Case 3268883

Hobbs Lot Farm, Wisbech Road, March, PE15 0BB

Fenland District Council — appeal dismissed

Outcome
Dismissed
Decision date
16 July 2021
Authority
Fenland District Council
Inspector
Beeby C
Procedure
Written Representations
Casework type
Planning Appeal
Type detail
Unknown
Development type
Change of use
Appellant
Mr Charles Baker
Agent
Neaves & Co - Chartered Surveyors Limited
LPA reference
F/YR20/0779/PNC04
ONS LPA code
E07000010
Jurisdiction
Transferred
Link status
Not Linked
Start date
27 April 2021

Summary AI

The appeal was dismissed due to non-compliance with Article 3(6) of the GPDO, which requires a material widening of the access to the A141. This would be necessary to carry out the proposed development.

Generated from the decision letter — check against the original before relying on it.

PDF text

Page 1 · Chunk 0 Appeal Decision

Hobbs Lot Farm, Wisbech Road, March, PE15 0BB — Fenland District Council — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 8 June 2021 by C Beeby BA (Hons) MIPROW an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date:16th July 2021 Appeal Ref: APP/D0515/W/21/3268883 Barns at Hobbs Lot Farm, Wisbech Road, March PE15 0BB • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant approval required under Article 3(1) and Schedule 2, Part 3, Class Q of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended). • The appeal is made by Mr C Baker against the decision of Fenland District Council. • The application Ref F/YR20/0779/PNC04, dated 30 July 2020, was refused by notice dated 20 October 2020. • The development proposed is described in the appeal form as the change of use of an agricultural building to a dwelling (single storey 2-bed) (Class Q (a) and (b)). Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2. Under Article 3(1) and Schedule 2, Part 3, Class Q of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 as amended (the GPDO), planning permission is granted for the change of use of an agricultural building to a dwellinghouse subject to limitations and conditions. 3.

Page 1 · Chunk 1 Appeal Decision

Hobbs Lot Farm, Wisbech Road, March, PE15 0BB — Fenland District Council — Appeal Decision Where an application is made for a determination as to whether prior approval is required for development, paragraph W(3) provides that the local planning authority may refuse the application where it considers that the proposed development does not comply with the conditions, limitations or restrictions that are applicable to such permitted development. 4. The applicable conditions, limitations and restrictions include those set out in the articles of the Order. Article 3(6) of the GPDO excludes permission for any development, other than under certain classes of Parts 9 and 18, which requires or involves the formation, laying out or material widening of an access to a trunk or classified road. Main Issue 5. In view of the above, the main issue is whether the proposed development complies with the conditions, limitations or restrictions applicable to development permitted by the GPDO. Reasons 6. The building for which a change of use is proposed lies in a farmyard which is accessed by a track off the A141 classified road. The track additionally forms https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Page 2 · Chunk 2 Appeal Decision

Hobbs Lot Farm, Wisbech Road, March, PE15 0BB — Fenland District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/D0515/W/21/3268883 vehicular access to a dwelling and surrounding arable farmland, which requires management by large agricultural vehicles. It has a single vehicle width for most of its length, although it widens slightly where it meets the A141. 7. The A141 at this point is single lane carriageway, has no passing areas and carries a 50 mile per hour speed restriction. The road carried a relatively frequent level of traffic at the time of my site visit. 8. Where a vehicle wishes to access the track from the A141 and another vehicle is emerging, it will be necessary for its driver to wait within the traffic, particularly where the emerging driver is in a large agricultural vehicle which occupies the majority of the access mouth. 9. Vehicles waiting to turn within the carriageway would cause perceived inconvenience which may cause other road users to perform manoeuvres which increase risk, such as overtaking. Furthermore, waiting traffic can give rise to additional rear end collisions and would obstruct the free flow of traffic movements along the A141, a strategic road. The level of risk is increased by the regular vehicular traffic which the road appears to carry. 10.

Page 2 · Chunk 3 Appeal Decision

Hobbs Lot Farm, Wisbech Road, March, PE15 0BB — Fenland District Council — Appeal Decision As the appeal proposal would provide a further dwelling which would be accessed via the track it would materially increase the number of vehicle movements along it. The additional waiting manoeuvres within traffic to which the proposal would give rise as a result of the track’s current single vehicle width would cause harm to highway safety. This harm could only be overcome by widening the access to the A141. 11. Whilst it is submitted that another access to the surrounding fields exists and hence that all agricultural vehicles associated with the management of the surrounding land may not use the appeal site access, this is unsupported by evidence and furthermore it is contested by an interested party. Thus, I attach only minimal weight to this submission in determining the appeal. 12. I acknowledge submissions that no accidents have occurred at the access in the last 5 years. Nevertheless, this does not compel me to find the current access acceptable in highway safety terms. My concerns about the proposal’s effect on highway safety are based on a judgment of the likelihood of such effects in the absence of substantive contradictory evidence. 13.

Page 2 · Chunk 4 Appeal Decision

Hobbs Lot Farm, Wisbech Road, March, PE15 0BB — Fenland District Council — Appeal Decision In order to benefit from the provisions of Schedule 2, Part 3, Class Q of the GPDO, the proposed development must comply with Article 3(6). In this case it would be necessary to materially widen the access to the A141 in order to carry out the development proposed. The development is consequently not permitted by the GPDO. It is development for which express planning permission is required and that could only be granted on application made to the local planning authority in the first instance. Other Matters 14. The appellant has concerns regarding the Council’s approach, however, these are not matters for this appeal. Conclusion 15. As I have found that the development would not comply with conditions, limitations or restrictions specified in the GPDO as applicable to the https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Page 3 · Chunk 5 Appeal Decision

Hobbs Lot Farm, Wisbech Road, March, PE15 0BB — Fenland District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/D0515/W/21/3268883 development in question, meaning that the development falls outside the permitted development right, there is no need to make a determination on the prior approval matters. Thus, for the reasons given above, I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.

Page 3 · Chunk 6 C Beeby

Hobbs Lot Farm, Wisbech Road, March, PE15 0BB — Fenland District Council — C Beeby INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

Extracted from the decision letter PDF and shown in full, chunk by chunk.

Main issues and findings

Highway safety
Against appellant
¶9-10

The additional waiting manoeuvres within traffic to which the proposal would give rise would cause harm to highway safety. This harm could only be overcome by widening the access to the A141.

Highway safety
Against appellant
¶11-12

Even though no accidents have occurred at the access in the last 5 years, this does not compel me to find the current access acceptable in highway safety terms. My concerns about the proposal's effect on highway safety are based on a judgment of the likelihood of such effects in the absence of substantive contradictory evidence.

Policies relied on

Reference Weight
Article 3(6) of the GPDO
Determinative

Site constraints from the Casework Database

Conservation area
Green belt
Listed building setting
AONB
SSSI
Flooding an issue

Source

Decision letter, 3 pages, issued by the Planning Inspectorate on 16 July 2021 under the Open Government Licence.