**Document:** Officer Report
**Application:** 17/00725/B — Conversion of existing redundant mill to single dwelling with associated parking
**Decision:** Permitted
**Decision Date:** 2018-07-03
**Parish:** Malew
**Document Type:** report / officer_report
**Source:** https://planningportal.im/a/10916-malew-ballakindry-mill-conversion-dwelling/documents/976791

---

# Officer Report

**Application No.:** 17/00725/B
**Applicant:** Ballacreggan Farms Ltd
**Proposal:** Conversion of existing redundant mill to single dwelling with associated parking
**Site Address:** Ballakindry Mill Ballagawne Road Ballabeg Castletown Isle Of Man IM9 4PD Case Officer : Miss S E Corlett
**Photo Taken:** 28.03.2018
**Site Visit:** 28.03.2018
**Expected Decision Level:** Planning Committee
**Recommended Decision:** Permitted
**Date of Recommendation:** 25.06.2018 _________________________________________________________________

## 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 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

- C 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.
- C 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.

- C 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.
- C 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.
- C 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.
- C 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.
- C 8. Planting must be carried out in accordance with the details provided by Roots to Shoots Landscape Proposal and 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 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. Plans/Drawings/Information;

This decision relates to drawings 1758-05, 1758-06 received on 3rd July, 2017 and 1758-01A, 1758-02A1758-03A and 1758-04C all received on 24th May, 2018.

_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the following Government Departments should be given Interested Person Status on the basis that they have made written submissions relating to planning considerations:

Manx Utilities who are directly affected by any alteration to the watercourse.

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):

Glebe Cottage, Maughold who are too distant from the site to be directly affected by the proposal. _____________________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT

## THE SITE

1.1 The site is a parcel of land adjacent to the northeastern side of Ballagawne Road between Ballabeg to the south and the A27 Ronague Road to the north. The Ballagawne Road is narrow and generally of single vehicle width and contains a number of bends which afford sometimes very limited visibility for those in vehicles. The road slopes downhill from north to south which perhaps encourages the speed of vehicles but this is limited by the lack of forward visibility in both directions. To the south of the site is a series of two relatively sharp bends with similar bends to the north. - 1.2 Within the site, the predominant feature is Ballakindry Mill, which appears to have been unused for some years. This building has been identified within the Department as having potential for Registration despite not being identified in the Area Plan for the South as such. It is situated at a slight angle from the highway, with the side lean-to roofed extension immediately abutting the highway: roughly 18m of the frontage is open and free from any boundary treatment, whereas the highway is generally characterised by clear roadside boundaries of hedging and trees with some stone walling. Beyond this to the rear (north) is a wooded area and, within this, lies a large pond. There is a mill race apparently flowing to the mill, and which also apparently connects the pond with the nearby stream. To the side of the front of the mill is a gated access into the land to the north which is higher than the ground floor around the building. - 1.3 Ballakindry Mill, which is angled almost exactly such that its front elevation faces due west, is largely two storeys in height, but there is a single storey, lean-to extension to the southern side. It is formed largely of stone, much of which is horizontally laid, along with prominent stone quoins and some bricks that were apparently latterly installed. The roof on the twostorey element, which is incomplete, is finished in slate, while corrugated sheeting provides the mono-pitched roof for the single-storey extension. Both elements of the building are clearly of historic and traditional construction even if it is clear from the stone joins that they were constructed at differing times. - 1.4 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.

## THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the conversion of Ballakindry Mill to a single dwelling and this follows previously approved applications for similar schemes (see Planning History). This would have four bedrooms on the ground floor and an open plan kitchen/lounge on the first floor. The application has been submitted with a Design and Access Statement explaining the design ethos, which includes a sentence explaining that the walls are straight appear to be free from cracks, and also a bat survey. The latter concludes that bats do use the building/area as a feeding site but not for breeding. - 2.2 The existing openings on the barn would be retained and re-used for windows; there would also be some new apertures created for the same purpose: three on the ground floor of the rear (east) elevation, one on the front (west) elevation at ground floor, and one in the side (north) elevation at ground floor. In addition, an older opening subsequently closed off is now proposed to be re-opened, with a single glazed panel installed. The lean-to side extension is proposed to accept two new rooflights. The most significant installation proposed is in the existing courtyard-style entrance, which would be in the form of a pair of front doors with fanlight surrounds, retaining the existing aperture but with a straight top to the glazing, reflecting that of the current timber door. - 2.3 Structurally, it is proposed that the building be entirely re-pointed with lime render, with a new slate roof finish proposed as well. - 2.4 A number of sycamores, an alder and three ash trees are proposed for removal to facilitate the development: one lies between the gable of the building with the road, three lie to the rear of the building and will be affected by proposed drainage and the remainder lie to the north of the building within the area proposed for vehicle parking. - 2.5 Three parking spaces are shown to the north of the barn and through an area that is currently gated. Tarmacadam surfacing on the hardstanding directly in front of the building and concrete block paving is shown for the parking and manoeuvring areas. - 2.6 Following discussions with the Arboricultural Officer amended plans have been submitted (25.05.18) which describe in more detail how the access and car parking areas will be formed and the existing trees protected. PLANNING HISTORY

3.1 The site has a highly relevant planning history. Approval in Principle was granted for the conversion of the barn under PA 04/01655/A, which was followed by a detailed approval issued to PA 05/01102/B - however, this was not implemented. Subsequently, and most recently, a conversion scheme identical to what had been previously approved was submitted, 16/01283/B. However, this was refused for four reasons. - 3.2 That application was refused for the following four reasons:

- R 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.
- R 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.

- R 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.
- R 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. THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN

4.1 The site falls within an area not zoned for any particular kind of development as set out in the Area Plan for the South (APS) 2013. It also falls within the Landscape Character Area (LCA) for Ballamodha, Earystane and St Marks. - 4.2 The APS sets out the following in respect of this LCA:

"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."

It continues: "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."

4.3 Otherwise, the APS contains no specific policies relevant to the assessment of this application. - 4.4 Strategic Policies 2 and 10 and Environment Policy 1 and General Policy 3 of the Strategic Plan presume against development on land not zoned for it. However, General Policy 3 does set out some exceptions, and one such exception is the conversion of existing built fabric, but only on the proviso that such a conversion would comply with Housing Policy 11: "Conversion of existing rural buildings into dwellings may be permitted, but only where:

- (a) redundancy for the original use can be established;
- (b) the building is substantially intact and structurally capable of renovation;
- (c) the building is of architectural, historic, or social interest;
- (d) the building is large enough to form a satisfactory dwelling, either as it stands or with modest, subordinate extension which does not affect adversely the character or interest of the building;
- (e) residential use would not be incompatible with adjoining established uses or, where appropriate, land-use zonings on the area plan; and
- (f) the building is or can be provided with satisfactory services without unreasonable public expenditure. "Such conversion must:

- (a) where practicable and desirable, re-establish the original appearance of the building; and
- (b) use the same materials as those in the existing building.

"Permission will not be given for the rebuilding of ruins or the erection of replacement buildings of similar, or even identical, form.

"Further extension of converted rural buildings will not usually be permitted, since this would lead to loss or reduction of the original interest and character."

4.5 In view of the site's location adjacent to a number of trees, and also the Landscape Character Area applying to the site in the APS, it is also important to consider Environment Policy 3:

"Development will not be permitted where it would result in the unacceptable loss of or damage to woodland areas, especially ancient, natural and semi-natural woodlands, which have public amenity or conservation value."

4.6 General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan provides an important set of criteria against which new development proposals should be assessed. In this case the following are relevant: that the development

- (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them;
- (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape;
- (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses;

- (f) incorporates where possible existing topography and landscape features, particularly trees and sod banks;
- (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality;
- (h) provides satisfactory amenity standards in itself, including where appropriate safe and convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space;
- (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways and
- (j) can be provided with all necessary services".

