Construction of driveway

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 19 December 2017 by D Boffin BSc (Hons) DipTP MRTPI Dip Bldg Cons (RICS) IHBC an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Decision date: 28 December 2017 Appeal Ref: APP/J9497/D/17/3178522 Ferndale, Throwleigh Road, South Zeal, Devon EX20 2QD  The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission.  The appeal is made by Mr Richard Knibbs against the decision of Dartmoor National Park Authority.  The application Ref 0043/17, dated 25 January 2017, was refused by notice dated 1 June 2017.  The development proposed is construction of driveway. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Procedural Matters 2. For reasons of accuracy and clarity I have taken the description of development from the Council’s decision notice. 3. The Council’s reason for refusal refers to the Dartmoor National Park Design Guide 2011 but I have not been provided with a copy of this document. As such, I give it little weight in the determination of this appeal. Main Issue 4. The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area having regard to its location within the Dartmoor National Park (DNP). Reasons 5. The appeal site forms part of a field/paddock adjacent to the appellant’s house. It is proposed to construct a driveway from the existing field gate to the hard landscaped area that is to the rear of the dwelling. The dwelling is presently served by a narrow rough track off Throwleigh Road. 6. The statutory purposes of a National Park include conserving and enhancing the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area. Paragraph 115 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) states great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty. 7. The Council’s Officer Report states that the area of the DNP within which the proposal would be located is classified within the Landscape Character Appeal Decision APP/J9497/D/17/3178522 2 Assessment for DNP (LCA) as ‘2D Moorland Edge Slopes’. The valued attributes for this area are identified as including a strong pattern of medieval fields with prominent Devon hedge banks and dry stone walls and the pastoral character of fields contrasting with areas of healthy moorland. 8. I have no evidence to indicate that the field pattern within the vicinity of the site is medieval. However, the appeal site forms part of a wider expanse of fields and woodland which slope down from Throwleigh Road in the direction of the appellant’s house. The fields are bounded by stone walls/hedges. Nevertheless, due to the sloping topography the appeal site is clearly visible from Throwleigh Road especially when approaching from the direction of Payne’s Bridge. As a result, the site makes a positive contribution to the pastoral character of this part of DNP. 9. The submitted drawings indicate that the drive is to be constructed from compacted stone and sand using a BODPAVE 40 system. Whilst for some of its length it would be adjacent to the boundary wall it would appreciably traverse across the field to provide access to the rear of the appellant’s house. It would take a considerable amount of time for the proposed development to weather and for any vegetation to grow to soften its appearance. As such, I find it would be a prominent and stark engineered feature in the pastoral landscape which would fail to conserve the landscape and scenic beauty of the DNP and I attach great weight to this harm. 10. The appellant has stated that the sand/stone could be replaced with grass and that this would minimise any visual intrusion. However, given the incline of the site I have no evidence to indicate that this would be a feasible or practical material to use for a vehicular access. Moreover, the appeal process should not be used to evolve a scheme. 11. The existing access to the house is bounded by stone walls, restrictive in width, inclined down towards the house and rough and unmade. Nevertheless, the appellant has lived at the property for 15 years and there is little evidence before me to indicate that this track has precluded access to the dwelling or why it is not possible to improve the existing track. Emergency vehicles such as ambulances and fire engines may not be able to get close to the dwelling along the existing track. However, the dwelling is not a substantial distance from Throwleigh Road and similar situations would be likely to occur at many rural dwellings. 12. I acknowledge that the proposal would not increase the number of vehicle movements from the dwelling and that there were no objections raised by the Highway Authority. Nonetheless, this is a neutral consideration that does not weigh for or against the proposal. 13. The appellant may contemplate moving from the property and this could have an impact on those who rent land off him. However, little weight can be attached to such personal circumstances. 14. Thus, for the above reasons, I find the proposed development would have an unacceptable impact on the character and appearance of this part of the DNP landscape. It would therefore be in conflict with Policies COR1, CO3 and COR4 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document that seek, amongst other things, to respect, conserve and enhance the characteristic landscapes and features of Dartmoor. Appeal Decision APP/J9497/D/17/3178522 3 15. I also consider that the proposal would be contrary to Policies DMD1b and DMD5 of the Development Management and Delivery Development Plan Document that state, among other matters, that within the DNP priority will be given to the conservation and enhancement of the natural beauty and development should respect the valued attributes of landscape character types identified in the LCA. Conclusion 16. For the reasons given above, having had regard to all other matters raised, I therefore conclude that the appeal should be dismissed. D. Boffin INSPECTOR