A plan dubbed ‘barking mad’ because it involved turning former dog kennels into three homes is back on the agenda.
Members of Cheshire West and Chester Council planning committee unanimously rejected the planning application to transform disused kennels in Kingswood Lane, Saughall, into three dwellings.
Councillors were worried about the structural condition of the buildings with a concern the plan undermined green belt policy.
But their decision went against the advice of council planning officer Simon Greenland who was jokingly called ‘barking mad’ after recommending the plan be approved.
Now applicants Paul and Rosaleen Jones are appealing the council decision.
The couple said in a statement issued to The Chronicle: “The discussion that followed at the meeting demonstrated that none of the planning committee members had any knowledge of structural matters which appears to be the key to the acceptability or otherwise of the proposal.
“At the request of the planning authority, we commissioned our own structural report from a suitably qualified chartered engineer with over 35 years’ experience in structural design. The report concluded the buildings were structurally stable and suitable for refurbishment to domestic use, without rebuilding.
“One of the committee members suggested that the local authority should commission their own structural report if they were in any doubt about the content of the report commissioned by the applicant however the council’s own legal representative advised committee members that this would not be permitted as the onus was on the applicant to submit a structural report in support of their application, which clearly had been done.”
The planning application was determined by the committee last November after it was ‘called in’ by ward councillor Brian Crowe (Con, Saughall and Mollington ) following concerns from some of his constituents.
Cllr Crowe told fellow members: “This is beyond belief that a speculative application to convert some very shoddily built dog kennels to residential accommodation in this day and age. Frankly the buildings are not substantial enough for a satisfactory conversion. It’s green belt, green belt separating the village of Saughall from Blacon . No very special circumstances exist.”
Committee member Norman Wright (Con, Marbury) agreed: “I was amazed to see this property/this development. Parts of it had no roof on. There are no foundations. There are only five-inch blocks, they weren’t even bricks. You could actually see through the blocks in places and it’s completely unstable in every way. It wants pulling down before something happens as a danger to the public.
“It’s certainly not safe for humans to live in in any way. I will be voting for refusal and I recommend refusal now.”
Cllr Jill Houlbrook (Con, Upton ) described the application as ‘nibbling away at the green belt’. She agreed with an objection from the Campaign to Protect Rural England that ‘very special circumstances not been demonstrated’ in the green belt.
