Restoration and housing plans for historic farmstead near Mansfield thrown out

This is the second time in recent years Chatsworth Settlement Trustees has applied to Bolsover Council for permission to demolish existing redundant buildings, restore others and build new homes on its land at Whaley Moor Farm, Whaley Road, Whaley – having had a previous application for 10 homes thrown out in 2018.

Planning manager Sarah Kay said the proposals would have a negative impact on the surrounding conservation area, concluding that converting the three buildings alone would make the project viable, without the addition of the new builds.

She said: “We do not accept that the scale and extent of the development being proposed is necessary to make the redevelopment of the entire site viable and we don’t see legitimate public benefit.”

Ms Kay described Whaley as an ‘isolated hamlet’ that was not considered sustainable and therefore any new residents would be heavily reliant on cars to access amenities.

Numerous residents objected to the proposals and a letter sent by the Whaley Residents Society was read out in the meeting, stating the view the proposals were ‘largely unchanged’ from the previously rejected application in 2018.

It said: “There are very minor amendments in an attempt to play a waiting game and in the hope that someone crumbles.”

However, Eamonn Keogh, the agent speaking on behalf of Chatsworth, said they had worked with the council following the previous rejection to come up with proposals that would be acceptable, which he thought they had done.

He said: “The Chatsworth Settlement Trustees has significant land holdings in the district, including many farms, based on a 19th Century model of agricultural production.

“However, farming practices are constantly changing, with a need for large machinery, larger farm buildings, that do not fit comfortably on farmyards designed to accommodate the horse and cart.”

The agent argued that simply converting the existing historic buildings, without building new dwellings, was not a viable option.

Councillors disagreed with his arguments, unanimously rejecting the proposals.