PLANS to convert a 17th century mansion into more than 50 luxury apartments will be rejected if vital information is not received by the end of July.

A planning application to convert Troy House near Mitchel Troy into 23 apartments and to build 31 new apartments came before Monmouthshire County Council’s (MCC) planning committee yesterday (6th June) with “a regrettable recommendation to refuse” due to a lack of vital information needed to make a decision.

But a last-minute discussion between the applicant and the council before the meeting led to the applicant being given “one more chance.”

Troy House is a Grade II* listed building which dates from 1680 but has not been used since the 1990s. In the second half of the 20th century the property was at one time a convent and later owned by the former Gwent County Council.

The property is owned by businessman Peter Carroll, who lodged a planning application in 2008 to convert the building into 23 apartments, demolish the 20th century classroom block, a hostel building and a chapel with cloisters and build 31 new apartments.

Discussions have taken place between the council and the applicant over the last two years in order to bring about a decision, and senior Monmouthshire councillors were forced to defend a decision to commission an ecology survey at the cost of £9,665 in 2015, despite concerns about it being an improper use of public money.

After eight years of working with the applicant, MCC case officer Craig O’Connor recommended in his report ahead of yesterday’s meeting that the application be “regrettably refused.”

Natural Resources Wales said existing flooding and bat studies are “insufficient” while Cadw said the plans would cause “significant harm to the integrity of the character of the Grade II* registered historic garden.”

There have also been concerns raised by MCC Heritage about the impact the development would have on the “special character” of the building.

Mr O’Connor also highlighted a lack of information on a number of items, including bat surveys, tree surveys and highways impact.

The applicant was met with mixed feelings from councillors, with Councillor Phil Murphy supporting “one last chance” for the applicant.

“I find it absolutely incredible that having sent out a letter that spelled out problems in words of one syllable last July describing exactly what the problems were and exactly what to do to get a favourable comment, that we only find ourselves now when its listed for refusal in a position where the applicant appears to have woken up and appears to want to do something about it,” he said.

“I want to support the officer’s recommendation that we are minded to refuse it but are prepared to grant an extension to our meeting of 1st August whereby I would say that if we don’t have sufficient information then we would refuse it, but I’m far more interested in the preservation of the building.

“It’s a crying shame that its fallen into rack and ruin. I would support one last chance to be given to the applicant.”

Cllr Jim Higginson added: “It’s clear that there is a lot of work needs doing and it needs doing urgently.

“This should have been sorted a long time ago, but unfortunately we do get these frustrations from time to time. By imposing the conditions that have been suggested it might bring it to a satisfactory conclusion.”

The application will also be subject to an urgent works notice, which would look at patch repairing the rood and propping heavily decorated plaster ceilings to preserve important historic fabric. MCC planning officer Amy Longford told councillors the applicant will be given opportunity to complete works themselves but that she would “love to serve the notice to protect the building.”