Farm once visited by the King given permission to move barn and rebuild farmhouse

A makeover to a farm site once visited by the then Prince Charles will go ahead despite calls to refuse the proposal.

The owners of Elm Farm in Hamstead Marshall applied for permission from West Berkshire Council to relocate an existing barn and slurry site, demolish a farm house and build a new one in a different location on the site, and relocate solar panels.

The new home would be two-and-a-half stories high, and two single-storey elements, to serve as a two-bed guest annex.

King Charles III visited the farm in 1999, where he planted a tree and enjoyed a tour of the then Organic Research Centre that was housed on the site.

“The proposed dwelling is considered to incorporate traditional materials and an architectural style in keeping in the area,” said West Berkshire Council planning officer Jake Brown.

But he said his department considered: “The proposal would change the appearance of the site from a working agricultural character to a domestic character, due to the residential built form and spread of domestic paraphernalia associated with the dwelling.

“The scale of the proposed dwelling and its curtilage would be greater than existing dwellings in the area … it would result in a harmful impact on the rural character and appearance of the area.”

This includes a Grade II-listed former post office building.

He continued: “The proposed solar array would introduce development into an area which will not enhance the character of the area.”

Anne Budd, who chairs Hamstead Marshall Parish Council, addressing the planning meeting on Wednesday, May 18, said the village “suffers from land invasion of various natures” and the plan might inhibit future schemes coming forward.

On the barns that would be demolished, she said: “These structures have no use whatsoever, except being a blot on the landscape and possibly subject to hazardous materials.

“The extensive habitat recovery will bring the land back to a good state of land management and stewardship.”

A neighbour who lives opposite the proposed development also voiced support.

“It is effectively a disintegrating farmyard full of decrepit buildings and concrete with no farm,” he said.

“The proposal would greatly enhance the village.

“We find the reasons for a refusal a little perplexing.”

Martin Lay, speaking on behalf of the applicant, pointed out that Elm Farm has been sold in eight lots four years ago, with new buildings constructed on all but this plot.

He reminded the committee the parish council felt “this proposal sets a gold standard for this kind of development”, and urged it to reject the advice of planning officers and accept the scheme.

Tony Vickers (Lib Dem, Hungerford and Kintbury) said he had attended a parish council meeting at the pre-application stage, and the clean sweep this proposal recommended was preferred.

“I feel it’s my duty as a ward member to try and do what I can to take [this scheme] over the line.

“My views are the same as supporters; this would be an enormous enhancement.”

The planning committee’s chairman, Clive Hooker, warned that “even though residents are in support of it, we might have to refuse it because it breaks the rules”.

Mr Vickers said: “We make our decision on the information we’ve received.”

A rejection could, he warned, lead to an appeal which would have a cost to the council, and be one it might not win.

Debra Inston, principal conservation and design officer for West Berkshire Council, said the applicant had previously submitted a commercial use appraisal for the existing barns.

“It was considered there to be a strong demand for commercial workshop and storage units, and advises the existing barns are suitable for such uses subject to some upgrading,” she said.

Adrian Abbs (Independent, Newbury Wash Common) said he was minded to stick with officers’ recommendations as “we’re supposed to be policy driven”.

Nigel Foot (Lib Dem, Newbury Clay Hill) was in favour, saying the scheme enhanced the environment and had support from residents; backing the scheme was “the common sense approach”.

Denise Gaines (Lib Dem, Hungerford and Kintbury) said voting in favour of the scheme would be going against three West Berkshire Council policies, and converting the barns to commercial use could help the local economy.

Mr Vickers reminded the committee the farm had already been split up into eight plots, which had allowed the barns to deteriorate.

“I cannot imagine those structures being turned into something that is agricultural with unreasonable expense,” he continued.

Ahead of the vote, Mr Hooker reminded the committee of the issues it had been debating, and called on planning officer Jake Brown to read out the conditions attached to the project should it be approved.

They include an updated ecology survey, sustainable drainage, a detailed schedule of materials before works start, and protecting biodiversity during construction.

With councillors happy with the proposals, they voted to reject the advice of officers and approve the scheme. Mr Abbs was the only councillor to vote against.

“I wish you the very best in your development,” Mr Hooker said.