DEC Officer Report

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Application No.: 19/00949/GB Applicant: Mark Watson Proposal: Conversion of farm outbuildings to 5 tourist units with associated parking (in association with PA 19/00950/CON) Site Address: Glyn Moar Outbuildings Glen Mooar Road St Johns Isle Of Man IM4 3AQ Technical Officer: Thomas Sinden Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 15.05.2024

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. Prior to the installation of any external lighting on the site (whether for security, decorative, directional or any other purpose), details are to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. Thereafter, any external lighting is to be installed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure that the amenity of neighbouring properties and wildlife habitats are not adversely affected by the development.

• C 3. The development hereby approved shall not be used or occupied other than for the purpose of short-let holiday accommodation and shall not be used as a separate dwelling (or dwellings). The accommodation hereby approved shall not be occupied by the same person(s) for a single period or cumulative periods exceeding 28 days in any calendar year.

Reason: To ensure that the development is only used and occupied as short let holiday accommodation and to prevent the creation of an unjustified separate dwelling (or dwellings) in the countryside.

• C 4. Prior to any works being undertaken relating to the roof, gables or eaves, including any roof preparation or clearance works, a bat mitigation plan including a method statement for construction works on or around the roof spaces shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. These details shall include but are not limited to the following:

• o Timing of works
• o Details of supervision and checks by a suitably qualified ecologist - before, during and
• on completion of works
• o Details of at least 2 bat boxes suitable for crevice dwelling bats to be installed and details of their timing of installation
• o Detail about how construction works are to be carried out - such as isolation of loft areas, continued access by bats, creation of a new bat access points (including type, location and number of access points)
• o Details of roofing membranes to be used
• o Details of the steps that will be taken should bats be found during works
• o Detail of how contractors will be made aware of the presence of bats and the mitigation plan to be worked too. The works shall be carried out in full accordance with the approved details unless alternative details are first submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. Reason: To ensure suitable mitigation is in place to safeguard bats.

• C 5. Notwithstanding previously submitted tree removal plan TR-24119D1, no trees shown to be retained on Proposed Site Plan 18/2742/14N are to be removed as part of the works hereby approved.

Reason: To ensure that the existing trees on the site, and the habitat that they provide to local wildlife, are not adversely affected by the development.

• C 6. Prior to the commencement of the works hereby approved, a tree protection plan is to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. Thereafter, the tree protection plan is to be adhered to in full for the duration of the works. Reason: To ensure that the existing trees on the site are adequately protected.
• C 7. Prior to the occupation of any of the tourist units hereby approved, the access driveway and car parking areas shown on drawing 18/2742/14N are to be completed and available for use. Thereafter, the access drive and car parking areas are to remain available for use by the occupants of the tourist units.

Reason: to ensure that highway safety and the amenity of the existing house are not adversely affected by the development.

• C 8. Prior to the occupation of any of the tourist units hereby approved, a landscaping scheme is to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. Thereafter, all landscaping shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Any trees or plants indicated on the approved scheme which, within a period of five years from the date of planting, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced during the next planting season with other trees or plants of a species and size to be first approved in writing by the Department. Reason: to ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development.
• C 9. 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 units 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.

Note: In addition to the specific conditions attached to this decision, the applicant is reminded of their responsibilities under the Wildlife Act 1990 in respect of Bats, Birds, Japanese Knotweed and any other wildlife found to be present during the course of the works hereby approved.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.

The application meets the statutory test within section 16 of the Act as the special interest of the existing buildings is being preserved. The harm caused by the interventions is judged to be offset by the restoration and repair works proposed to the historic fabric, and overall the proposals are therefore judged to preserve the special interest. The application is also in accordance with general policy 3, strategic policy 4 and environment policies 1, 16 and 32 of the strategic plan as the setting and special interest of the registered buildings are being protected and preserved, the development will convert redundant rural buildings which are of architectural and historic interest, and the development would not adversely affect the countryside. Although concerns have been raised regarding the increased traffic, highway safety, increased noise and lighting, the scheme has been amended to address these concerns and the scheme now proposed is judged to comply with the policies listed above. Conditions have been added to ensure that the proposals do not result in an adverse impact on the locality in relation to the factors raised. The application is therefore judged to be acceptable.

Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to drawings;

• 18/2742/01G received 3.6.2021,
• 18/2742/02 received 28.8.2019,
• 18/2742/03 received 7.8.2020,
• 18/2742/04 received 28.8.2019,
• 18/2742/05 received 28.8.2019,
• 18/2742/06 received 28.8.2019,
• 18/2742/07M received 8.11.2022,

together with drawings 18/2742/08M, 18/2742/09F, 18/2742/10F, 18/2742/11G, 18/2742/12F, 18/2742/13F, 18/2742/14N all received 15.4.2024.

_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

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 4(2):

The owners of: Ballachrink Lodge Ballachrink Farm Cornmill Cottage

as they do not clearly identify the land which is owned or occupied which is considered to be impacted on by the proposed development in accordance with paragraph 2A of the Policy; the land is not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy. Finally, the comments have not explained how the development would impact the lawful use of land owned or occupied by them and in relation to the relevant issues identified in paragraph 2C of the Policy, as is required by paragraph 2D of the Policy.

