Loophole means ‘monstrosity’ that’s been refused planning is set to stay for two years

Olympian Louis Smith
TEMPORARY’: The structure erected by Ability Plumbing in Southborough

The structure, which was refused planning permission last year, could now end up staying up just as long as if it been granted permission in the first place due to a loophole.

As the Times reported last year, residents of Bedford Road in Southborough were shocked to wake up last May to a large scaffolded structure, covered with a corrugated roof and plastic sheeting at the sides.

Ten months on and the structure is still blighting their lives, despite Ability Heating and Plumbing in London Road being told by town planners to take it down.

After neighbours complained about the structure last year, which they have compared to an ‘aircraft hangar’, the plumbing firm applied for retrospective planning permission for a ‘part covered storage for business’ in July.

The application was rejected by Tunbridge Wells Borough Council (TWBC) in September and the company was told they could appeal within six months.

A legal quirk means that the structure can stay in place until an appeal is heard by the government’s Planning Inspectorate.

But the latest Planning Inspectorate timescales show that appeals can take an average of 32 weeks to be decided for written appeal, or over a year – 72 weeks – if there is a hearing.

This could mean the Bedford Road neighbours could end up enduring the ‘monstrosity’ for more than two years – the length of time on the original planning application was also two years.

“It’s still there, I’m afraid,” one resident told the Times last week, adding that there was also a lot of noise and disruption from the motion-sensor installed in the temporary structure.

“Lights are coming on and off all night. Cats trigger them, and foxes. It’s just a horrendous monstrosity,” she said. “Who on earth in their right mind would put something like that up and think he wouldn’t upset anybody?”

The owner of Ability Heating and Plumbing, Daniel Moon, told the Times that an appeal application has now been sent to the Planning Inspector.

He said: “The application was for a temporary period of two years. As I said before, we have outgrown the property and are looking for a larger industrial unit.”

In the meantime, he explained, the structure had allowed the business to ‘work at a safe distance while benefitting from the outside air, lowering the risk of Covid spread.’

“If we find a new premises the structure will come down anyway,” he said.

Asked by the Times whether the structure would come down after the two-year period even if there is no planning decision, Mr Moon said: “It’s most likely, however it’s dependent on whether or not we move premises.”

By Victoria Roberts

Share this article

Recommended articles

Search

Please enter a search term below.

Subscribe To Our Newsletter