Controversial plans to turn a barn at the foot of the world-famous Solsbury Hill into a house have been approved.
Councillor Joanna Wright by the barn that will be converted
At Bath & North East Somerset Council’s planning committee meeting last Wednesday, 21st January, the application to convert the timber-boarded agricultural building at Bailbrook Lane at Lower Swainswick was approved by a majority of councillors.
Solsbury Hill, with its panoramic views of Bath, is the site of an Iron Age hill fort and was the inspiration for the song by Peter Gabriel.
The barn was built around 2016 under permitted development. The ground floor is currently used for agricultural storage and the upper floor as offices.
As it is not considered suitable for modern agricultural use, the owners applied to turn it into a house.
Councillor Joanna Wright in front of the new barn under construction and Bath Springs
Few changes were proposed other than removing an outside staircase. The scheme was revised during the application process, removing a planned extension and reducing the number of new windows.
Council planning officers had recommended approval, saying the conversion would not cause substantial harm to the Green Belt and would not harm the Cotswolds National Landscape, the setting of the Bath World Heritage Site or the conservation area, and if anything, there would be a reduction in traffic to the site.
But the planning committee was asked to make the final decision after a ‘call-in’ by ward councillor Sarah Warren (Bathavon North, Liberal Democrat) and Green councillor Saskia Heijltjes, who represents the neighbouring Lambridge ward.
Batheaston Parish Council had also objected, along with more than 30 local people.
Parish councillor Peter Lewis addressed the committee saying: “This is Green Belt within the Cotswolds National Landscape and the setting of Solsbury Hill and the Bath World Heritage Site, so it’s not an ordinary site, it’s sensitive. It’s very visible and it’s used constantly by the public with a footpath running immediately above it.
“Our objection is straightforward. This is inappropriate development in protected countryside and it adds a residential, urbanising use into a place where policy is meant to protect openness and rural character.”
He said residents had watched this area “change dramatically” in recent years: “What used to feel like countryside now feels more like a private compound, with the footpath squeezed and views degraded.”
He said the barn sits alongside the replacement development of Vine House, often referred to as Bath Springs: “Work has continued there despite the long-standing expectation and condition that the original house, Vine House, would be demolished as part of that permission.
The new barn under construction, and Bath Springs to the right
“If that condition was there to prevent multiple dwellings in such a sensitive location as Solsbury Hill, then approving another residential unit here directly contradicts that principle and makes the planning framework look inconsistent.”
Councillor Lewis told the committee that Bath Springs is now visible well beyond the site: “You can see it from the canal path between Bath and Batheaston and you can see it from Sally in the Wood looking towards Solsbury Hill.
“If it’s that prominent at that distance, then approving further residential change here can only deepen that cumulative harm.”
He said the parish council feels the barn remains a functional, rural building and conversion is “a disproportionate response to what are, at most, minor operational constraints”.
Councillor Joanna Wright (Lambridge, Green) also addressed the committee. She said: “This location is unique and special to many in my community. Formally, this application sits in Bathavon North ward; however, the ward councillors seem unable to represent on this application.
“Directly next to this site sits Lambridge ward and many residents in the area have contacted me on this application as well as on the ongoing issues at the site.”
She said she had meet with planning enforcement officers to discuss various issues. Mature trees had been damaged or felled and piles of earth from the current building development had been dumped onto what was once open meadow land, she told the committee.
She said the new windows would directly impact local residents’ loss of privacy and that local people and Lambridge ward councillors questioned why a highways report was not sought as the proposed house would increase conflict between vehicles and walkers.
Councillor Wright added: “The barn was originally permitted on the basis that it remained screened, yet the trees required to hide it were removed and never replaced.”
She said that in 2019, the previous owner had applied to convert the barn into a house and it was refused by the council and also on appeal.
“Nothing seems to have changed since then, except that this proposal is even more ambitious,” she said.
Councillor Shaun Hughes (Midsomer Norton North, Independent) questioned what had changed since it was built and it now being considered no longer suitable as a barn.
The case planning officer said the agricultural use of the site had changed with the new owner now introducing an organic vineyard. A new barn is currently under construction at the site under permitted development rules.
The officer explained that the site could not be considered as being in an isolated location because it’s “literally on the edge of a settlement”.
He said it would involve potentially a car journey to access facilities but that could be a short car journey, and then walking or public transport could be used beyond that. He said there are bus stops at the end of Bailbrook Lane.
Councillor Hughes also voiced concern about the “cycle of permitted developments then becoming housing developments” but planning officers said the committee must consider this separately to other permissions.
Councillor Tim Warren (Midsomer Norton Redfield, Conservative) said it was very hard to find a legal reason that would stand up to refuse the application: “Whether we like to or not is another point.”
Councillor Duncan Hounsell (Saltford, Liberal Democrat) agreed saying: “We have to apply the policies as they are, not maybe what we’d like them to be.
“I can’t see a strong enough reason to object. This is a conversion of a redundant agricultural building. There is in my opinion no loss of privacy and we are looking at it as a single application.”
But Councillor Eleanor Jackson (Westfield, Labour) “strongly disagreed” saying the fact that the barn not currently in “congenial use” was not a valid reason for development in the Green Belt which would have a significant impact on Solsbury Hill.
She added: “It’s just not acceptable if it’s not accessible without a car.”
Councillor Fiona Gourley (Bathavon South, Liberal Democrat) said to make it suitable for agricultural use “you could just make bigger doors frankly”. She also pointed out that the new barn has lots of windows facing south, adding: “I am slightly concerned about the future, I guess.”
The committee voted to permit the plans by five votes to four. There are conditions including landscaping.
Site’s planning history over the last 20 years
Plans were first submitted in 2005 to demolish Vine House and build a five-bed sustainable home very close by, but they were withdrawn.
In 2008 an application to replace Vine House with a very modern four-storey sustainable property set into a steeply sloping area of ground was granted by the council’s development control committee, against the advice of planning officers.
They had felt it was inappropriate development in the Green Belt and would be a very prominent and intrusive building in the landscape.
In 2010 revised plans with changes including a reduction in the number of storeys to three, were submitted to the council and permission was secured in 2011.
There have also been various applications approved over the years for agricultural storage buildings at the site.