_____________________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The red line for the application site encapsulates three outbuildings to the north-west of Glen Mooar House (also referred to as Glyn Moore or Glyn Moar in various documents), and extends to Glen Moar Loop Road on its north-easterly boundary. The registration document for Glen Mooar - RB 268 - encapsulates the main house, formal gardens and a number of agricultural outbuildings that sit to the west of the existing house. - 1.2 The outbuildings can be accessed within the site and from the driveway of the main house, or via a separate access located opposite the Glen Mooar Loop Road junction. The separate access is overgrown although its edges are clearly defined by the trees that run either side with exception to the odd self-seeded sapling. - 1.3 The arrangement of the outbuildings forms a small central courtyard and a natural opening amongst the group of Registered Trees throughout the site. The buildings are set back around 26m from the main road. There are three main buildings; 'long barn' on the northeast side running almost parallel to the road (barn 1), 'barn 2' on the south-west side of the courtyard and 'barn 3' on the north-west side of the agricultural entrance. Between the barns and the main road are a further two non-historic structures, a single garage and a shed. Long Barn - 1.4 The long barn is around 28m long x 6m wide and predominately two storey with an eaves level of 4m (measured from a ground floor datum on 99.52) and finished with a pitched red cement tile roof with a central ridge 6.05m which steps up for a short distance with a ridge

• 7.3m high at the eastern side finished with a corrugated steel roof. There are two further single storey lean-to additions at each gable end. At ground floor the building provides a number of stables each compartment access via its own door from the courtyard. At a midpoint to the building there is a walk way providing access from the courtyard through the building and out to the roadside garden area where there is a small detached standalone garage building.

1.5 The stone built long barn is white washed throughout, there are a number of existing apertures across the front and rear elevations at both ground a first floor, some fitted with timber windows others without frames. The stepped section of the barn has a separate external staircase to the rear roadside elevation providing access to the first floor storage areas. - 1.6 The lean-to extensions are stone built throughout, the larger eastern extension joins at a right-angle to the main barn projecting further forwards at the front and rear and which has a partially collapsed corrugate tin roof and a large open aperture facing into the courtyard. The smaller extensions on the western side wrap the building into the courtyards and have a mix of cement tile and corrugated tin roof.

• Barn 2 (Hay Loft)

1.7 This detached barn is one and half storey's, stone built and finished with a pitched sheet metal roof. The building is 9m long x 6m wide and installed with double garage doors on one gable end and an external staircase on the rear elevation providing access to the first floor hay store. To the southernmost end is a small open walled area which may have perhaps once been a piggery.

• Barn 3 (Two Storey Garage)

1.8 This building was subject to a fire a few years ago as a result the building is without a roof and without the peaks of its gables. It stands with four walls with an external footprint of approx. 9.8m long and 6m wide. There are two double doors on the elevation facing into the courtyard above which is one aperture, and two filled in apertures. Courtyard - 1.9 The courtyard area central to all the outbuildings measures around 30m long and 11m wide. It appears mostly cobbled surface albeit over grown with grass and general weeds and greenery. Registered Building Document - 1.10 The RB document states that the associated farm buildings appear not to have been in productive agricultural use since the mid nineteenth century and that the original farmhouse here was known as Ballahowin and was demolished when the mansion house was built and the name Ballahowin was abandoned at that point and thereafter the mansion house was named Glyn Moore/Glen Moar. In 1851 the owner listed the building as Glyn Moore. The old farmhouse was mostly demolished whilst most of the farm buildings remain today and it's possible that the existing walled garden was aligned to the original farmhouse and the arched added when Glyn Moore was built. - 1.11 The outbuildings are also referenced within the supporting photographic study where it includes photographs of the long barn, barn 2 (hay loft) and the steps to the rear of the long barn. - 1.12 The site is recognised as being of both special architectural and historic interest.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The current application proposes internal and external works to each of the existing agricultural outbuildings to facilitate the creation of 5 self-contained tourist units and the creation of a grasscrete car parking area behind the buildings. Works to each of the buildings is set out in more detail below, in summary the long barn is to be split into three units, whilst the hay loft and two storey garage are to create individual units. The wider scheme also includes the re-use of the existing access and driveway with its finish in brick paviours and adding a new passing place along the way. The proposal and red line also includes the siting of a new klargester unit and soakaway into field 312673 nearest the garage building. - 2.2 Long Barn

• 2.2.1 The proposal seeks to split this barn in to three individual units using the existing passageway and right angle lean-to as natural divisions.
• 2.2.2 'Unit 1' - in the single storey lean-to section sitting at right angle to the main two storey section, this self-contained unit it to be fitted within internal walls providing one bedroom, one bathroom and an open plan kitchen living area. Facing into the courtyard the door opening is to be installed with bi-folding doors. The tin roof is to be replaced with a new lean-to slate roof fitted with four conservation roof lights.
• 2.2.3 'Unit 2' - in the two storey section nearest the external staircase. This area is to be adapted with internal walls and a new internal staircase providing a two bedroom, one

