Plans to repair a listed building in Presteigne look set to fail

Plans to repair and alter a listed building in the heart of a border town in Wales look set to be rejected by Powys planners.

At a meeting of Powys County Council’s planning committee on Thursday, April 7, councillors will decide a listed building consent application by Thomas Perceval for 45A Presteigne High Street.

Both 44 and 45 High Street, once known as Kings Head Store are Grade II listed.

Mr Perceval has applied for consent to make repairs and alterations, a new external door, two replacement windows new stairs, kitchen and sanitary ware.

He also wants to insulate the building and also rebuild a section of garden wall.

Presteigne and Norton Town Council had no objections to the proposal when they discussed it.

But Presteigne’s county councillor, Beverley Bayham called the application in to be decided by the committee.

Councillor Baynham said: “On the face of it what seems a simple application has a history of difficulty that would be far better placed with the committee for determination.”

Agent Barrie Morgan of Marches Conservation Services explained the proposal in design and access and heritage impact statements.

Mr Morgan said: “The current owner wishes to reinstate a serviceable building to current standards.

“Although 45A is part of a listed complex unfortunately there are no

surviving elements of historic interest either internal or external.

“The footprint of the building and its volume is of interest as it has been established for some time possibly during the 18th or early 19th century and is presumed to have served some ancillary support to the trading at street level.”

He added that the building has been modernised during the 20th century.

Mr Morgan said “It would be desirable to reintroduce more traditional joinery to the building in order to enhance the appearance both in terms of the listed building curtilage setting and conservation areas status.

“However, the applicant is not in a position to fund any work other than that which is vitally necessary.”

Senior planning officer Gwyn Humphreys said: “Whilst the built heritage officer confirms support in principle for the sympathetic repair and renovation of the building, in this instance the officer has raised an objection to the proposed development, owing largely to a lack of information to fully detail the site’s history and proposed works having been submitted to inform the decision-making process.

“Concerns have been also raised given that the application provides no details as to why the interior of the building is an empty shell with a missing door, and what works have already or previously occurred to the building.

“Insufficient information has been submitted to enable the planning authority to consider the application proposals favourably.

“The proposed development fails to comply with all relevant planning policy, guidance and legislation as outlined, and the recommendation is one of refusal.”