4.7 Environment Policy 4 provides further guidance on the protection of ecology: "Development will not be permitted which would adversely affect:

- (a) species and habitats of international importance:

- (i) protected species of international importance or their habitats; or
- (ii) proposed or designated Ramsar and Emerald Sites or other internationally important sites.

- (b) species and habitats of national importance: (i) protected species of national importance or their habitats; ii) proposed or designated National Nature Reserves, or Areas of Special Scientific Interest; or

- (iii) Marine Nature Reserves; or
- (iv) National Trust Land.

- (c) species and habitats of local importance such as Wildlife Sites, local nature reserves, priority habitats or species identified in any Manx Biodiversity Action Plan which do not already benefit from statutory protection, Areas of Special Protection and Bird Sanctuaries and landscape features of importance to wild flora and fauna by reason of their continuous nature or function as a corridor between habitats.

Some areas to which this policy applies are identified as Areas of Ecological Importance or Interest on extant Local or Area Plans, but others, whose importance was not evident at the time of the adoption of the relevant Local or Area Plan, are not, particularly where that plan

has been in place for many years. In these circumstances, the Department will seek site specific advice from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry if development proposals are brought forward."

REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Arbory Parish Commissioners raise no objection (31.07.17). - 5.2 DEFA Inland Fisheries have no objection to the application provided that appropriate steps are taken to prevent harm to the aquatic populations in the watercourse downstream from the site. They confirm that they have visited the site in 2016 in response to the earlier application and both that and the current application involve re-routing the existing millrace. Whilst the mill race itself does not have a permanent water flow, it does drain into a stream which contains trout populations. Any major alterations to the watercourse would need to be done with care to ensure that sediment is not washed downstream during the re-routing works, especially at sensitive times of the year. They require a written construction method statement approved in advance of the commencement of works to ensure that there is taken a suitable construction approach to reduce the possibility of injury or disturbance of fish within the watercourse (21.07.17) - 5.3 DEFA Senior Biodiversity Officer confirms that he is content with the bat report (08.08.17). - 5.4 DEFA Arboricultural Officer considers that there is a sufficient lack of information on the impact of the development on the existing trees to warrant an objection to the application and requires information on both the impact on existing trees and proposed mitigation planting before a decision is taken (22.08.17). Following the submission of further information, the AO expresses concern at the loss of two trees to the rear of the building which are required to be removed to facilitate a drainage ditch to serve the property, and he confirms no objection to the removal of trees 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8. He confirms that he is concerned that there are other trees on the site which have not been considered and suggests that measures for their protection should be provided along with details of the levels of the parking area and how this may affect trees. He states that the arboricultural assessment has not been undertaken in accordance with Section 4 of the British Standard to ensure that the tree constraints are identified properly. Finally, he suggests that there are areas where construction activity will take place within root protection areas and the method of undertaking this needs to be specified, which it is not (21.12.17). - 5.5 Manx Utilities advise that if there is an intention to make the mill race watercourse part of the dwelling, written consent will be required from them prior to any works commencing (25.07.17). - 5.6 Highway Services initially sought a deferral of the application, noting that the access appears to have very low levels of visibility at 13m and 23m. There is no information provided regarding the speed of traffic on the derestricted road to determine the correct visibility, and no justification for accepting such a low level of visibility sightlines and requested that the application is deferred to allow the applicant to submit the required information (31.07.17). - 5.7 Highway Services then recommended refusal of the application on the grounds that the application fails to provide safe and convenient access as required by GP2 (h) of the SP (18.08.17), indicating that it is not likely that the required visibility splays are available, even if the access were relocated (22.05.18). - 5.8 Two residents of Maughold suggest that the mill was probably a water mill rather than a windmill but note that the bat survey mentions machinery yet none is shown on the drawings and wonder whether there is any remaining internal ill machinery. They suggest that this needs to be taken into account and if possible to preserve any remaining machinery if possible and

this has been done in the past (28.07.17). The applicant later confirmed that the building is empty (15.08.17).

