Council rejects farm building

planning

A plan to build a storage building on a farm was rejected by councillors after neighbours objected to its size saying it would ruin the views of a village.

Several villagers had spoken out against the proposed building on land off Jennett Tree Lane in Callow End near Worcester over fears it would be too big and unsuitable.

The building would have been used by Grant-Smith Agricultural Partnership to store machinery and livestock feed.

The plan was rejected by Malvern Hills District Council’s planning committee by 14 votes to two at a meeting on Wednesday.

The planning committee said it had rejected the plan because it was too big and too intrusive on the landscape. Councillors said it would harm open countryside and would be detrimental to the character of the area

Cllr Tom Wells, who represents Powick, said the reasons why it should be refused had not changed from when it was first rejected in 2018.

“Whilst I respect that officers have tried hard to negotiate, we are required to look at the application as if it was a brand new one,” he said.

“In those terms, this still strikes me as a very significant building which is likely to be obtrusive and whose justification and need is, at least, questionable.”

A decision by made by the council’s planning committee at the request of local councillors Tom and Kathy Wells.

The committee voted against the recommendation of the council’s planning officers who had said it should be approved.

Eight objections were made against the plan and four more after the plans were amended and public consultation was extended.

Objectors said the size of the building was out of proportion to the land it would sit on, was unnecessary and would dominate views around the village.

The council said the previous application, which was rejected in 2018, had failed because Grant-Smith Agricultural Partnership did not show that any local farmers needed another building and there was no agreement in place to show anybody would be using the building if it was built.

Council planning officers said the application had passed tests to show it was necessary and the building would be used and occupied if it was built but its size, design and impact on neighbours still had to be looked at by councillors.

By Christian Barnett - Local Democracy Reporter