Appeal 6002219

The appeal is dismissed.

The site consists of a farm, farmhouse and holiday complex, including ten holiday cottages, some formed from converted buildings. In 2018, planning permission was granted for an extension to the main farmhouse to provide an events room as part of the holiday accommodation. The extension has subsequently been built.

The site is accessed from the A396 via a steep entrance and a long narrow lane. In granting permission, a condition was imposed restricting use of the extension to only those occupying the holiday accommodation or the farmhouse. This was to limit the volume of traffic using the entrance and lane. The appellant seeks to widen the allowable use of the room to include its occupation by non-residents, such as for local groups, or for organised events like fitness or art classes. The main issue is therefore whether condition 3 is reasonably necessary in the interests of highway safety.

The entrance off the A396 consists of a hard surfaced apron. In previous years, to improve the visibility of drivers leaving the site, hedgerow has been removed and replaced by open stock fencing. At one time the access was deemed sufficiently safe for the County Council school bus to drop off children at the entrance. More recently, a ‘ [site address] ’ nameboard has been relocated to avoid impeding the visibility of drivers exiting the lane.

The appellant’s visibility sketch plan shows that, at the site entrance, a sight stopping distance of more than 170 metres is available to the south, with 85 metres to the north-east, taken 2.4 metres back from the carriageway edge. However, although accompanied by a large-scale [name] map, the visibility plan is not drawn to a recognised scale and does not appear to correctly show the curvature of the A396.

My winter morning visit represents a snapshot in time. Nonetheless, I saw that when leaving the access, the visibility attainable to or from vehicles travelling southbound towards the access is restricted by a sharp curve in the road, and roadside embankments and vegetation. Based on the [name] map, the line of visibility north-east from the access crosses land and greenery on the opposite side of the A396 where it bends, and so visibility may be further hindered by vegetation growth in warmer months.

Even if the suggested sight distances are available all year-round, I have little substantive evidence of the average speeds of vehicles on the A396 here, and therefore whether these distances are sufficient. Accordingly, I cannot be sure that drivers leaving the site would have enough visibility of oncoming traffic, in time to avoid a collision. Consequently, on the evidence before me, an increase in the use of the entrance would potentially risk the safety of road users.

The evidence before me is that many holidaymakers now prefer shorter breaks and experiences, rather than weekly stays, resulting in reduced occupancy rates compared to pre-Covid years. To fill gaps, it is suggested that non-resident events using the room would be restricted to quieter periods, such as mid-weeks and outside of school holidays. Event bookings for non-residents would not be advertised until the preceding month, and accommodation guests would be offered places at events at reduced prices. The size of the room is modest, and the limited amount of space available for parking would provide a degree of self-regulation.

Even so, for commercial reasons, the business would no doubt seek to maximise its occupancy of both the accommodation and of the room. Levels of holiday occupancy may fluctuate, especially over the long term. Without condition 3, it would be possible, for example, for booked events including for non-residents to coincide with the holiday accommodation being busy, such as with last-minute bookings. Limitations on parking space would not necessarily prevent additional traffic from being generated, for example by local event attendees being dropped-off and picked-up later.

There are a few passing places along the narrow, single-track lane, and two cars can pass at the entrance. Most traffic to an event would be flowing in the same direction along the lane. That said, any vehicles travelling in the opposite direction, could result in queuing or reversing manoeuvres being needed, including towards or even within the A396 carriageway. This therefore adds to my concerns regarding the access and road safety.

Other rural tourist businesses may well have poor accesses and greater levels of traffic. However, I have considered the proposal and the circumstances before me. As such, on the information available, the removal of condition 3 could well result in a material increase in traffic using the access and lane, thus risking the safety of road users.

For the reasons given above, condition 3 is reasonably necessary in the interests of highway safety. Accordingly, its removal would conflict with policy AC-D2 of the Exmoor National Park Local Plan, adopted July 2017. This makes clear that development which would prejudice road safety interests should not be permitted.

The proposal would help boost the rural economy and employment. It seeks to further diversify the business, in a difficult market where there is far more competition. Nevertheless, as a matter of planning judgement, these benefits do not overcome my concerns regarding the safety of highway users.

For the reasons given, the proposed removal of condition 3 would conflict with the Development Plan, read as a whole. Material considerations do not indicate a decision other than in accordance with the Development Plan. I therefore conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.