• bathroom self-contained unit. At ground floor the unit is to have separate kitchen and living area. Access will be via an existing door opening from the courtyard. The tin roof is to be replacement with a new pitched slate roof, the existing four window apertures facing into the courtyard are to be maintained and fitted with new glazed window units. At the rear the apertures are to be maintained and fitted with new glazing and the first floor door access via the external staircase is to be replaced with a window unit.
• 2.2.4 The existing ground floor passageway through the long barn is to be maintained.
• 2.2.5 'Unit 3' - in the two storey section nearest the main access entrance. This is to be a self-contained three bedroomed, one bathroom unit is to be fitted with new internal walls and staircase and living and kitchen space within the single storey lean-to nearest the courtyard. The existing floor joists are to be removed and the floor heights modified with new floor joists added and the ground floor timber stalls reduced in height. The existing apertures throughout the barn are to be maintained and fitted with new window units or timber doors. The roof of the main barn and lean-to elements are all to be replaced with slate roof coverings with two conservation roof lights installed on either side of the roof slope. A new window is proposed at first floor of the northern gable. Part of Unit 3 are to be rebuilt where the existing stone wall is damaged.
• 2.2.6 The supporting design statement indicates that all windows and doors are to be finished in timber. All wall finishes to the existing structures are to be white washed to match the existing appearance, and new sections of wall are to be smooth rendered. Roof structures are to be carefully removed, treated and re-instated where possible above a ring beam to consolidate the wall tops. Two new flues are proposed on the courtyard elevation and one new flue on the rear roadside elevation.

2.3 Barn 2 (Hay Loft)

• 2.3.1 The proposal seeks to convert this outbuilding in to a self-contained one bedroom, one bathroom maisonette style unit. The external staircase is to be maintained with the window opening altered to a door access. The garage doors facing into the courtyard are to be replaced with glazed patio doors with rolling shutters and the hay store opening above lifted to a higher position. Three conservation roof lights are proposed on the western side of the new slate roof replacing the existing tin roof. All roofing timbers are to be retained where possible. The exposed stone is to be retained as existing and repointed. A new flue is to be installed on the courtyard elevation.

2.4 Barn 3 (Garage)

• 2.4.1 The proposal seeks to convert this into a self-contained unit with two bedrooms and one bathroom at first floor access by a new internal staircase, at ground floor the unit is to have an open plan kitchen and living space. The unit is to have the gable peaks rebuilt and a new slate pitch roof installed to match the adjacent buildings and fitted with two conservation roof lights on the south facing roof slope. The garage door openings facing into the courtyard are to be fitted with glazed doors and the three windows re-opened above and fitted with new windows. The western gable is to have its openings installed with a door at ground floor and a window at first floor. The rear and east gable are to remain solid. A new wood burning flue is proposed on the west end gable.

2.5 Single Garage and Shed

• 2.5.1 The garage is proposed to have its front gable re-built to match the remaining building and the tin roof replaced with natural slate.

• 2.5.2 The agent states that the shed is a fairly recent structure and is in poor condition, this may be retained however this structure is also considered for demolition. The most recent plans show its re-use as a cycle store.

2.6 Parking Area

• 2.6.1 The application seeks approval for the creation of a parking area to the rear of Barn 2 Hay Loft. This parking area is to be access between Barn 2 and 3 and is to measure at its longest and widest 19m x 19m and provide up to 6 car parking spaces weaved between the existing trees. There is a central turning space for circulation in and out of spaces. Most recent site plan drawings show this new car parking area finished in grasscrete.

2.7 Entrance and access lane

• 2.7.1 The existing entrance opposite the loop road junction is to be maintained and the track cleared and laid with brick setts. The track enters the courtyard along the north gable of Barn 3 where there is a pedestrian gate and 2m wide access gate. Drawing 14M indicated CellWeb to be used in the passing place.

2.8 Trees

• 2.8.1 The application initially submitted a tree survey and a proposed tree removal plan. The most recent site plan 14N shows the elm 2119 and horse chestnut 2126 (referenced in DEFA comments) as being retained. No updated tree removal plan has been submitted.

2.9 Field's 312673 and 312676

• 2.9.1 The original red line for the application also included the main dwelling, outbuildings and field 312676. The application was then amended to further include field 312673 within the red line, but now the red and blue lines have been changed again to only include the access, driveway, outbuildings, area of new parking and the area of the proposed 'klargester' unit and soakaway. The remaining land outlined in blue to reflect the extent of land owned by the applicant.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The current application runs contemporaneously to the same application for Registered Building Consent for the same works under PA 19/00950/CON. - 3.2 The outbuildings were recently subject to two applications 17/00337/GB and 17/00338/CON for the conversion of outbuildings in to a single residential dwelling including the erection of linked extension between the long barn and the hay loft and the installation of sunroom extensions, as well as the demolition of the existing garage building and replacement with a new garage in revised position, the creation of a new access and driveway. - 3.3 Prior to 2017 the site was also subject to a number of applications for the barn, although none of these were ever implemented and the barns remain in agricultural use:

• o 98/00406/A - Approval in principle for conversion of barns into single dwelling approved
• o 94/01300/A - Approval in principle for conversion of barn to office accommodation approved
• o 93/01612/B - Conversion of redundant long barn to 4 self-contained tourist apartments

-approved

• o 93/01316/A - Approval in principle for conversion of redundant long barn to 4 selfcontained tourist - approved.

4.0 PLANNING POLICIES - 4.1 3.1 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1999 S16 Registered buildings: supplementary provisions

(3) In considering —

• (a) whether to grant planning approval for development which affects a registered building or its setting, or
• (b) whether to grant registered building consent for any works,

the relevant Department shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.

