Understanding planning · 13 min read
Planning application documents: what to read first
Understand planning application documents, officer reports and decision notices. Use a reading checklist, document table and worked example to inspect a case.
Application overview
Proposed conversion of agricultural barn to residential dwelling with ancillary office & workshop
Proposal details
- Reference
- NP/26/0116/FUL
- Alternative references
- PP-14746786
- Ward
- W05001485
- Parish
- St Dogmaels
- Agent
- Jones
- UPRN
- MAN000000000168203
Sign in to view all collected council fields and recorded changes.
Sign in to view collected detailsApplication location
Ty Llwyd Bach, Cippyn, St Dogmaels, Pembrokeshire, SA43 3LS
This record has no verified map location.
Documents 27 of 27
| Document | Published | Action |
|---|---|---|
| REFUSED Planning StatementRefused Document | Not published | View |
| REFUSED Drainage StatementRefused Document | Not published | View |
| REFUSED Sustainability - Carbon CaptureRefused Document | Not published | View |
| REFUSED EcoFlow DetailsRefused Document | Not published | View |
| REFUSED Tree SurveyRefused Document | Not published | View |
| REFUSED Tree Survey PlanRefused Document | Not published | View |
| REFUSED Arboricultural impact assessmentRefused Document | Not published | View |
| REFUSED Arboricultural impact assessmentRefused Document | Not published | View |
| REFUSED Access Appraisal ReportRefused Document | Not published | View |
| REFUSED Strucutural SurveyRefused Document | Not published | View |
| REFUSED Ecology ReportRefused Document | Not published | View |
| REFUSED Green Infrastructure StatementRefused Document | Not published | View |
| REFUSED Existing & Artistic Impression of Path VisibilityRefused Document | Not published | View |
| REFUSED Site PlanRefused Document | Not published | View |
| REFUSED Location PlanRefused Document | Not published | View |
| Application form - redactedApplication forms | Not published | View |
| REFUSED Existing Floor Plan 1 of 2Refused Document | 4 Mar 2026 | View |
| REFUSED Proposed Floor Plan 2 of 2Refused Document | 4 Mar 2026 | View |
| REFUSED Sheet 1 Version 1 Elevations recd 18/03/2026Refused Document | 18 Mar 2026 | View |
| REFUSED Sheet 2 Artistic Rendering recd 18/03/2026Refused Document | 18 Mar 2026 | View |
| Consultee Response - PCNPA Building Conservation Officer 25/03/26Consultee response | 26 Mar 2026 | View |
| Consultee Response - Welsh Water 30/03/2026Consultee response | 31 Mar 2026 | View |
| Consultee Response - PCNPA Planning Ecologist 05/05/2026Consultee response | 5 May 2026 | View |
| Consultee Response - PCC Hghways 06/05/2026Consultee response | 6 May 2026 | View |
| Consultee response - NRWConsultee response | 22 May 2026 | View |
| Officer ReportOfficer Reports | 21 Jul 2026 | View |
| Decision NoticeDecision notice | 21 Jul 2026 | View |
Documents open on the council website. Browse council documents if a link has changed.
Decision & conditions
Decision NoticePlanning conditions
- The agricultural barn is not considered to be an appropriate building for conversion because the architectural character and vernacular details of a typical bwythyn are no longer present. The relationship between the original functional requirement of the building and its character has been eroded to such a degree that the appearance of a dwelling does not exist. The inherent absence of cues stemming from historic function means the proposal does not conserve the building sufficiently to enable an exception to development in the countryside and the creation of a new dwelling. On this basis the proposal conflicts with Policies 7 (Countryside), 29 (Sustainable Design), Policy 48 (Affordable Housing) and 50 (Housing Development Proposals) and the Authority’s SPG on Conversions.
- The substantial loss of agricultural use barn which is specifically the larger access machinery store is considered to fundamentally undermine the establishment of the rural enterprise in terms of local and national policy and guidance on which the previous proposal was justified. The proposal does not preserve the planning purpose of the previous permission and the impacts arising from the loss of agricultural use have not been addressed in how the applicants will achieve the relevant and ongoing business objectives to develop an established rural enterprise. On this basis the proposal conflicts with Policies 43 (Employment Sites and Live/Work Units) and 44 (Protection of Employment Sites and Buildings).
