Appeal 6003220

The appeal is dismissed.

Where an application is made for a determination as to whether prior approval is required for development, the local planning authority may refuse the application where it considers that the proposed development does not comply – or that the developer has provided insufficient information to enable the authority to establish whether the proposed development complies with the conditions, limitations or restrictions that are applicable to such permitted development.

The main issue in this appeal is whether the proposed development would comply with the conditions, limitations or restrictions applicable to development permitted, having regard to Schedule 2, Part 3, Class Q of the GPDO.

Schedule 2, Part 3, Class Q of the GPDO, states that the change of use from buildings on agricultural units and former agricultural buildings to dwellinghouses is permitted development, subject to limitations, conditions or restrictions. [name].1 (a) – (p) sets out the relevant exceptions and limitations of the permitted development rights. The Council have only indicated concerns with regards to the limitations in paragraphs Q.1 (g) and (o).

[name].1(g) states that development is not permitted by Class Q if “development under Class A(a) or Class B(a) of Part 6 of this Schedule (agricultural buildings and operations) has been carried out on the established agricultural unit during the period which is 10 years before the date development under Class Q begins”. There is no dispute that two buildings were erected under permitted development rights in 2016 and 2019 which house livestock, machinery and straw, and that they are located within the established agricultural unit.

The appellant considers that the purpose of paragraph Q.1(g) is to prevent the misuse of Part 6 of the GPDO, to construct an agricultural building only to convert them to residential under Class Q. This matter however does not alter the wording of paragraph Q.1(g). It is clear from the submitted evidence that agricultural buildings have been constructed on the agricultural unit under permitted development rights during the period which is 10 years before the date development under Class Q begins. The proposed development therefore does not comply with the limitation set out in paragraph Q.1(g) of the GPDO.

The appellant has made reference to the Hibbitts1 case. Whilst this case refers to development under Part 3, Class Q of the GPDO, it specifically relates to the building being capable of conversion without complete or substantial re-building or, in effect, the creation of a new building, and the necessity to assess the extent of works required for a conversion. I do not consider this case relevant to the matter of paragraph Q.1(g) of the GPDO. The appellant has also referred to the appeal building having no agricultural purpose instead being used as a domestic garage. This matter does not alter my findings with regards to paragraph Q.1(g).

[name].1(o) states that development is not permitted by Class Q if “the existing building, excluding any proposed extension under Class Q(b) but including any proposed building operations under Class Q(c), would not be capable of complying with the nationally described space standard issued by the Department for Communities and Local Government on 27th March 2015 as read with the notes dated 19th May 2016 which apply to it”.

The Council details that the proposed development does not meet the requirements of the nationally described space standards as bedroom three, as shown on the submitted plans, falls short of the standards for a double bed space. The appellant does not dispute this matter and indicates that they would be happy to amend the plans to remove bedroom three. Amended plans showing the removal of bedroom three have not been provided and therefore I can only consider the appeal on the evidence and drawings before me. On this basis, I find that the proposed development does not comply with the limitations stated in paragraph Q.1(o) of the GPDO.

The proposed development does not comply with the limitations set out in paragraphs Q.1(g) and (o) and is therefore not permitted development under Schedule 2, Part 3, Class Q of the GPDO.

[name] have found that the proposed development does not comply with paragraph Q.1(g) and (o) and is therefore not permitted development, it is not therefore necessary for me to consider the merits of the proposal based on the matters raised in the conditions set out in paragraph Q2. of the GPDO.

For the reasons set out above, I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.