4.2 The site is designated as 'Open Space for Particular Purposes - Registered Woodland' on the St Johns local plan 1998, the site is also within a wider area considered for a 'Proposed Conservation Area. As already mentioned the outbuildings and the main house are registered under Registered Building number 268 (RB 268). Given the nature of the current proposal and the status of the site, it is relevant to consider the following policies from the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, Heritage PPS 1/01 and the Written Statement accompanying the St Johns Local Plan 1999 in the assessment of the application. These policies ultimately seek to make best use of sites, direct development to existing centres and settlements and only allowing development in the countryside in exceptional circumstances (Strategic Policies 1, 2, 10, Spatial Policies 3 and 5, General Policy 3 and Environment Policy 1), ensure suitable protection of the Islands built heritage and Registered Buildings including their character and setting and indicating that their demolition is to be avoided and that any alterations and extensions must be appropriate and not detriment their character (Strategic Policy 4 and Environment Policies 30-35 and 39), and also determine whether the conversion of existing rural buildings into new tourist accommodation is acceptable both in terms of visual and general amenity (Environment Policy 16 and Business Policies 11-14). Further to these consideration shall also be given to the general standards towards acceptable development (General Policy 2) as well as the impact of development on woodland, ecosystems, habitats and local highway safety (Environment Policies 3 and 4, and Transport Policies 4 and 7). The registration document of RB 268 also highlights the importance of these buildings including the farm buildings forming part of the registration, as well as Policy T/R/1 and Paragraph 10.3 of the St Johns Local Plan that encourage conversion of existing properties into tourist accommodation and specific reference to 'Glenmoar' and emphasis on the historic quality of the area and setting of Tynwald Hill. - 4.3 The Government's flood risk map states that the site is not at risk of surface water or river flooding.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only. - 5.1 German Parish Commissioners - no objection 03/10/2019, 12/11/2019, 18/11/2022 and 04/01/2023

• 5.1.1 Earlier comments 28/07/2021 expressed some concerns with the loss of mature trees and that they would like to see the results of the bat survey and use of the existing driveway to avoid loss of trees.

5.2 Manx Utilities - Concerns for water main (12/09/2019)

• 5.2.1 There is a water main situated within the proposed development and it is essential that the applicant contact MU to make arrangements for the site and potential need for any diversion prior to undertaking any building works to ensure suitable water supply is maintain to the surrounding properties.

5.3 DEFA Senior Biodiversity Officer - Concerns and suggested conditions if to be approved (25/09/2019, 15/10/2019 and 04/11/2022)

• 5.3.1 These comments expressed significant concern for roosting bats at this site and the need for up to date bat surveys including bat emergence survey's being undertaken prior to any works being undertaken including the blocking up of any access into the barns, and that these survey's must be undertaken by suitably qualified ecological consultancy and a report and bat mitigation plan to be provided to Planning for written approval prior to any works being undertaken.

• 5.3.2 These bat surveys are required to identify the species of bat utilising the property, their abundance and whether they are breeding and this will determine the mitigation required. As the site has already proven to be used by a variety of roosting bats, the bat mitigation plan must include the following but that other mitigation measures may be required depending on the results of the bat surveys:

• o The provision of a dedicated loft space of suitable dimensions and with appropriate access points for brown long-eared bats.
• o The provision of a variety of bat hibernating spaces.
• o The use of Type 1F bitumen membrane, which is the only membrane type that is proven safe for bats.
• o Recommendations for external lighting - some species of bat avoid lit areas and therefore if any new external lighting is proposed then we recommend The
• o BCT and ILP Guidance Note 8 Bats and Artificial Lighting (12th September 2018) is adhered to.
• o The responsible timing of works.
• o Details about the type and location of a variety of bat boxes to be erected around the site - including on trees and buildings - to provide adequate hibernating and breeding spaces.

• 5.3.3 Concern was also expressed for the lack of mitigation expressed for bats so far, also that the site was used by nesting birds and that Japanese knotweed was found to be at the site. Removal of so many trees is also a concern; the trees providing sheltered feeding areas for bats and that the proposed tree removal will result in a significant reduction in food availability for brown long-eared bats and additionally some species of bird and that they support DEFA's Arboricultural Officer's need to retain the mature elm (2119) and the horse chestnut (2126).
• 5.3.4 A substantial patch of Japanese knotweed growing in the vicinity of the proposed car park which is a highly invasive non-native plant and is listed on Schedule 8 of the Wildlife Act 1990 and it is an offence to spread it into the wild. Roots can spread 7m from the crown, therefore a 7m exclusion zone must be set around the Japanese knotweed for the duration of the works. Given the presence of Japanese knotweed on the proposed development site the location of the Klargester Biodisc treatment with associated soakaways and any other drainage works/utility installation must be provided and should be well away from the Japanese knotweed that will take at least three years to eradicate.
• 5.3.5 If to be approved conditions should be added in respect of bat surveys and mitigation plans, no external lighting unless a scheme is provided, exclusion zones be provided around the Japanese knotweed, eradication plan provided for the Japanese knotweed and a plan provided to show mitigation for nesting swallows.
• 5.3.6 In addition to the conditions three informative notes are to be added referring to the relevant Bats, Birds and Japanese Knotweed sections of the Wildlife Act 1990 and the consequential offences should any harm occur in this respect.

