Row as 'Great Wall of Bulkington' plans approved

[dutchman]

Nine neighbours objected, for nine different reasons, to an unpopular scheme in Coventry Road



Plans for two-metre high gates and a wall at the front of a Warwickshire property have been approved by councillors – even though one suggested they resembled the ‘Great Wall of Bulkington’

Nine neighbours had objected, for nine different reasons, to proposals for 2.1m high dark grey gates and adjoining wall at the front of a driveway in Coventry Road.

They said the structure was "not in keeping" with its environment and that it would look "out of place".

One neighbour objected because of the applicant's "problematic" previous home improvements, saying the parking of vans and lorries outside had been a "nuisance to occupants".

Some councillors voiced concerns the owner might want to extend the wall along the sides of their 18m-long driveway.

Cllr Brian Hammersley (Con, Bede) told a meeting of Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council’s planning committee: "It does look like the Great Wall of Bulkington at the end of the drive.

"And I would be concerned if there were no others down the street because it would tend to stick out like a smack in the eye."

Cllr Scott Harbison (Con, Wem Brook) added: "To me it feels as though they are going through the appropriate channels, starting off with the gate at the front and getting the tough bit out the way.

"You don’t need planning permission for walls if they are under two metres so when we pass this it will be carte blanche for them to carry on with the walls."

Committee chairman and ward member, Cllr Lubs Cvetkovic (Con, Bulkington) said that there were other gated properties along the road.

Cllr Richard Smith (Con, Bulkington) confirmed that suggestion, saying: "There are some really big properties down there with big walls and gates. It’s a little bit odd for those particular houses but not out of keeping with the road itself."

Despite all the protestation, councillors approved the scheme, provided the applicant complied with a series of conditions.

Planning officers confirmed that while there was nothing in the current application relating to additional boundaries, permission would not be needed if they were under two metres high.