The owner of three partially converted barns has been told for the second time he cannot sell them as houses after losing a planning appeal.

George Gordon had already started converting three agricultural buildings on land in Lydiard Green into single-storey houses before applying for planning permission last year from Wiltshire Council.

He told the council they were being converted under a special rule where barns can be made into homes without having to get a specific planning consent.

But planners ruled against the development. They said the houses were outside the settlement area of the hamlet, there wasn’t a need for more houses in the area and the proposal would result in "harm to the character and appearance of the area due to the suburbanisation of this former agricultural site."

They added: It would be a form of development that would result in poor design, due to the provision of excessively high flat roof dwellings and poorly integrated materials, which would be an incongruous form of development that would fail to integrate into the surrounding area.”

Mr Gordon appealed against the decision and both he and the council made their case to the government appointed planning inspector Liam Page who said the main issues he would consider would be whether the site was outside the settlement boundary and the effect on the area the houses would have.

Mr Page decided: "The development would have the effect of extending the residential pattern of development further into the rural environment and generate harmful domesticating effects.

“The existing buildings may have fallen into a state of disrepair and the development may go some way to rectifying their appearance. This does not overcome the fundamental conflict with respect to delivering residential development on the periphery of an existing settlement in place of an agricultural use and associated erosion of the rural environment.”

Fundamentally, Mr Page said, there were no reason to allow the buildings which were outside the village’s development plan and he found against Mr Gordon.

He also decided, that because the council had not acted unreasonably, the appellant's claim for costs was not upheld.