‘Unfair’ ban on garden extensions is rejected
COUNCILLORS agreed it would be “really unfair” to refuse planning permission for garden extension works in Green Belt carried out more than four years ago – and including land sold by a former member of the planning committee.
Five residents were invited to apply to Rossendale council for retrospective change of use permission for the land to the rear of 8-14 Anderton Close, Cowpe after officers received an enforcement complaint.
Last week’s development control meeting heard that the works costing “thousands of pounds”, had included gaining permission from Lancashire County Council to relocate a public footpath and that the overall site was now “a massive improvement”.
Committee members overturned officers’ recommendation
to refuse the application – which includes replacement of boundary treatments, new native hedgerows and screening to mitigate visual impact – and gave the applicants a year to begin, and two years to complete, the changes.
The revised scheme also includes reducing the height of the retaining wall supporting the extended garden of no.8 to 2m.
Setting out the recommendation to refuse, the
planning officer’s report stated that inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved “except in very special circumstances”.
Planning agent Richard Gee said the development was the “modest extension” of four “very small rear gardens” and said the residents were “good people” in their 60s and 70s who had “attempted to do everything by the book”.
Mr Gee also reiterated
statements made in the planning report that one of the applicants contacted the council before the works were completed and claimed they were told “in no uncertain terms that planning permission was not required”.
Officers say they have no written record of this.
He added: “The works were actually carried out – somewhat incredibly – by somebody who was a member of this planning committee.”
Coun Sean Serridge said the previous state of the site was “quite frankly a mess”.
He added: “What’s there now is a massive improvement and what’s proposed is even better.
“I think it’s unfair that we are looking at refusing. I just don’t believe that people go to the trouble of relocating a footpath without checking with the council. Any concerns by the council should have been raised then, instead of several years later after massive improvements have been made.”
Coun Jimmy Eaton said the footpath is in use and “in a better condition than it was many years ago”.
“It’s cost them quite a substantial amount of money,” he added. “I feel disappointed in what has happened and how it’s happened.”
Coun Liz McInnes said: “These residents, I believe, have acted in good faith. They bought the land off a councillor. I think we should meet them halfway. I cannot support a refusal.”