Appeal 6002087

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted to widen existing access and cut back hedges to facilitate greater visibility when entering and exiting the site at [site address] [postcode] , in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 0293/24/FUL, and the plans submitted with it.

The development has already been carried out. I am therefore considering this appeal retrospectively.

The main issue is whether the drainage arrangements are sufficient to avoid surface water flowing onto the highway.

The proposal is to widen an existing access rather than introduce a new access. The appellant reports that the work carried out has restored and supplemented a pre-existing drainage arrangement. The previous ditches were overgrown and full of debris and would thus have been of limited benefit. These are now clear and have been supplemented with extensive additional attenuation areas, which are piped through the Devon bank to disperse in the adjacent field.

I visited the site in the winter. Although it was a dry day, my visit followed a very wet start to the year. From my own observations, the arrangements on site were working well. I could not see any notable volumes of standing water, and the attenuation areas would in any case allow for significant volumes of water to collect before they could discharge onto the road.

The Council suggests that previously the water discharged into the centre of the field. It is not clear what evidence there is for this and the appellant states that there has been no change to the drainage infrastructure. In any case, it is important to consider that the work was modest insofar as it was to widen an existing access rather than create a new access where new drainage arrangements would have been required. The evidence before me suggests that arrangements to address surface water drainage at the site have been carefully considered and considerably improved. Furthermore, and in the knowledge that the work has already been carried out and there was a lengthy period between the submission of the application and the Council’s decision, there are no reports of failure regarding drainage or surface water disposal in the submissions.

A requirement to submit an assessment of flow rates or any further information is disproportionate and unnecessary owing to the modest scale of the work, and my observations of an arrangement that appears to be adequate.

In summary, the drainage arrangements are sufficient to avoid surface water flowing onto the highway. The work is therefore in accordance with Policy DEV35 of the Plymouth & South West Devon Joint Local Plan 2014-2034, which seeks to ensure that development does not increase flood risk and minimises water run-off.

The Parish Council has objected on the basis that this is a new access. The work carried out was however to widen an existing access, and the Council made its decision on that basis, so whether the access is justified or results in additional traffic are not relevant matters.

The Council has not suggested any conditions that it considers to be necessary if the appeal is allowed. As the work has already been carried out there is no need for the usual time limit condition. I am satisfied that no additional information is required to make the work acceptable, and no conditions are necessary to maintain any aspect of the work or retain any element so that the work that has been carried out continues to be acceptable.

For the reasons given above the appeal should be allowed.