PLANS to rebuilding a derelict farmhouse as a holiday home have been given the go-ahead by Ceredigion planners despite concerns there was very little of it left.
Eurig and Eleri James sought the reinstatement of the dwelling at Ty’n Bwlch Lledrod, along with associated works.
A supporting statement by JMS Planning and Development said the ruined building was once a standalone farmhouse, bought by Mr James’ grandfather in the 1960s, since used to house cows and sheep on the 400-acre farm, home to 800 breeding sheep and 100 breeding cows.
The statement said it was intended to reinstate the remains of the former farmhouse as a holiday unit for farm diversification.
The application had been recommended for refusal when it was considered at the October 11 meeting of Ceredigion County Council’s development management committee, officers saying the resubmitted application would effectively amount to a new building rather than a conversion.
However, a council site inspection panel had considered there was enough of the building left, and members heard the applicant was prepared to enter into a Section 106 legal agreement tying the redevelopment to the existing farm.
Local member Cllr Wyn Evans said: “I do support this application 100 per cent; a great project that will bring in another aspect to this agricultural business, it’s going to help this farm to move forward into a new life in the future.”
He added: “I would encourage you as a committee to support this application and to help to keep our young people in the rural area; this project will promote the Lledrod area and the county in its entirety.”
Cllr Meirion Davies, a member of the site inspection panel, said he was “entirely supportive” of the application, saying the panel felt there was enough of the existing building left for conversion.
He added: “They are a family that are hard-working and work in the agricultural field, and I think we should support them; it’s important that farms should have other lines of business.”
Cllr Gareth Lloyd, who moved approval, conceded there was “a high margin” in terms of what was acceptable, but added: “I wouldn’t imagine there would be any visual impact over what has been there for hundreds of years.”
Committee members, with one abstention, granted approval subject to a Section 106 condition tying the property to the farm.
