COAL MERCHANT Paul Rogers faces a nail-biting wait to find out whether he can live in his mossland dream home or be forced to knock it down.
"If I lose my appeal I've been told I will have to demolish the farmhouse within a month or the authorities will do it for me," said an anxious Mr Rogers on the eve of his appeal. This week at a public inquiry at Leigh Town Hall Government Inspector David Pinner heard two appeals by Mr Rogers into Wigan Council's enforcement notice following an alleged breach of planning control and refusal of planning consent for his rebuild of Nook Farm on Astley Moss.
The inquiry heard how Mr Rogers, who lives in Ellesmere Park, Eccles but runs a coal business from the former Barlow's coal yard at Scott House in Astley Green, bought derelict Nook Farm and four acres of land two years ago and set about rebuilding it as his family's home.
Mr Rogers told the inquiry: "I assumed planning permission would not be needed to rebuild the property if it was done on the existing walls and foundations. I approached an architect to prepare plans -- nobody said the work required planning permission."
Mr Rogers explained how he had employed contractors to clear the overgrown site and work on the property began in December 1999.
But he said he was told to stop work in early January 2000 by a Wigan MBC enforcement officer who called at Nook Farm.
She returned two days later and informed him the farmhouse was in Salford, not Wigan, and advised him to contact Salford planners.
Mr Rogers claimed he was told by Salford that building regulations only were needed and restarted the rebuilding programme. Then he said a month later the enforcement officer from Wigan returned to tell him the property was definitely within Wigan and all work had to stop.
For Mr Rogers, barrister David Manley argued that Wigan Council were claiming Nook Farm had been abandoned in 1957 after the house became uninhabitable because of fumes from fires on nearby land.
He said: "Wigan's fault was to tell Mr Rogers that it was nothing to do with them and direct him to Salford Council where an officer represented that it was not a planning issue and work could continue. "It is the appellant's submission that as a matter of law Wigan is stopped from enforcing against this building. Wigan put this chain of events in place.
"Had anyone in Wigan troubled to look at the proposals map to the UDP they would have seen Nook Farm is clearly shown as lying within Wigan.
"What has occurred is not the erection of a new dwelling house but the renovation and repair of an existing dwelling. What has resulted here has no greater impact on the Green Belt than what was on the site in December 1999 immediately before work started." Questioned by barrister Alan Evans, acting on behalf of Wigan MBC Director of Legal Services, Mr Rogers said he paid £25,000 to retired Astley farmer Ellis Tonge for derelict Nook Farm, four acres of land and a small plot opposite.
The inquiry heard that landowners Peel Holdings had complained about the development before the initial visit to Nook Farm by an enforcement officer. Evidence also revealed that Mr Rogers had constructed an access to the house along the line of the former pit railway line when the original access had been further to the east off Nook lane.
Questioned by Mr Evans he said there was no roof on the property when he got it and roof timbers had fallen down. The inquiry heard that Billy Hartley of neighbouring Rawsons i'th' Nook Farm had openly admitted he had taken some of the original roofing slates from Nook Farm when rebuilding his own home in the 1980s.
Mr Rogers said he estimated he had spent £38,000 on renovations since his original purchase but Mr Evans said he had calculated the work had cost £44,000.
"I think about a further £20,000 would need spending on the house to complete it because plumbing, plastering, a sewerage system and electricity have to be sorted," said Mr Rogers.
The inquiry concluded with Mr Pinner's visit to the Astley Moss farmhouse site after which Mr Rogers said he expected to know the outcome of his appeal within two months.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article