Detached garden annex at 269 Barkerhouse Road, Nelson
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Pendle Development Management Committee on 21 Oct 2025.
What was proposed
The application sought a detached rear-garden annex with two bedrooms, a lounge, kitchen and bathroom.
“Site Description and Proposal The application site comprises a semi-detached, single-storey bungalow located within the settlement boundary of Nelson. The property is finished in white-rendered concrete blockwork under a pitched roof and includes UPVC fenestration. A long rear garden is located to the rear of the dwelling, and two off-street parking spaces are provided on a hardstanding at the front.”
Officer report
Planning history
There was no relevant planning history, and amended plans were submitted after the previous committee consideration.
“Relevant Planning History None Consultee Comments Public Response Highways No objection subject to conditions, including provision of parking for both the host dwelling and the annex, cycle storage, and restriction on independent use.”
Officer report
Why officers supported it
Officers considered the annex acceptable because its amended design avoided direct overlooking and conditions would control privacy, use, parking and future development.
“The principle of providing an annex in residential garden land is acceptable, subject to the annex remaining ancillary to the host dwelling and having no adverse impacts on residential or visual amenity. Design and residential amenity The proposed annex would be sited to the read of the garden. Its scale and height in itself would be compatible with surrounding gardens and would not cause any direct loss of amenity or living conditions.”
“This would be at an angle of 90 degrees and there is a hedge and proposed 2m high fence in between. The 2m high fence is permitted development. That combination of angles fence and hedge would mean that there would be no loss of privacy to nos 271. The applicant has erected a large fence separating the house from the proposed annex. That is an inappropriate and unlawful form of development.”
Officer report
Support for the proposal
A planning consultancy supported the application, highlighting annexes’ role in multigenerational living if conditions prevented independent use.
“Potential damage to boundary treatments and impacts due to land level differences. • Commencement of works before permission was granted. A representation from a planning consultancy was also received in support of the application, highlighting the role of annexes in supporting multigenerational living, provided robust conditions prevent independent use.”
Officer report
The committee’s consideration
Amended plans had been submitted after deferral and were considered acceptable by the committee.
“At the last meeting the determination of this application was deferred to allow time for amended plans to be submitted. These had been received and were acceptable. The officer’s report now recommended approval.”
Minutes
The committee’s decision
The committee resolved to grant planning permission subject to conditions.
“That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions -”
Minutes
Sources
- Pendle Development Management Committee minutes, 21 October 2025
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Pendle'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
- Council
- Pendle
- Date
- Tuesday 21 October 2025
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- Pendle committee decisions →
This committee's year
11 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.