Gareth Hughes
Member
- Messages
- 2,741
- Location
- In the wilds of East Anglia
Penners said:I recognise that the ultimate goal with such a building is always to conserve it in its original state, fabric, mechanisms and all. But despite my weak attempt at irony above, this is surely the classic dilemma that you must see arising time and again.Gareth Hughes said:the poor old applicants were going to have to spend £710,000 doing the work so the application was only out of the goodness of their hearts and their concern for the mill which they loved(and which thay have owned, in increasing dereliction, since the 1950s - without, so far as one can tell, ever spending a penny on it.)
How is that conservation to be funded?
Do you dig your heels in over applications for residential conversion, and watch the building slowly decay, or do you allow someone's City bonus to be spent on converting the building into a home, with glass around the winding gear and tasteful downlighters illuminating the mill-wheel?
It's not a decision I'd like to have to make.
we didn't object to a separate house, provided the mill was repaired and made weathertight (not necessarily fully restored) as the quid pro quo for permission - the cost of that would be around £50,000. It would then be in a condition where it could be maintained as part of the routine maintenance cycle of the new house, with no need to damage it in order to turn it into lounge, games room etc etc. Effectively it would just be a rather big garden ornament.