptable. It is noted that the alteration to highway, in the form of creating a new access, will require a Section 109(A) Highway Agreement to be made post planning consent. This would be a matter to resolve directly between the applicants and highways. - 6.30 In respect of the proposed Access Arrangement, the submitted plans indicate an access construction of stone chippings. This has drawn an objection from highways as the chippings would be unbound and loose material/chippings could be brought onto the highway as a result of vehicle movements. Highways recommend that loose chippings would need to be set into a grid and be large stone in order to be acceptable. In addition, with the uncertainty of the highway boundary, any surface within the running lane of vehicles on the road should be constructed of a similar surface material to prevent change of road friction leading to risk of vehicle loss of control. This material should be provided for the first 5m back from the highway edge. Also, if access gates are to be provided, they should be set back at least 5m back from the indicative highway edge. The stone chipping was chosen for use for its drainage capabilities. Highways has now requested that the material be altered to a suitable alternative surface to prevent water run-off onto the highway. A change to hard material could still be made porous for the desired design outcome. - 6.31 Subsequent to Highway Services Development Control requesting that:-

- o A bound and consolidated surface material be provided for the first 5m back from the edge of highway; and -
- o Bicycle storage in a secure and covered area at a rate of one space per bedroom.

6.32 The applicant has advised that they propose to use recycled planings which provide a porous surface made from excess road material which is compacted such that it does not stay loose or track onto the road. Photographic evidence of a recent job was provided to illustrate where this was used and after several months of use, advise that no material has tracked onto the public highway. - 6.33 With regard to the request for secure cycle storage, at a rate of one space per bedroom, the applicant advises that the proposed utility room which is part of the dwelling would be used for secure bicycle storage where it will also have an electricity supply to enable charging of electric bicycles if needed. - 6.34 The proposals also involve the installation of a mirror on a pole opposite the proposed access. This would be subject to a separate arrangement with highways if located within the highway boundary, or the adjoining landowner. This has not been considered in the response from Highways, or by DEFA Planning as part of the application.

- (vi) Trees and ecology

6.35 The comments from the Arboricultural Officer on the previous Ref: 21/01825/B application were damning on the level of trees that have been removed on site, with or without consent, especially as the site sits within a designated registered tree area; RA0270. Nevertheless, as previously noted, they are gone and irreparable damage has been done and what remains is a cleared site of any trees and vegetation. It is noted on the drawings most of the land that is not to be built on or used as hard landscaping (paths and driveway) is to be grass or lawn areas. However, it is proposed to add replacement trees and additional landscaping is shown on the proposed Site Plan Drawing No. 1970-03. A management plan has not been submitted. Whilst the Site Plan Drawing shows the location of new trees such as:

- o Beech; Horse Chestnut; English Oak; Hornbeam; Holm Oak and Norway Maple; and,
- o Apple; Pear and Cherry Fruit trees within the immediate garden area
- o The location of the new 'sod' hedge running adjacent to the highway boundary to the south of the new access into the site; and,
- o Blackthorn/Hawthorn hedging mix for the southern and western site boundaries,

the plan does not show Latin species names, numbers of plants, hedge plant densities or planting patterns and it is considered that whilst the details are acceptable in principle, a Landscaping Plan and Management Details for the site should be conditioned as part of any approval that may be granted.

6.36 In addition, the comments received from DEFA Biodiversity are noted and a condition requiring that no works of development shall be undertaken on site until a bat and bird box plan has been submitted to DEFA Planning and approved in writing to include details of at least

2 bat boxes/bricks and at least 2 birds boxes/bricks suitable for swifts on the mill building, should be attached to any planning permission that may be granted.

6.37 On balance the nature of the works on site and the proposals are seen to be acceptable and accord with the objectives of Policies EP3, SP4b in seeking to protect and improve the natural environment.

- (vii) Drainage / Flooding

6.38 In relation to the issue of the comments of the Flood Risk Management Team who have considered the application in detail and run off after entering the highway, the presence of the ditch adjacent to the highway could accommodate any run off water and the application form notes that any rainwater will be discharged into an existing water course and referenced a license No. WPA/08/2005. - 6.39 However there lies the concerns as the amount of hard surfaces being created through roofs and hard landscaping, i.e. non permeable surfaces, and the lack of any surface water drainage mitigation measures, means this could put additional pressure on the existing ditch and as the Commissioners have already identified by the over flow from the pond being diverted and would exacerbate any flood risk to those lower down the stream which has not been taken into consideration at this stage. As such it has not been demonstrated there would be no unreasonable risk of flooding or flood risk resulting from the proposed development and could be considered contrary with GP2l, Ep7. It is considered, that these concerns can be overcome via the submission of details as this did not present itself as a particular issue in the consideration and approval of application Ref: 17/01725/B. In the event of an approval being granted it is recommended that a condition requiring details of foul and surface water drainage be submitted for approval, with the development carried as approved.

