Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Notice varied and upheld16 October 20243341888

Riverside Paddocks, New Inn Fields, BORDON, GU35 9LH

without planning permission and within the last 10 years, the material change of use of land to a B8 business use for the storage of builder’s materials and equipment (reclamation tiles and bricks and other materials)

Authority
East Hampshire District Council
Appeal type
enforcement · Enforcement Notice
Procedure
Hearing
Development
employment-industrial · Change of use
Inspector
Howell M

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Whether the alleged material change of use has occurred as a matter of fact (ground (b))
  • Whether, if it has occurred, it amounts to a material change of use of the land given the claimed primary agricultural use (ground (c))
  • Whether the steps required by the notice exceed what is necessary to remedy the breach of planning control (ground (f))

What decided it

The significant scale of builder's materials and equipment stored on the land was found not to be incidental to the agricultural use, establishing an unauthorised mixed use amounting to a material change of use.

Judgments cited: Burdle & Williams v SSE & New Forest DC [1972] 1 WLR 1207; Murfitt v SSE [1980] JPL 598; Somak Travel v SSE & Brent LBC [1987] JPL 630; Newbury DC v SSE & Mallaburn [1994] JPL 879; Mansi v Elstree RDC [1964] 16 P&CR 154

The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every other appeal around it, with the full reasoning summary, the letter held on file, and the case law it applies.