Living in office

[John D v2.0]

I'm pretty sure conditions that require things that are outside the control of the property are unenforceable. There are loads of rules about how conditions have to be worded. If you really want to go ahead, consult an expensive planning lawyer about what you really have to do.
You might even find knowledgeable people on garden law web site. But their advice, like mine, is worth what you paid for it. A planning lawyer has a professional responsibility to be right.

 

[LukeB123]

From what I gather, it's not a planning condition that is being imposed, it's design issues. Sound to me like the access to the site is unsuitable for vehicular traffic due to visibility. The planners won't approve it because it's not safe (doesn't meet their policies, doesn't provide much of a visibility splay etc) the amenity bit is probably more so something that can be argued, where as if it's dangerous or not wide enough etc to drive a car past then that's the end of the matter unless it can be altered.

I was being tongue in cheek before when I said lower the wall - I know you said you can't. Seems the neighbour has a bit of a ransom strip.

 

[^woody^]

Sound to me like the access to the site is unsuitable for vehicular traffic

There is an existing driveway. That trumps any planning issue.

 

[LukeB123]

He's fine to carry on using that for the existing use of course.

However, If he requires consent from the council for say, change of use to holiday home, then he will have to meet their statutory regs, suitable access etc. It's probably archaic and a not really designed for cars.

That trumps any planning issue.

That's why I previously posted about submitting an application when the poster asked if there was anyway around it. A well reasoned application with a fall-back position could help.

 

[willmo82]

Thanks very much you guys
Very helpful