Imaginative plans for the repurposing of a former concrete reservoir structure into a house in the vicinity of Ednego Road, Banbridge, have been turned down by ABC planners – partly because the site is question was never intended to be a dwelling.
The reservoir occupies an elevated position in a field, and is largely overgrown, to the point where the structure of the reservoir is largely hidden.
The development plans included a kitchen, living room, utility room, pantry, lounge and one en-suite bedroom on the first floor; an en-suite master bedroom, two additional bedrooms, a bathroom and a dressing room on the ground floor.
ABC planning officers explain in their report that the conversion plans are in breach of current planning criteria.
They wrote: “Officers do not consider the structure to be a building rather a piece of plant.
“It was not built for habitation, or use for any other means of offering enclosure for functions associated with human activity.
“The structure is a tank and has no means of access to it that would be expected for a building envisaged under this policy.
“Officers having considered all the information provided with the application, and carried out a site inspection, are of the opinion the proposed dwelling would be a prominent feature in the landscape and fail to blend with the existing landform or other natural features.
“The ancillary works are not considered to integrate with their surroundings. The site rises steeply in the northern direction of Ednego Road. The site has existing scattered hedgerow to the east; however, officer consider the site to lack established natural boundaries.
The applicant had planned to turn part of the reservoir into a two-storey residential dwelling. Credit: ABC planning portal
“Officers are of the opinion that the proposed dwelling would rely on new landscaping for integration.
“The design of the building is considered to be inappropriate for the site and its locality.
“There are no overriding reasons why this development is essential in this rural location, and could not be located within a settlement.
“It has not been demonstrated that the structure to be converted and adapted is a locally important building and the works proposed represent a sympathetic conversion and adaptation.
“The proposal is contrary to the Strategic Planning Policy Statement and [the relevant policy regarding] Sustainable Development in the Countryside.”
