Local occupancy barn conversion at Coast to Coast Field Barn, Rosgill, Penrith

“This application seeks planning permission for the change of use of a barn to a local occupancy dwelling. The associated alterations include the rebuilding of the eastern elevation, re-roofing part of the barn, demolition of part of an existing stone boundary wall and the creation of a parking area and the enclosure of the building.”

“The physical alterations are similar, but not identical, to those proposed in the refused application. The planning agent considers that the current application has addressed the previous refusal by including a change in the proposed use to a local occupancy dwelling; revising the extent of glazing and curtilage; and, the submission of a Structural Assessment Report confirming the building is capable of conversion without substantial reconstruction’.”

“The Coast to Coast field barn is located to the south of Rosgill, close to Rayside. The barn is located in an enclosed field system where a public footpath (no FP361038) runs adjacent to it. The footpath forms part of the Coast to Coast National Trail.”

“The proposal would cause harm to the undeveloped, rural and agricultural nature and character of the barn, its surrounding landscape setting and the wider open countryside. The proposed use would irretrievably erode the agricultural character of the land and its contribution to the remoteness and perceived openness and naturalness of the site which is an important characteristic of the site.”

“The development fails to reflect local character and distinctiveness and does not conserve and enhance the character and quality of the local landscape. The development results in harm to the visual amenity of…”

“I disagree with the conclusions of the report. The northern part of the building does not contain a roof, with most of the eastern elevation of the northern half of the building missing. I do not consider that the condition of the building, and particularly the northern half of the building (the structural report refers to as the ‘Byre’) can be considered ‘structurally sound and capable of conversion’ as required by Policy 02, rather it would need substantial rebuilding,…”

“The proposal should therefore be considered as redevelopment for the purposes of Policy 02. I consider the impact on landscape character in detail below, but in short I find the development would result in an unacceptable change and would neither result in a significant enhancement of the landscape character or historic environment, nor enhance the building’s immediate setting.”

“Lake District National Park Authority Development Control Committee – 5 August 2026 7/2026/3046 5.33 The proposal would provide one local occupancy dwelling. The application site is within the East Distinctive Area. In the event of an approval any permission would be restricted by condition to occupation by persons with a local connection to this distinctive area. The distinctive area is the scale at which our adopted policies seek to deliver housing and redress imbalance.”

“The provision of a local occupancy dwelling would meet local community need, and there are social benefits. However, an Inspector has recently considered that the provision of local occupancy housing on an appeal in…”

“Motion to refuse the application Proposed by [name withheld] by [name withheld] were unanimously in favour of the motion…”

“The proposals would result in harm to the special qualities of the National Park and Outstanding Universal Value of the English Lake District World Heritage Site.”