GLOUCESTERSHIRE’S embattled chief constable is at the centre of a planning row in a Welsh village.
Rod Hansen, who is currently suspended and facing a disciplinary hearing over alleged gross misconduct this week, has caused concern in Monmouthshire with his plans to convert a barn into a three-bed home near Chepstow.
Residents and councillors have objected to his application to vary the conditions for the development in Argoed Road, Earlswood, Shirenewton.
Shirenewton Community Council said the site was “stripped of undergrowth and the barn roof removed, which would have displaced flora and fauna including many protected species of wildlife, particularly bats, great crested newts and dormice in the breeding season”.
It was reported to them that there was an “abundance of bats, great crested newts and dormice” in the immediate vicinity prior to the work, according to their formal comment to Monmouthshire County Council (MCC).
They also expected to see a retrospective planning application to validate the work carried out so far given the lapse of time since the original consent.
However, Mr Hansen’s planning agent said it has been evidenced that the planning permission granted in 2005 is still valid and could be relied on to continue building work and a retrospective planning application was not required.
And an ecological appraisal found there was little bat activity in the area and evidence of dormice activity was some distance from the barn, he said.
Shirenewton Community Council also expressed disappointment that work had begun at the site before the ecological appraisal last December.
“[It] was limited to a ‘preliminary ecological appraisal’ and to species including bats with a ‘preliminary roost assessment’ and ‘daytime bat walkover’ survey, and that the survey was carried out in the winter during daytime when there would be the least wildlife and vegetation activity,” their objection continued.
They called for a full appraisal as a condition should the County Council approve the plans along with “extensive remediation to compensate for the extensive loss of flora and fauna in the midst of the breeding season”.
One objector complained that the bat survey was carried out during the day on December 10. “There are clear records of four species in the area within 120 metres of the property but reference is made to one kilometre”, they claimed in their letter of objection.
“This same survey refers to a wide range of legislation regarding the non-disturbance of a variety of species to include great crested newts, bats, dormice, nesting birds, etc with applicable dates.
“Despite this, no attempt appears to have been made to stop the work and protect the habitat for any length of time. The destruction has been devastating.
“The construction work commenced early July but the application for the amendments was not sent in until September 3, 2025 and was not considered by the Shirenewton Community Council until January 5, 2026.”
They go on to claim in their objection that “double standards are being applied to both planning and wildlife legislation”.
County councillor Louise Brown (C, Shirenewton), supported SCC’s comments, and said: “I note in particular that the applicant’s ecology report had a picture with evidence of dormice who are one of the protected species.”
Architect Richard Liddell, who has been instructed by Mr Hansen, said the first thing that they had to do was to establish whether or not the existing planning consent.
The planning consent, which was obtained in 2005, was extant and could therefore be relied upon to continue the building work, he added.
Mr Liddell said that they identified that materials that had been brought to site were still present, that excavations had been undertaken and concrete poured for the original proposed extension, and that a building regulation application had been submitted at that time.
“This was evidence that the development had been lawfully commenced,” he said.
He said this evidence was presented to the planning officer on site who confirmed the work had started within the five year period, that the applicant at that time had a valid reason for not continuing the building work and despite the passage of time, continuing the building work now complied with planning legislation and was lawful.
“Mr Hansen asked us to submit an amendment to the original drawings,” he said.
“As a part of this process, a meeting was held which included the head of planning of Monmouthshire, in order to ensure that the whole process was acceptable to the council planners.
“The question did arise as to whether it was acceptable to demolish and rebuild some walls, and in order to establish the position the head of planning had obtained the original officers report to committee of 2005, and considered the drawings submitted at that time.
“At that meeting it was confirmed that the professional view of the planning officer was that work had started that the planning permission was extant and that the work that had been undertaken with regard to rebuilding walls was in accordance with the original consent. The development was therefore lawful and a retrospective planning application was not required.
“At the time of the original planning consent the requirements for ecological studies and protection of the environment was not as rigorous as is presently the case, nevertheless Mr Hansen has given due regard to such matters and a full ecological report, including bats, has been prepared.
“The ecologist agreed that there were no bat roosts, and confirmed that there was little bat activity in the area.
“The whole of the site was ecologically looked at carefully, including with regard to dormice, and the only evidence of dormice consisted of a single hazel shell which showed evidence of dormice activity, some distance from the barn.
“The ecologist suggested that the small brush area of the land could be cleared, and that some planting and allowance of existing trees to regrow should be encouraged.
“Management of this land will include felling 30 per cent of the area on a three year rolling program, in order to ensure light is able to gain access to ground level for the benefit of natural flora to recolonise, and for the benefit of ecological diversity.
“To that end, approximately 400 whips of a mixed RSPB approved natural variety, including hazel which is a favourite of dormice, have been planted in the hedge to revitalise it.
“A pond has also been dug, in the position of a pond that was shown on the OS plan, but which no longer existed, in order to restore long lost aspects of biodiversity.”
He also said the building inspector has visited the site many times and is “entirely satisfied” that the property is compliant with building regulations.
Monmouthshire County Council has yet to decide the application to modify the conditions of the previous planning permission.
