Government inspector will rule on future of garage in Hempfield Road, Littleport, that planners say offers ‘an oppressive outlook’

The Planning Inspectorate will rule whether Anthony McFarthing can keep the garage at 16 Hempfield R

The Planning Inspectorate will rule whether Anthony McFarthing can keep the garage at 16 Hempfield Road, Littleport, after East Cambs refused retrospective permission for it. Front and part side. PHOTO: East Cambs Planning - Credit: Archant

The future of a garage – built without planning permission and described by one neighbour as making it ‘depressing to live here’ – is to be considered by a Government inspector.

The Planning Inspectorate will rule whether Anthony McFarthing can keep the garage at 16 Hempfield R

The Planning Inspectorate will rule whether Anthony McFarthing can keep the garage at 16 Hempfield Road, Littleport, after East Cambs refused retrospective permission for it. Side view.PHOTO: East Cambs Planning - Credit: Archant

The Planning Inspectorate will rule whether Anthony McFarthing can keep the garage at 16 Hempfield Road, Littleport, after East Cambs refused retrospective permission for it.

Neighbours complained they have objected each of the three times it was before planners and one claims “building of this massive garage on my boundary and 10 feet from the only natural light into my lounge is morally wrong’.

They won’t have to add additional comments since the Planning Inspectorate will make his decision by considering both the council’s view and those who made representations when it was considered locally.

Mr McFarthing first applied and was given permission for a garage but failed to build it in line with the approved plans.

The Planning Inspectorate will rule whether Anthony McFarthing can keep the garage at 16 Hempfield R

The Planning Inspectorate will rule whether Anthony McFarthing can keep the garage at 16 Hempfield Road, Littleport, after East Cambs refused retrospective permission for it. PHOTO: East Cambs Planning - Credit: Archant


You may also want to watch:


His most recent application proposed amendments to the roof ridge and eaves but the council ruled the plans “have no scale, there are also no elevations or floor plans”.

When the application was considered the council was told three neighbours lodged objections protesting about loss of light, an overbearing structure, rear windows contrary to original application, issues with roof angle and unsafe trusses.

Most Read

Planning officers who considered the application said it dominates a neighbour’s home “to an inappropriate degree”. They also thought it created “an oppressive outlook”.

In a design statement put forward by Mr McFarthing he argues there has been “some confusion as the point of measurement” by council officials.

He also felt he had done sufficient to cover elements of design and construction put when he was visited by a council enforcement officer.

Become a Supporter

This newspaper has been a central part of community life for many years. Our industry faces testing times, which is why we're asking for your support. Every contribution will help us continue to produce local journalism that makes a measurable difference to our community.

Become a Supporter