5.4 The DOI Highway Services - do not oppose subject to conditions (11/11/2022)

• 5.4.1 initial comments 28/06/2021 raised concern for the usability and manoeuvrability in and out of spaces and the lack of disabled bays with the number of overall spaces being below the standard for hotels, motels and guesthouses based on bedroom numbers. There was also a lack of details for bin store and collection, separate pedestrian access and passing place along the driveway. Further comments were provided following revisions to the scheme these continued to highlight the lack of waste bin and collection details, lack of cycle parking and passing place and limited visibility splay information.

• 5.4.2 Further revisions were made and subsequent comments were provided 03/05/2022 and 11/11/2022 acknowledging the reduction of car parking that the inclusion of a passing bay on the driveway is adequate. Cycle parking and electric vehicle charging points should be

• considered to support Active Travel and net zero objectives, but do not oppose subject to conditions ensuring the access, layout and circulation spaces being provided in accordance with submitted details.
• 5.4.3 Following the re-publication of amended plans (April 2024), DOI Highways have stated that they have no further comments on the application (17.4.2024).

5.5 DEFA Forestry - objection 12/09/2019 and 30/06/2021 -

• 5.5.1 Whilst some trees had already been removed under license, they raised concerns with the number of revisions now made to the scheme and the difficulty in knowing if their concerns had been resolved. Issues were highlighted in whether or not trees 2119 (Elm) and 2126 (Horse Chestnut) were being removed or not as both were important mature trees, there being no Arboricultural Impact Assessment AIA or Tree Protection Plan TPP formally provided, details for the location of klargester, soakaway or other drainage/utilities having potentially significant conflicts with the retained trees. An updated AIA is required, prepared in accordance with the recommendations of BS5837:2012, to properly understand the arboricultural impact of the proposals, and no details of how Japanese knotweed will be dealt with.

5.6 DEFA Principal Registered Buildings Officers - objections (22/07/2020 and 23/089/2022)

• 5.6.1 Comments summarise by stating that the proposals would be harmful to the character of this complex of outbuildings and the application fails to sufficiently demonstrate the optimum viable use for the site which would be compatible with the existing fabric, interior and setting of the buildings, all of which affect its special character as a building of merit.

• 5.6.2 The two comments highlight Glynmoar as being an important quarterland farm containing archaeological remains and may merit further investigation. The current main house was constructed C1845 and replaced the earlier Ballahowin farmhouse, and it is probable that the outbuildings subject to this application pre-date the existing main house and are a surviving remnant of the quarterland farm complex.
• 5.6.3 The outbuildings are included within the registration and are of special interest worthy of preservation. The principle of the conversion into tourist accommodation is supported particularly if the income is used to help maintain the principle building but that it is important that any conversion of the outbuildings does not cause harm to the setting of or potentially harm the long term viability or interest of the main house.
• 5.6.4 There are concerns that the application fails to make any identification or analysis of the outbuildings nor any type of assessment of features or details that contribute to the buildings special interest, and therefore no assessment as to how the special features are to be preserved or sensitively incorporated into the proposed works, or how the works might impact these features and how the special features have been suitably protected or works mitigated.
• 5.6.5 There are further concerns in the construction methods proposed such as the indicated use of cement render tanking, use of inappropriate insulation materials, proposed concrete ring beams and roof alterations particularly to barn 1. The overly domestic style of windows in these rural buildings, window openings in Barn 3 and that the volume and layout of proposed parking being more akin to an apartment block and should be more naturalistic to respect the setting. Reference also being made again to Historic England's guidance for Adapting Traditional Farm Buildings Best Practice Guidelines for Adaptive Reuse.
• 5.6.6 The Principal Registered Buildings Officer left their post in September 2023 and has yet to be replaced. Numerous meetings have taken place with the applicant and their agent since these comments have been made. The most recently submitted amended scheme (April 2024) seeks to remedy the concerns raised, and will be assessed in section 6.

• Third Party Comments
• 5.7 The owners of Ballachrink Lodge - objection (04.08.2021)

5.7.1 They express concerns for increased traffic and highway safety issues, noise pollution associated with 5 new tourists units, light pollution affecting dark skies, the lack of need for development and that it does not enhance the area, but does have a negative impact on the character and appearance of the area. Impacting on the amenity value of the area and its unique aesthetic pleasantness. Impact on trees and wildlife which has already been addressed by experts in the respective fields, and that the impact on such is not justifiable for such a project. They also raise concern as to the circulation of information and that new residents had moved to the area and not had opportunity to comment and that the proposal will have impact on them.

5.8 The owners of Ballachrink Farm - objection (05/08/2021)

5.8.1 The raise highway safety concerns as a result of increased traffic, the resultant loss of trees and nature, increased noise from users and traffic, increased light pollution, also there is no need for the development which will harm the environment. Concern also raised for plans not being circulated.

5.9 The owners of Cornmill Cottage - Objection (07/07/2021, 05/05/2022, 26/10/2022)

• 5.9.1 Concern for loss of mature trees, increased traffic resulting in safety issues to pedestrians and horse riders due to nature of narrow roads, the proposal for 5 tourist units would represent 5 separate dwellings which would detract and spoil the peace and natural beauty of the area.