## ASSESSMENT

6.1 The principle of the conversion of the mill to a residential dwelling was previously acceptable, noting some reservations 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 confirmed that he is a Structural Engineer and confirms that the walls are sound and showing no sign of movement, bowing or cracking and as a new first floor is to be introduced, this will further strengthen the building. This is no longer considered to be an issue. - 6.2 Accordingly, the matters for detail are, in this case, judged to be:

- o The design proposed;
- o The impact on trees;
- o Highway safety, and
- o The impact on protected species. The design proposed

- 6.3.1 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.
- 6.3.2 A condition requiring a photographic survey of the building be undertaken prior to the conversion works would be appropriate, given the historic interest that this building offers. Conditions would also be appropriate to constrain further uncontrolled alterations and extensions which could otherwise be undertaken without permission under the Permitted Development Order and to require details of the materials of windows and doors. The impact on trees

- 6.2.1 The Arboricultural Officer initially indicated that the measures for protecting the trees were not satisfactory. The applicant has submitted a series of plans and information to address these concerns, most recently on 13th March, 2018 to show the use of cellweb tree protection. Further to this information, the Officer indicates that he no longer objects to the application, subject to conditions about tree protection and replanting. Highway safety
- 6.3.1 The visibility for those emerging from the site is severely limited: to the north this is limited by the presence of the existing bank. This is proposed to be reduced to a height not exceeding 1.05m to afford a view over it to the extent that vehicles would be seen when they are around 25m away. To the south the visibility is impaired by the lean-to element of the building. Vehicles approaching the site from the south would not be seen until they are around 22m away. Highway Services have indicated that this is not acceptable nor is there likely to be a way of achieving visibility due to the alignment of the road and the presence of the building.

- 6.3.2 There is clearly a conflict between the benefits of finding a use for the building to more likely ensure its maintenance and retention, which is a significant benefit given its

- acknowledged historic, social and architectural interest and the potential detriment to highway safety.
- 6.3.3 It is relevant that there is a level of vehicular activity associated with the use of the building and the access for agricultural purposes. If the property were converted to a dwelling, there will be a change in the amount, timing and nature of the vehicular activity and the type of vehicles using the access. It is likely that there will be an increase in the use of the access, both by the occupants coming and going as well as delivery vehicles and visitors. The vehicles are likely to be smaller - domestic vehicles rather than farm plant - and the drivers will be lower down and less able to see approaching vehicles, but more likely to be able to respond more quickly and move more quickly in and out of the access.
- 6.3.4 There needs to be a balance of all of these factors and considering them all, it is recommended that whilst there is unsatisfactory visibility from and of vehicles emerging from the site, it is considered that the benefit of retaining this building of interest, together with the nature of the additional traffic which would be using the access, the balance should fall in favour of the application.

The impact on ecology

- 6.4.1 The comments of the Senior Biodiversity Officer are noted, and there is no concern with the bat survey that has been submitted. Accordingly, it is concluded that the provisions of Environment Policy 4 are met and overcome the previous reasons for refusal.

7.0 CONCLUSION - 7.1 The proposal is considered to accord with HP11 and is supported.

8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

- o The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent;
- o The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any
- other person in whose interest the land becomes vested;
- o Highway Services of the Department of Infrastructure, and
- o The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

8.2 In addition to those above, article 6(3) of the Order requires the Department to decide which persons (if any) who have made representations with respect to the application, should be treated as having sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings relating to the application. - 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.

I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to it under the appropriate delegated authority.

### Decision Made : …Permitted.. Committee Meeting Date:…02.07.2018

Signed :……S CORLETT……….. Presenting Officer

Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required

YES/NO

## 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.

---

*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/10916-malew-ballakindry-mill-conversion-dwelling/documents/976791*