Boundary wall and gates at Manor House Farm, German Lane, Charnock Richard, Chorley

What was proposed

The application sought retention of a 1.9-metre front boundary wall, railings and access gates, with revised access arrangements and cream rendering.

“Proposal: Front boundary wall/railings and access gates, 1.9m in height (part retrospective)”

“The application is part retrospective and seeks the retention of the boundary wall which has been erected along the southern boundary of the curtilage of the property, at approx. 1.9 metres in height. During the course of the application, revised plans have been submitted in order to address the comments of Lancashire County Council Highways Authority.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is a detached barn conversion in the Green Belt, near a railway, terraced homes, a scrap yard, fields and isolated properties.

“The application relates to a detached barn conversion on German Lane, Charnock Richard. The property has been extended to the side; however, arial plans have shown that there has been an accumulation of buildings to the side of the property historically.”

“The property is located within the Green Belt and has the railway line to the rear. A small row of terraced dwellings is located to the south and a scrap yard beyond theses. The wider area is characterised by fields and isolated properties.”

Officer report

Earlier applications

An earlier retrospective boundary wall and gates application was refused, while a single-storey side extension application was permitted.

“Ref: 24/00910/FULHH Decision: REFFPP Decision Date: 23 December 2024 Description: Front boundary wall and access gates, 1.9m in height (retrospective)”

“Ref: 24/00156/FULHH Decision: PERFPP Decision Date: 20 May 2024 Description: Single storey side extension…”

Officer report

Green Belt and appearance

The wall would have greater visual and spatial impact than the former hedge, but officers considered the harm to Green Belt openness not substantial.

“The Government’s Planning Practice Guidance advises that assessing the impact of a proposal on the openness of the Green Belt, where it is relevant to do so, requires a judgement based on the circumstances of the case. By way of example, the courts have identified a number of matters which may need to be taken into account in making this assessment.”

“The previous boundary to the site was a hedgerow, which was a softer treatment and adds to the visual amenity of the area. The wall which has been erected is of breeze block construction and would be rendered in cream to match the dwellinghouse. The wall has a more stark appearance and greater visual impact. Spatially, the wall also has a greater presence.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The parish council objected, while highways officers became satisfied with the revised access and no longer considered the proposal to encroach into the highway.

“Charnock Richard Parish Council – object on the grounds that the previous application was refused and that the wall is located on the highway and does not represent the applicant’s actual boundary and covers cables. The also consider the wall to be inappropriate within the Green Belt.”

“Lancashire Highway Services – initially objected to the proposal but are now satisfied with the revised proposal. In addition, LCC Highways have confirmed that they no longer consider that the proposal encroaches into the highway.”

Officer report

Objections received

One objection raised concerns about the former grass verge, a telephone cable, lorries using the road and the need for a true survey.

“At the time of report preparation, 1no. letter of objection has been received raising the following issues:”

“The wall has been located on the previous grass verge The wall is located on a telephone cable The comment this is a no through road is irrelevant as lorries use this road A true survey needs to be carried out…”

Officer report

Who spoke

An objector and the applicant spoke at the meeting.

The committee vote

The committee voted 8 for and 2 against granting planning permission subject to conditions.

“After careful consideration, it was proposed by Councillor Craige Southern, seconded by Councillor Neville Whitham and subsequently resolved (8 for, 2 against) that planning permission be granted, subject to conditions.”

Minutes