6.0 ASSESSMENT Statutory Test - 6.1 Section 16 of the Act states that the "Department shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses." In this instance, the existing barns are in a poor state of repair. It is considered that the reuse of the barns and the associated repair and restoration works that will form part of the proposals will outweigh any perceived harm that will result from the conversion works. With the above in mind, it is judged that the application passes the statutory test. Policy Tests - 6.2 Principle

• 6.2.1 Strategic and spatial policies seek to make best use of existing sites and direct development to existing centres or suitable extensions of such settlements, both General Policy

3 and Environment Policy 16 also support the conversion of existing rural buildings into new uses including tourist purposes. Furthermore St Johns Local plan also supports the conversion of existing buildings in to tourist uses and Environment Policies 30-34 and supporting paragraphs indicate that sometimes it's necessary to look for new uses of registered buildings in order to secure their economic future but that any conversions must be sensitive and appropriate to their special character and interest as to not impact their registration. Ultimately the overarching principle of conversion in to new tourist use is to be supported. The success of the scheme will turn to whether the rest of the physical works are considered acceptable, appropriate and sensitive to the existing registered buildings, to the site and its setting, and to the wider environment.

6.3 Impact of physical works to buildings

• 6.3.1 Looking to each of the buildings, the overall works seek to retain the general form, proportion and external appearance of each, with clearing of vegetation, re-pointing and rerendering of elevations in lime to retain traditional finishes. The most notable changes will be the rebuilding of the upper gables of the garage building which was subject to fire some years ago and the replacement of the existing 'red' coloured roofs with new natural slate roofs, but

the overall roofscape will seek to match the existing pitched and lean-to arrangements throughout the long barn, and the pitched roofs of the hay loft and garage building.

• 6.3.2 Externally the proposals seek to re-use existing openings and installing new windows and doors for each of the units, some being larger patio doors into the larger openings in the long barn lean to, hay loft and garage building. Initially there was some concern from the Principal RB Officer regarding to style of the windows proposed. The opening methods and design of the windows generally has since been updated, and the designs now proposed are considered to be much more respectful of the existing building.
• 6.3.3 The change to the roof finishes being a natural slate will bring about a considerable change to the existing red roof, although natural slate being a widespread traditional material and roof finish often seen throughout agricultural and vernacular Manx buildings, and so not considered to be so unreasonable as to warrant a concern or refusal. It is also worth taking into account that the existing roof finishes on the long barn is not likely to be original, and so not worthy of retention or replicating.
• 6.3.4 The application has been subject to a number of revisions throughout its submission, most recent drawings detail written annotation stating the existing internal walls being rendered in lime, with the internal face of external walls being insulated internally with studs and woodfibre insulation, with a 14mm lime plaster finish. External stone walls are to be cleared of growth, repaired, re-pointed with lime mortar and finished in white lime wash. While these internal changes will alter the internal physical appearance compared to the existing exposed walls and open span rooms, the installation of upgrade insulation, new internal walls and first floor height changes will help to support and facilitate the conversion of the buildings and their re-use as tourist units helping to support their continued upkeep.
• 6.3.5 Most recent drawings seek to install burning stoves within the units, three of which will be prominent from views within the courtyard and which would detract from the overall rural feeling of the buildings and coupled with the window changes and those more visible rooflights giving a more 'domestic' feel to the building, but again not one which would be so significantly or adverse as to warrant such an unacceptable impact as to refusal their installation. Fumes and smells are covered in later paragraphs.
• 6.3.6 Environment Policy 16 sets out the criteria in converting rural buildings and in this instance it is acknowledged that the original agricultural use of the buildings is now redundant with there being no farming or livestock at the site, the buildings are indicated to be structurally capable or renovation and their registration makes it quite clear that they are of sufficient interest warranting their retention, re-use and preservation. Submitted plans demonstrate how the buildings can accommodate the new tourist uses without requiring any extensions, and that the changes would not adversely impact the external visual appearance or character. Traffic generation and dispersal of activity will be addressed in later paragraphs.

6.4 Impact on Registered Building

• 6.4.1 Environment Policy 16 indicates that in the re-use of existing rural buildings, if this involves significant levels of redevelopment, the benefits secured by the proposal in terms of impact on the environment and the rural economy shall outweigh the continued impact of retaining the existing buildings on site. There have been other rural buildings converted into tourist uses which have contained a similar levels of development, but in this case the buildings also form part of the registration RB 268, and so there is an extra need to ensure that any conversion works do not adversely impact the special features and elements that contribute to its specific registration, and that the overall works are appropriate and sensitive, or suitably mitigated.

• 6.4.2 Comments from the RB officer state that these outbuildings likely pre-date the main house and form part of the original quarterland farm complex, and are of special interest