- (viii) Other

6.40 Part of the proposals note a degree of engineering works (retrospective) to the east of the building, essentially removing a quantity of soil / earth that has been deposited and spread to the north of the building around the south of the pond. This aspect is retrospective and no such details have been provided on quantities, how the embankment has been created and whether this was an engineered design was followed to address a "leak" to the pond. The pond on site is more akin to a hobby or private pond that has no real formalisation in its use or any planning permission for a commercial use. It benefits from a fish trap and is used in this regard for private recreational purposes. The pond has been in existence as long as the Mill has been in situ with the water being used to grind wheat, barley, corn etc. It is considered that the works undertaken are acceptable and that retrospective planning permission for them can be granted as part of any approval.

## - 7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 On balance it is judged, the proposal is acceptable and accords with the aforementioned Policies of the Strategic Plan as outlined in the above Report and meets the tests for exceptional development within the countryside. It is therefore concluded that the planning application should be approved subject to a range of conditions covering the use of materials to reflect the historic nature and importance of the Mill Building, landscaping, bio-diversity, drainage, and highways conditions regarding the access surface; and, conditions restricting any additions and/or alterations which might otherwise constitute 'Permitted Development', meaning that they would require a specific planning permission. - 8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

- (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf);
- (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material;
- (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure;
- (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
- (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
- (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and

- (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

8.2 The decision maker must determine:

- o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and
- o whether there are other persons to those listed above who should be given Interested Person Status.

8.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given Interested Person Status.

Recommendation - Approve. Recommended Decision: Grant subject to the imposition of conditions. Date of Recommendation: 12/5/2023.

I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to the it by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.

Decision Made : Permitted Committee Meeting Date: 22.05.2023

Signed : H Laird Presenting Officer

Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).

Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See below

Customer note

This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.

## PLANNING COMMITTEE DECISION 22.05.2023

Application No

23/00203/B

Applicant Mr Carl & Mrs Tracy Underwood Proposal Conversion and extension of former mill to a dwelling, creation of access and closing off of existing access, installation of solar panels, reinforcement of bank around existing lake and associated drainage (retrospective) and landscaping

Site Address Ballakindry Mill Ballagawne Road Ballabeg Castletown Isle Of Man IM9 4PD Planning Officer Presenting Officer Mr Hamish Laird

As above

Addendum to the Officer Report

- At the 22/5/2023, Planning Committee Meeting, Members resolved to vary/delete the proposed conditions outlined in the Committee Report as follows:

Condition 5 "All new door frames and windows to be inserted in the Mill Building and the extension, in the development hereby approved, shall have either black powder coated, aluminium or wooden frames. The use of black uPVC for all window and door frames is specifically excluded from this planning permission.

Reason: To ensure that high quality materials are used for the Mill Building and the extension which reflect and preserve the character and historic significance of the Mill structure and impart a high quality finish in the interests of visual amenity."

- Condition 7 Deleted. Following discussion with the applicant and agreement by the Case Officer, Members resolved that the condition was unnecessary.
- Condition 8 (as renumbered) "A scheme of landscaping, shall be implemented and maintained in accordance with the details indicated on the approved plans. The landscaping around the pond should be sufficiently far enough away from the working area in the south to be un-impacted by the works. The

landscaping in this area shall be undertaken prior to the first occupation of the dwelling taking place. All other planting, seeding, and earth works comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the occupation of the dwelling or substantial completion of the development, whichever is the sooner, and any plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species.

Reason: In order to give planting a sufficient time to establish and to mitigate previous negative impacts to help assimilate the development into its surroundings in the interests of the visual amenities of the site and surrounding area."

Condition 11 (as renumbered) "The submitted details and use of planings for the surface material to be provided for the vehicular access surface to serve the development, herby approved, is acceptable to DEFA Planning. The surface covered by these details shall relate to the first 5.0 metres as measured back from the edge of the public highway. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details, and shall thereafter, be permanently maintained.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety by ensuring that a bound surface for the access is used to prevent loose material being brought onto the public highway through vehicle movements onto and off the site."

---

*Data sourced from the Isle of Man public planning register under the [Isle of Man Open Government Licence](https://www.gov.im/about-this-site/open-government-licence/).*
*Canonical page: https://planningportal.im/a/10018-malew-ballakindry-mill-conversion-extension/documents/966758*