The homes, located at Grundy Fold Farm in Bolton, were issued a notice for demolition in 2018 by Bolton Council. According to a planning inquiry, the luxury detached properties were up to a third bigger and in different locations than allowed.
The householders were originally given a six-month extension to demolish the structures and return the site to its original form, though this has now been extended to 12 months due to the “hardship” caused by the decision.
Planning permission for the conversion of the former farmhouse, as well as the addition of four new homes around the central courtyard, was originally approved in 2014.
That planning permission, which is still in place, is for just four dwellings and the conversion of the former farmhouse, which was demolished and stands partially rebuilt.
The householders now have the option of their “fall back position”, which would see the existing buildings demolished and rebuilt in the correct areas and to the correct size.
The planning inquiry took place in March and lasted four days, giving the poor holders, their lawyer and Bolton Council the chance to speak on the issue.
It heard that Sparkle, the project’s developers, demolished the farmhouse and began building afresh but partially constructed four new homes in the wrong locations and with different dimensions than agreed.
Two appeals from the house owners were considered – one against the demolition enforcement and another asking for the decision on a subsequent amended planning application to be overturned.
Both appeals were dismissed this week, with Bolton Council arguing at the inquiry that harm had been caused to the green belt.
READ MORE: Woman in rent battle with caravan firm
He added that the current location of the properties is “a significant departure away from the clear design intentions of the 2014 scheme”.
Killian Garvey, speaking for the householders, explained that the effect on openness of the greenbelt of the houses where they are now did not cause significant harm to openness.
He also argued that the enforcement action to order demolition was not proportionate to the breaches of planning.
In the decision notice, planning inspector Jason Whitfield said: “Both appeal A and appeal B would result in a greater presence of built development in the green belt than the fall back position.
“I find that this greater increase in built form would be harmful, both spatially and visually, when located in an area characterised by openness and on a site which, when considered at its baseline, is largely free of built form.
“As a consequence, considering all the evidence before me, I find the harm resulting to green belt openness from the appeals would be greater than any such harm resulting from the fall back position.”
Additional reporting by Chris Gee.