• worthy of preservation. From an officer review, the registration documents don't specifically reference any part of these outbuildings either externally or internally, but it would be reasonable to state that their general form, proportions, layout around a courtyard and their clustered three building arrangement are characteristics that contribute to their significance. The linked walkways, external staircases, small window and door openings and traditional external materials further contributing to the overall significance. Internally the buildings are typically agricultural with exposed stone walls and with some spaces having concrete stalls, some open and others with hay loft in the roof space. During site visits it was recognised that the timber stalls in the long barn were worthy features contributing to the history of the building. Such features being retained and incorporated in to design. Internal works within the barns are not subject to planning approval, and are being assessed within the concurrent registered building consent application.
• 6.4.3 There is some concern expressed by neighbours as to the number of units being proposed and the subsequent impact on the setting and environment of the site and its surroundings. The hay loft and garage lend themselves to being two separate units, while there have been concerns expressed throughout the scheme as to the over intensification of the long barn in its splitting into three units. Not only in the consequential visitors, activity and traffic associated with the number of units, but also in the increased need for building interventions so as to create each of the individual units.
• 6.4.4 Environment Policies 32-34 make it clear that alterations to a Registered Building which would affect detrimentally its character as a building of special architectural or historic interest will not be permitted, but often it is necessary to look for a new use to secure the economic future of the building and that in such re-uses any physical alterations to the building must be sensitive to its character as a building of special architectural or historic interest, and that traditional materials should be used.
• 6.4.5 The overall external works are considered to be sensitive and not to detract from the overall character and appearance of the buildings as a whole. From a registered building perspective it is clear that the conversion to tourist units will see a more 'domestic' feel to the buildings through windows, patio doors, roof lights and flues being added, but that there needs to be some degree of flexibility in allowing some changes so that the buildings can be renovated and continue to be of special interest in the future. The revisions made over time to the scheme have sought to best retain those internal features of special interest, and although it has not be demonstrated that a reduced number of units could not do this is a more successful manner and with also having less interventions on the original historic building fabric, the current scheme is judged to respect the existing buildings. The concerns raised by the Principal Registered Buildings Officer regarding the use of cementitious material, tanking and the overly domestic nature of the windows are judged to have been successfully addressed by the current scheme.
• 6.4.6 On balance given the assessment of the buildings from both an offer perspective, RB perspective and taking into consideration the original registration document, it is not felt that the external modifications as proposed would be so adversely harmful or of such significant adverse effect on the whole cluster of buildings or their historic character and appearance so as to harm their specific registration in this case. Indeed, it is judged significant that large amounts of the existing historic fabric will be repaired and restored as part of these proposals, and this is judged to be a very positive factor in favour of the overall scheme.
• 6.4.7 The rear parking area has been subject to significant discussions throughout the application process, the final design solution opting for a more naturalistic layout and design amongst the wooded area to the rear of the buildings and being installed with a grasscrete finish allowing a more fluid parking between the trees. Although showing 6 formal spaces, the area of grasscrete could likely accommodate additional vehicles within the area. This natural arrangement and surface finish was suggested by the RB officer in the early stages of the

application and its installation is considered to be acceptable and to not adversely harm the setting or character of the registered buildings.

6.5 Impact on trees

6.5.1 Based on the information provided to date, DEFA forestry comments state that 11 trees have already been granted removal subject to felling licence, and that the planning application now seeks for the removal of 13 more trees including the category 'B' Elm and Horse Chestnut trees, whilst they have no issues for the removal of the 11 trees, they have issues with the loss of the Elm and Horse Chestnut and that their removal is unjustified.

• 6.5.2 Updated drawings now indicate both the Elm and Chestnut as being retained, and so it would be somewhat unreasonable to object to the removal of the other trees minded of the acceptance by DEFA Arboricultural Officer. It's disappointing that no tree or landscape planting has been offered to reimburse the loss of the trees particularly minded of their recognised contribution to local habitats and to the site and surroundings as a rural environment. It is considered sensible to add a condition to any approval that requires the submission and approval of a tree protection plan prior to the commencement of any works, in order to ensure that the existing trees are not damaged by the proposed works. It is also suggested that a clarifying condition be added, given the initial tree removal information has not been updated, to state that all trees on the most recently submitted proposed site plan are to be retained.

6.6 Impact on neighbours

• 6.6.1 Comments have been received from three properties along the loop-road, each are outside of 20m and so if judged against current IPS criteria they would not be granted interested person status due to their distance away from the site although their comments due relate to valid planning issues. They express significant concerns in the intensive use and increased activity expected at the site as a result of the 5 tourist units being proposed, namely increased traffic and resultant highway safety issues (addressed in later paragraphs), noise and lighting having amenity impact on the tranquil rural setting.

• 6.6.2 Naturally the conversion will bring with it an increased level of activity, and one which may be noticeable to permanent nearby residents, albeit not noticeable to other more general members of the public. Distances and vegetation between the site and the neighbours would likely mitigate any increased levels of general activity or noises expected with the tourist change of use, and that in most cases visitors or tourists are likely to act in a reasonable manner as to not disrupt neighbours or adjacent users of the other tourist units and minded that the main house is the nearest residential property to the site.

• 6.6.3 It is undoubtable that there will be some increase in noise and lighting at the site as a result of the conversion to tourist units through additional coming and goings by the tourists and the internal lighting of the units and their occupancy. External lighting is to be restricted by condition in the interest of bat and nesting bird habitats and so it is not felt that there will be any significant adverse changes to lighting in this respect, and the distance between the site and the neighbours is expected to mitigate any noise impacts so as to not adverse or harm the general living conditions or enjoyment of neighbouring properties, and the distances will ensure any fumes or smells from proposed flues will have dissipated before reaching neighbouring properties.

6.7 Impact on highway safety

• 6.7.1 The proposal makes use of and existing access and driveway route. The proposal includes a passing place along the driveway and an area of off road parking behind the outbuilding for at least 6 vehicles (with possibly more cars accommodated if smaller vehicles or parked carefully). Cycle parking is also shown within the retained shed building to the rear. DOI have indicated that they do not oppose so long as the access, driveway, parking and circulation space is provided in accordance with the submitted details.

