Breadsall barn demolition plans rejected over Green Belt homes 'domino effect' fears

The current barn in Rectory Lane, Breadsall

Plans to demolish a Derbyshire barn and replace it with a modern eco-home in the Green Belt have been rejected by councillors looking to avoid a “domino effect”. The scheme, submitted by Benjamin Roberts, would have seen a barn in Rectory Lane, Breadsall, demolished and converted into a two-bed house.

This comes nearly a year after the applicant was given permission to convert the former agricultural building – retaining the current structure and reusing it. At an Erewash Borough Council meeting this week (January 10) members chose to reject the application, in line with recommendations from their planning officers, due to the impact on the Green Belt.

Councillors also sought to avoid setting any sort of precedent for homes being built on Green Belt land, with a niche planning law called Class Q allowing conversion of barns but not demolitions and replacements with homes. The borough council has fielded a large number of Class Q applications over the past few years with councillors repeatedly seeking to draw the line between unacceptable and acceptable, and looking to avoid “opening the floodgates” for many barns being built just to be converted into homes.

Poll: Is the government doing enough to help with the cost of living?

This has seen the council win and lose appeals over the issue when applicants take the case higher after a refusal. During last night’s debate, a local resident claimed the change in tack from the applicant was effectively an admission that the building could not in fact be converted, as had been indicated during the previous application – approved in February 2023.

She said the planned scheme was beyond what was acceptable and that she wanted to protect the Green Belt. They said the applicant was “disingenuous” in applying for the refurbishment of a building that would be demolished and all original materials moved off-site, causing a “substantial disturbance”.

Mr Roberts, speaking during the meeting, said: “We have in no way implied that the barn is incapable of conversion.” He said it would be a “sensitive, attractive scheme” of “exceptional quality” and high architectural standards – which were the reason the scheme was no longer set to be converted but demolished.

However, refusal of the rebuild would still leave the applicant able to proceed with the conversion plan. He said the barn would be used for his family to continue living on and managing land they have owned for decades – along with a flock of sheep.

Mr Roberts said he hoped there was no “ill will” towards him and sought permission to “pursue our dream of a more sustainable future”. Steve Birkinshaw, the council’s head of planning, said the reference to the former agricultural use of the building being used to back the demolition of the barn and rebuild of a home was not something that could be considered.

He confirmed the borough council has had a “mixed bag” at appeal over Class Q conversions of barns into homes. Cllr Tim Scott said: “This looks to be a rather average-looking barn being turned into a rather average-looking house.”

He said the scheme represents inappropriate development in the Green Belt. Cllr Ann Mills said there was nothing in the borough’s Local Plan to allow the demolition of the barn and replacement with a home to override protection of the Green Belt.

Cllr Harry Atkinson said: “By the sounds of things this development is to be built anyway. If we refuse they will convert it anyway and the new-build would be more sustainable.” Cllr Kevin Miller said: “This sort of thing could open the floodgates. In Erewash we have hundreds of barns and this could start a domino effect.”

Cllr Dave Doyle said the scheme would likely come back at appeal with the council having to defend a refusal and saying there were numerous benefits of the new scheme, including solar panels and high environmental standards. Council planners, who had recommended refusal, had written: “The design of the proposed dwelling would introduce a clearly modern domestic appearance into what is currently an agricultural landscape and would therefore be contrary to the overriding character of the area.”

We send out the biggest stories in an email every day. Sign up for the main Derbyshire Live newsletter here.