®Planning appeal decision
Home Spring, Houghton Road, North Houghton, Stockbridge, Hampshire, SO20 6LF
Planning appeal 3307775 at Home Spring, Houghton Road, North Houghton, Stockbridge, Hampshire, SO20 6LF (Test Valley Borough Council) was allowed in part (a split decision) on 13 August 2024 by Inspector Dignan P, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the structure is a building or a caravan/mobile home (ground b).
Erection of a dwellinghouse (described as a twin-unit caravan by the appellant) and formation of hard surfacing comprising aggregate material and concrete pads
- Authority
- Test Valley Borough Council
- Appeal type
- enforcement · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Householder developments
- Inspector
- Dignan P
- Postcode
- SO20 6LF
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the structure is a building or a caravan/mobile home (ground b)
- Whether there has been a material change of use to residential or whether the land has a lawful residential use (ground c)
- Whether the structure can be justified as occupational accommodation for a rural worker under Policy COM10 (ground a deemed application)
- Whether the steps required by the enforcement notice exceed what is necessary to remedy the breach (ground f)
- Whether the period allowed for compliance is too short (ground g)
What decided it
The absence of cogent evidence of an essential functional need for on-site residential accommodation to support the horticultural business, combined with the less than substantial but significant harm to the setting of the listed building, means the development conflicts with the development plan with no sufficient material considerations to justify departure from it.
The substantial weight given to the best interests of the appellant's child and significant weight to personal circumstances were insufficient to overcome the development plan conflicts and the less than substantial harm to the heritage setting, which weighed significantly against the development.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy COM2Policy COM10Policy E1Policy E9Policy HTN1Policy HTN4
- Judgments
- Cardiff Rating Authority v Guest Keen Baldwin's Iron and Steel Co Ltd [1949] 1QB 385; Skerritts of Nottingham Ltd v SSETR (No.2) [2000] 2 PLR 102
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision
More decisions in Test Valley
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2024
- Notice upheld21 September 20263354722Hillside Nurseries , Branches Lane the Banks, Lockerely , Hants, SO51 6JT
- Planning permission granted30 March 20263334230Land South of Wellow Way, Scallows Lane, West Wellow, SO51 6DX
- Dismissed18 September 20253354325The Log Cabin, Packridge Farm , Packridge Lane, Romsey, SO51 9LL
- Notice varied and upheld9 September 20253359449Sunrise Farm, Middle Wallop, Stockbridge, Hampshire, SO20 8HR
- Notice varied and upheld8 September 20253315612Pipe Stock Ltd, 3 Premier Way, Romsey, SO51 9DQ
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.