• 6.7.2 Neighbouring properties have raised concern for the expected increased traffic movements along the loop road as a result of the proposed 5 new tourists units. The adjacent Glen Mooar road is likely to be far more heavily trafficked due it being the key route to nearby Tynwald Mills shopping and café area, whereas the loop road is primarily to serve the neighbouring dwellings rather than a route or destination road. The concerns by the neighbours are acknowledged and it is undoubtable that the introduction of 5 new tourists units will see an increase level of traffic moving more regularly along the loop road, but taking into account that this is a public route available for unrestricted use and that naturally traffic speeds on narrower routes tend to be slower, coupled with the level of development of 5 tourists units where it is expected that visitors would be arriving without motor vehicles or car sharing and so keeping on average one vehicle per unit that this level of activity is not considered to be so harmful in this instance as to adversely impact the highway network or flow of traffic as to cause any highway safety issues or to harm the general living conditions or highway use by the neighbours.

6.8 Impact on habitats

6.8.1 Bats have been found at the site. The original bat survey report outlined some mitigation but this was lacking sufficient detail. Ecosystems have more recently commented on the application stating that the original survey is now out of date and that new surveys should be undertaken including summer emergence surveys, only once these surveys have been done can proper and appropriate mitigation be considered and implemented.

• 6.8.2 DEFA Ecosystems have suggested conditions seeking both surveys and mitigation be provided prior to the undertaking of works including any blocking up works. Suitably worded conditions shall be added to any approval, but it should be noted that in the event that mitigation requires any part of the development to be changed or modified beyond the details set out in the submitted drawings that such changes would need to come back to planning as part of a separate application due to the Registered Status of the buildings and the need for consent for any works to them.

• 6.8.3 In addition to surveys and mitigation being provided, it shall also be noted that there is separate legislation which protect species such as bats and also nesting birds which have similarly be found at the site. It is felt that subject to condition that suitable mitigation can be actioned to ensure no adverse harm to habitats as per Environment Policy 4.
• 6.8.4 The Wildlife Act 1990 also highlights Japanese knotweed as an invasive species and it would be an offence to cause spread. Japanese knotweed has been found at the site and suitable care and mitigation is required to ensure it is fenced from the development during works as its eradication can take up to 3 years.
• 6.8.5 Ecology also raise concern in the loss of trees which current provide shelter and food for local habitats. Further to those conclusions in 6.5 it is felt necessary to add a condition seeking landscaping and re-planting for the site to mitigate the loss of the number of trees being removed on the longer term biodiversity and ecology of the site.
• 6.8.6 Having the ecology comments in mind, it is judged sensible to add a note to any approval that highlights the need for the applicant to comply with their requirements under the Wildlife Act 1990 in respect of bats, birds and Japanese Knotweed.

6.9 Impact of intensity of development on setting and surroundings.

• 6.9.1 It is clear that in creating more units of tourist accommodation that there will naturally be an increase of activity through people, traffic, noise and lighting especially when compared to the existing agricultural use of the buildings which haven't been used for quite some years and some which have been subject to fire and parts which have fallen in to poor condition and with other spaces being used as extended garage and garden storage for the main house.

• 6.9.2 Naturally the buildings lend themselves to three separate units, but this would result in the long barn being a considerably large single unit. In splitting the longer barn into 3 separate units this has result in far more intervention being required, which has been addressed earlier in this report. Four units would have likely been the ideal to limit intervention on the existing buildings and to limit some activity, 5 units starts to border on tipping the balance, whilst 6 units would tip the balance having greater intervention on the existing buildings, and resulting in visitors, vehicles, people, traffic and activity which would start to impede on the rural setting and characteristics of the site and its surroundings.

• 6.9.3 Whilst there has been no viability study provided, the creation of 5 units and the level of activity associated and level of intervention is not considered to be so harmful to the overall character and appearance of the buildings, or to significantly adversely harm their quality or features as to undermine the details in the registration document for the outbuildings or to detriment their character as a building of special architectural or historic interest, and so is considered to be within the bounds of acceptability in this case, and even without a viability statement provided, it is expected that the re-use for tourism compared to the existing use would provide a more economic future for the buildings, and not forgetting that support is given to such re-use without harm being caused and that the St Johns local plan also supports encouraging re-use of buildings for tourist purposes. CONCLUSION
• 7.1 It is considered on balance that the level of development proposed in the conversion of the outbuildings into 5 tourist units and the amenities provided for each being suitable only on a short term basis and not occupied permanently that the proposal is considered to be acceptable. The re-use of existing buildings for tourist purposes is supported by the St Johns Local Plan. Environment Policies 16 and 33 support the reuse of rural and registered buildings for new tourist uses, and acknowledge that their conversion will help to provide an economic future and contribute to their upkeep. The works are considered to result in a mildly 'domestic' external appearance, but minded that revised drawings have sought to limit this impact, that these impacts are outweighed by the overall longer term investment being made in the upkeep and re-use of the buildings and their contribution to the history of the site.

7.2 In further ensuring suitable mitigation and safeguards for the site, conditions will be added in respect of tree protection, landscaping, bat surveys and mitigation, no external lighting, provision of access and car parking prior to coming into use, and conditions to ensure the temporary tourist occupation of the units only. - 8.0 INTERESTED PERSONS 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.

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

Decision Made : Permitted Date: 21.05.2024 Determining officer

Signed : C BALMER Chris Balmer Principal Planner

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.