Appeal 6003708

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for retention of existing gate to provide access to paddock land at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, reference MO/2025/0837/PLA, subject to the following

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing numbers PL01A, PL02A, and PL03A.

The gate hereby permitted shall not be used by vehicles unless and until the vehicular access to [site address] has been provided with visibility zones in accordance with the details shown on drawing no PL03A. Thereafter the visibility zones shall be maintained and kept clear of any obstruction over 0.6 metres high.

Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved drawings, no hardstanding materials shall be laid other than in complete accordance with details that have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

Within three months of the development hereby permitted, details of additional hedgerow planting shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The additional hedgerow planting shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details in the next planting season and maintained thereafter.

The application form states that the development was commenced in August 2019 but has not yet been completed. On my site visit, I observed a gate that was broadly in accordance with the gate shown on the submitted plans. However, the bell mouth I observed was grassed over and I did not observe the bare substrate indicated on the plans, even though it is referred to in the evidence as already laid. In this circumstance, I have considered the appeal as part-retrospective, as was indicated on the application form. I have based my assessment on the submitted information as well as my own observations of the site and the surroundings.

The main issue is the effect of the development on the character of the landscape and the countryside.

The appeal site lies within the countryside outside of the Green Belt. As a narrow winding lane enclosed by hedgerows, [site address] shares many of the key characteristics of the Wooded Weald Landscape Character Area (LCA)1 in which it sits. These features, combined with the prevalence of fields and paddocks and the sparsity of buildings, gives the area a distinctly rural character that has intrinsic value and beauty that should be recognised in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework). On my site visit, I observed that gated openings form part of the established character of [site address] and the wider area. The high quality of the landscape is recognised through its inclusion within the locally designated Area of [name] (AGLV).

Policy EN2 of the Mole Valley Local Plan 2020-2039 ([name] 2024) (LP) seeks to protect the character of the countryside beyond the Green Belt by limiting the forms of development that are deemed acceptable. As a non-residential development, the development falls to be considered under Paragraph 3 e iii of Policy EN2, which permits such development where a rural location is necessary and where factors in favour of the development clearly outweigh any harm to the rural and undeveloped character of the countryside.

The gate provides access to a paddock located in the countryside and, therefore, a rural location is necessary. Whilst there is an additional access to the paddock located closer to [site address] , the paddock is large and the appeal gate is located to provide more direct and convenient access to its southern and central parts via the road. There are, therefore, some operational benefits through the provision of this second gate, and it negates the need for vehicles to travel over the grassland within the paddock causing unnecessary damage.

The five-bar metal gate is similar in size, design and materials to other field gates I observed in the area. Indeed, its appearance is typical of field gates that are commonly found in the countryside, and its character is therefore consistent with that of the rural environment in which it is sited. The hardstanding area would be modest in size, leading to the loss of only a small area of grass verge and the hardstanding materials could be secured through a condition to ensure they would be appropriate to the locality. Taking these factors together, the completed development would be discrete, and it would lack prominence in views from the road and the surrounding area.

Photographs show that the hedgerow was significantly damaged by a fallen tree many years ago. In all reasonable likelihood, this damage necessitated most of the removals that have occurred. However, even if some hedgerow was removed to facilitate the opening, the total gap is no wider than would have been necessary to provide the gated entrance, and it represents a small proportion of the hedgerow 1 As described in the Mole Valley Local Plan Landscape SPD overall, which retains its long length along most of this part of [site address] . Therefore, I am satisfied that no hedgerow has been removed without justification. Furthermore, the appellant proposes to undertake additional hedgerow planting, which could be delivered on land within the appellant’s control and secured through condition. This would mitigate the loss of hedgerow that has occurred and would enhance the boundary in accordance with Policy EN9 of the LP.

Overall, given the small-scale of the scheme and its consistency in style with other field accesses in the wider area, the lane would retain its verdant, rural character in-keeping with the profile of the [name], and it would cause no harm to the landscape character of the AGLV. Consequently, there has been and would be no harm to the character of the countryside arising through the appeal scheme.

It follows that there would be no conflict with Policies EN4, EN8, and EN9 of the LP which, taken together, seek to protect the rural character and scenic beauty of the countryside and the AGLV and to safeguard existing hedgerows from unnecessary loss. Furthermore, given the absence of harm to the rural and undeveloped character of the countryside, the benefits of the development and its need for a rural location bring it into accordance with the forms of development permitted in this location through Policy EN2 of the LP.

Permission has previously been sought for an access to the paddock from [site address] ; and I am mindful of the concerns expressed that the access may be intended for purposes unrelated to the management of the land. However, I have assessed the scheme on the basis upon which it was submitted, which is to provide access to paddock land. Should it appear to the Council that there has or comes to be a breach of planning control relating to the use of the gate, it would have the power to consider enforcement action if it deemed it expedient to do so.

I have attached a condition to define the permitted drawings to provide certainty. A condition securing visibility at the site entrance is necessary in the interests of highway safety. Conditions to secure details of hardstanding materials and hedgerow planting are required to protect and enhance the character of the area.

The PPG advises that conditions restricting the future use of permitted development rights or changes of use may not pass the test of reasonableness or necessity. In this instance, the Council’s suggested condition that limits the use of the gate lacks clear justification and, therefore, it would be unnecessary and unreasonable, and it has not been imposed.

For the reasons given above the appeal should be allowed.