How would you fancy living in these former dog kennels if they were converted into residential properties?
Council planning officer Simon Greenland was jokingly called ‘barking mad’ after recommending approval of a planning application to transform the disused kennels in Kingswood Lane, Saughall, into three dwellings.
Cheshire West and Chester Council planning committee disagreed with the officer in the strongest terms as reflected in their unanimous rejection of the scheme based on the structural condition of the buildings.
Visiting ward councillor Brian Crowe (Con, Saughall and Mollington) had called in the application for a committee decision following concerns from some of his constituents.
He 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.
Latest planning stories
Cllr Houlbrook added: “They quite clearly are dog kennels. I’m really concerned about the foundations because I’m not aware anybody builds dog kennels with foundations and if they do they would be very expensive dog kennels. So if they’re going to use the framework which is there now I can’t believe without substantial foundations they’re going to hold the building up.”
Cllr Mark Williams (Con, Dodleston and Huntington) asked for clarification on how green belt policy applied to ‘a few blocks put in a field’.
Fiona Hore, the council’s senior manager for planning and strategic transport, explained existing buildings could be reused without any issue providing the structures were ‘permanent and substantial’ as suggested by the planning officer in the case.
But members disagreed.
Cllr Peter Rooney (Lab, Ledsham and Manor) said the road sufarce of the unadopted access track was ‘appalling’ and added: “The buildings themselves, I wouldn’t put my garden tools in there let alone anybody that I actually liked. They will fall down as soon as you put any kind of weight of a roof on them.”
Cllr Don Beckett (Lab, Winsford Over and Verdin) said there were ‘a lot of signs of distress’ in the structure, adding: “It wants knocking down in my opinion not refurbishing.” He later quipped: “I can understand why the dogs moved out!”
Members rejected the plan on grounds the buildings were not substantial enough for reuse as residential dwellings without a major reconstruction. This would be considered a rebuild and inappropriate development in the green belt.
