A CONTROVERSIAL planning application which looked set to be rejected by councillors has now been approved following council talks.

The retrospective planning application for ‘Steel Barn’ off Red Hill Lane in Worcester’s historic Middle Battenhall Farm asked for permission to carry out a number of changes including putting up wooden fencing, building a car park and storage unit, extending the home’s curtilage past the authorised boundary – all of which was not in the approved application and had already been carried out – as well as get permission to install solar panels.

Councillors had heavily criticising the applicant for carrying out the work before getting permission before refusing it.

As the decision was contrary to the recommendation of the council's planning officers, the plan had to return to the planning committee for a final decision.

Discussions between the city council and the applicants had led to an agreement to bring the height of the fence down to one metre.

The majority of the city council's planning committee was happy to change their minds and approve the plan when it met on Thursday (June 11) but some councillors were left angered by the reversal.

Cllr Alan Amos, who was outvoted in his bid to have the plan refused for a final time, said the council was letting the applicants do what they wanted.

"Now the applicant, in their great generosity, has decided to do this and that, given the history of two years of complete ignoring of enforcement and completely ignoring of what the council has asked them do, what guarantees have we got that these amendments, which the majority of the committee seems to think is worth the paper it is written on, that they will happen and they will be enforced?

"Or is it the case, like with any condition, that the applicant can come back and ask for the condition to be changed or removed and then there has to be another discussion and if they don't carry out the amendment, which I don't think for one second that they are going to, then it is then a matter for us to decide whether we take enforcement action or not.

Middle Battenhall Farm Action Group (MBFAG), which had criticised the plan saying the work should never have been carried out in the first place, had agreed to remove its objection.

The plan was backed by nine votes to two.