- Decision
- dismissed, 25 September 2026
- Decided by
- Planning Inspector: A Knight
- Authority
- Swale (South East)
- Appeal reference
- 6010408
- Application reference
- 25/502501/FULL
- Procedure
- written representations
- Development
- Temporary (three-year, retrospective) change of use of garden land to store plant, machinery and equipment
- Site context
- open countryside
- Green Belt
- No
- Framework applied
- August 2026 NPPF
- Determinative policies
- S5(1)(b), S5(4)
- Development plan policies
- Swale Borough Local Plan 2017 ST3, DM3, DM14, CP1, CP4
- Main issues
- suitable location; character and appearance
Summary
A three-year temporary plant and equipment yard in a countryside garden near Sittingbourne. Dismissed: the business was not shown to need a countryside location under S5(1)(b), available town premises were not properly discounted, and S5(4) exceptional circumstances were absent. The yard also harmed the rural character.
Issues and findings
- Transition. "The main parties have been given the opportunity to comment" (DL ¶3).
- Plan consistency. "I do not consider there to be any material inconsistency between the Local Plan and the Framework; In both cases, policy support depends on whether it is necessary for the business to operate from the appeal site" (DL ¶8).
- S5(1)(b): FAIL. "That he has such an intention confirms me in the view that there is no evident necessity for the business to operate from the appeal site" (DL ¶10).
- S5(4): FAIL. "The considerations listed above do not comprise such exceptional circumstances" (DL ¶24).
- Accessibility. "I cannot be certain, therefore, that locating the business at the appeal site would not result in a greater likelihood of car dependency than the alternatives" (DL ¶23).
- Character: HARM (DL ¶29, ¶33).
Planning balance
S5(4): the jobs and temporary nature carry minimal weight; no exceptional circumstances (DL ¶19–20, ¶24). Plan-led conclusion (DL ¶34).
What made the difference
The necessity test. The appellant's own plan to move within three years showed the location was not necessary, and the alternative-sites evidence did not explain why listed premises were unsuitable.
Transferable points
- S5(1)(b) "shown to be necessary" fails where the applicant intends to relocate anyway (DL ¶7, ¶10).
- Alternatives must be discounted with evidence of the business's size, cost and location needs (DL ¶11–14).
- Services near a site that make it sustainable for housing do not show a business needs to be there (DL ¶21).
- Temporary permission carries little weight without evidence of what will change (DL ¶20).
Policy findings
Policy codes are those of the National Planning Policy Framework (August 2026) unless a development plan is named.
| Policy | Finding | Weight | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| S5(1)(b) | fail | nothing inherent in the business needing this site; appellant intends to relocate within 3 years; alternative Sittingbourne premises not properly discounted (DL 7, 9-17, 25) | |
| S5(1)(j) | fail | no evidenced unmet need shown (DL 7, 25) | |
| S5(4) | fail | no exceptional circumstances; benefits (12 jobs, temporary nature) given minimal weight (DL 18-20, 24) | |
| Transitional(2) | neutral | no material inconsistency between DM3(1)(b) and S5(1)(b); both turn on necessity and alternatives (DL 8) | |
| TR3 | neutral | 13-minute walk to bus stops; no evidence on connectivity of alternatives, so no locational advantage shown (DL 21, 23) | |
| LP ST3/DM3/DM14/CP4 (local) | conflict | incongruous commercial storage eroding openness and rural character; surrounding commercial uses mostly unauthorised (DL 27-33) |
Key facts
- Business employs 12; office adjoins the site (DL 18, 22)
- Estate agent list of available premises; reasons for rejection unevidenced (DL 11-14)
- Nearby commercial uses largely unauthorised, enforcement commenced; assessed against authorised uses only (DL 27-28)
- Parties given opportunity to comment on the 2026 Framework (DL 3)
Sources
This note is one of the decisions behind the NPPF 2026 Navigator, which shows how each Framework test has been applied across all the decisions in the database. Also available as Markdown.