Bid to turn disused milking parlour and storage sheds to housing at Witchford rejected by East Cambs planners
- Credit: Archant
Three days after being told by a planning officer his application would fail, Roger Gate withdrew a bid to convert a former milking parlour at Grunty Fen Road, Witchford, to housing.
Mr Gate submitted the application last November to convert the building that he believes was last used in 1991.
He acquired the property in 2011 and says the buildings he proposed to convert comprised a milking parlour, storage areas and cow sheds.
“The buildings are currently in a poor state of repaired and used only for occasional storage,” he told East Cambs Council.
However he has withdrawn his bid convert the buildings after the application was reviewed by planning officer Catherine Looper.
You may also want to watch:
She told him: “The works required in order to convert the building to a residential dwelling would be extensive.
“The proposed work is not considered to be a conversion of the agricultural building. “There is no existing frame which is to be converted and the proposed dimensions of the roof would extend beyond the existing.”
- 1 Binmen revolt over alleged bullying, poor pay, low morale and staffing crisis
- 2 Woman pedestrian in her 50s killed in guided busway crash
- 3 Plans revealed for new A10 pedestrian bridge
- 4 Ely Cathedral hosts legendary jockey Frankie Dettori's only book signing
- 5 'I feel alive for the first time': Slimmer lost half his body weight in lockdown
- 6 Retired murder detective, Russell, releases first book in new crime series
- 7 Woman has heart attack and dies in ambulance waiting for a hospital bed
- 8 Memorial stone for Cambridge student laid hidden in undergrowth for 80 years
- 9 Cambridgeshire hospitals busy and staff tired and abused
- 10 Covid-19 vaccine myths ‘biggest challenge’ in progress
Ms Looper added: “A significant amount of demolition would take place and some of the removed materials will be used in the construction of the dwelling. These works are not considered to be reasonably necessary.”
She said that no information had been provided about ‘potential contamination risks’ on site.
The application, she said, did not comply with the Town and Country Planning Act.