The case centred on whether the wall comprised a means of enclosure within the terms of Class A of Part 2 to Schedule 2 of the order 2015. The dry stone walls in the landscape had an historic function for keeping animals enclosed, the inspector acknowledged. However, this did not mean that permitted development rights automatically applied. At the time of the application the wall was in disrepair and it barely connected with other more substantial walls in the area. It would have had substantial gaps through which people and animals could pass through. The use of concrete block sections and slate cladding would be appropriate for the display of memorial plaques but this did not mean that it comprised a means of enclosure. Rather, it would be more akin to a memorial wall. The latter could have accommodated up to 3,000 plaques which would also have triggered a material change of use of the land as a consequence of the number of visitors which would visit the site unrelated to its lawful forestry use. The appeal was dimissed.
Inspector: Susan Wraith; Written representations
Dilapidated wall insufficient to comprise means of enclosure
A LDC seeking affirmation that a stone wall in Derbyshire could be rebuilt in part through the addition of concrete blocks and the insertion of memorial plaques was denied because of its poor physical state.
Have you registered with us yet?
Register now to enjoy more articles and free email bulletins
Sign up now
