Derbyshire barn conversion plan slammed as “wholesale gutting” of listed building

The Grade II-listed property at 1 High Street in Bonsall, south of Matlock, dates back to the late 16th century, making it more than 500 years old. Private owner Mark Whitfield plans to turn the historic barn into a four-bed house with a gym, car port and stables.

Derbyshire Dales District Council planning officers have recommended that his plans should be approved, in order to maintain the use of the structure and avoid it falling further into disrepair. A decision will be made by councillors at a meeting on Tuesday, November 8.

Council officers have written in a report for next week’s meeting that the property, in the Bonsall Conservation Area, is on the “listed buildings at risk” register and appears to have been out of use for “some time”. If approved, the prominent limestone building would be converted into four bedrooms, with several en-suites; an open plan kitchen, living and dining area; an office; reception hall; and a gym. A total of three rooflights would also be installed on the north side of the listed property.

Meanwhile, a “dilapidated” timber building at the rear of the building would be demolished to make way for a stable and a car port. The property is said to be in a high radon risk area so a new breathable floor system will be installed.

Bonsall Parish Council has raised a series of objections to the plan, saying there are “significant threats to neighbours’ privacy”, concerns over the proposed access track, claiming residents living nearby would be “hugely affected” and that the proposed stable and car port building is “outsized” and “obtrusive”.

Cllr Garry Purdy, leader of the council, who also sits on the authority’s planning committee, has written a letter supporting the scheme. He wrote: “I note the objections by Bonsall Parish Council but if this building is not brought back into use then a significant heritage asset will be lost to the village.”

Six objection letters were submitted by residents living close to the site, claiming the proposed development of the former barn “isn’t faithful to its original appearance”. An opposing resident wrote that the project “isn’t a sympathetic restoration of a listed structure but a wholesale gutting of it”.

Objecting residents feel the proposed conversion is not in keeping with the current building or surrounding properties. They feel the access route to the rear of the property would be harmful to neighbours, along with feared highways safety issues.

Residents say the public benefits of the scheme can be outweighed by the negatives, claiming “there is no public benefit, only to the applicant”.

An opposing neighbour claimed the scheme was a “large scale, unsympathetic development of the site requiring prolonged construction thereby creating long-term noise and inconvenience to neighbours of the barn and holiday guests”.

Planning officers say the plans are a tweaked version of a project approved in 2015, which has now lapsed after inaction, with the applicant adding the potential new stable and car port building.

Officers wrote: “The proposed works will seek to sympathetically restore a vacant listed building and bring it back into use. Due to its unused nature and condition, the building has been on the district council’s buildings at risk register for over 25 years.

“This proposal will, therefore, lead to the beneficial reuse and restoration of a Grade II-listed building in a sustainable location, bringing not only benefits to designated heritage assets but also to reduce the shortfall in housing supply, albeit in a very minor way. Whilst it is appreciated that the neighbours and their holiday guests would have had little disturbance previously, with the building being vacant for so long, it is nevertheless considered that the modest amount of comings and goings likely to be undertaken along the access by cars associated with a dwellinghouse would not create such a significant loss of amenity that could justify a recommendation of refusal of planning permission.”

They feel the public benefit of bringing an at-risk listed building back into use outweighs the negatives of the scheme.