Retaining wall repairs at Churchyard Wall And Gatepiers St Giles Church, Matlock
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Derbyshire Dales Planning Committee on 10 Feb 2026.
What was proposed
Listed Building Consent was sought for ground anchors and helibar to reinforce the retaining wall.
“Listed Building Consent is sought to install ground anchors and helibar to the retaining wall. The retaining wall exhibits multiple defects which include cracking, leaning, and bowing. The movement identified in the wall likely results from the lateral pressure exerted by the weight of the ground above, causing movement in the wall towards Stoney Way.”
Officer report
The site
The wall is a Grade II listed heritage asset beside Stoney Way, within the Old Matlock Conservation Area and near residential properties.
“Church of St Giles is a Grade II* listed Medieval Parish Church within the Old Matlock Conservation Area. The Churchyard Wall, to which this application applies, is itself a Grade II listed heritage asset.”
“The Church is visible from the Classified Road Church Street and the surrounding area is largely residential. A Non Classified Road Stoney Way runs alongside the church to the East of which the approximately 19 metre retaining wall can be viewed.”
Officer report
Earlier works and current risks
Earlier rebuilding works did not resolve the wall’s defects, and the wall was considered at risk of serious collapse within five years.
“With regards to this application structural investigations have identified serious defects in the listed Churchyard Wall including cracking, leaning and bowing. Due to the progressive nature of these defects, the Wall is at risk of serious collapse within the next 5 years.”
“Previous works were undertaken in 2013/2014 to rebuild the wall under application numbers 13/00099/LBALT and 13/00100/FUL. However these works failed to fix the underlying problems with the wall. This consequently meant that new options need to be considered.”
Officer report
Why officers recommended approval
Officers considered the chosen method the least harmful practical solution, limiting excavation and protecting the heritage asset, with benefits outweighing visual impact.
“The wall is viewed as a heritage asset and the District Council feels it is of significance and wants to preserve it in the best way it can. Therefore, it is considered necessary to look at alternative options to rebuilding the wall in order to protect this heritage asset.”
“Whilst the proposed structural intervention will be visible along a considerable length of the Wall, it is considered that this solution is both well informed, and the least harmful solution to provide future protection of the heritage asset. Any visual impact is likely to be outweighed by both heritage and public benefits as per the test set out in paragraph 215 of the National Planning Policy Framework.”
Officer report
Consultation responses
Archaeology, Matlock Town Council and the conservation officer raised no objection, while archaeology noted the method would limit disturbance to burials.
“Consultee Name Position Date Comments DCC Archaeology: No objection 17.12.2025 There are numerous burials both marked and unmarked in fairly close proximity to the wall. Repair work in 2013- 2014 involved significant…”
“This application has opted for the use of ground anchors to reinforce the listed wall structure which would limit any impact to in situ burials and could be carried out without the need for excavation behind the wall. Therefore there is no need for archaeological involvement unless the proposed engineering solution changes at any point. Matlock Town Council No objection 17.12.2025 Request works are completed in due haste.”
Officer report
The decision
Permission was granted subject to the stated conditions, with delegated authority to approve necessary amendments.
“That planning permission is granted for the development subject to the subject the conditions as set out in the report with delegated authority to the Director of Place and Economy to approve any amendments to those conditions as deemed necessary.”
Minutes
Sources
- Derbyshire Dales Planning Committee minutes, 10 February 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Derbyshire Dales's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Committee
- Derbyshire Dales Planning Committee
- Council
- Derbyshire Dales
- Date
- Tuesday 10 February 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Vote
- Unanimous
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- Derbyshire Dales committee decisions →
This committee's year
28 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 5 against officer advice.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.