Outline permission had been granted in 2008 and authorised the erection of a dwelling, shop, store, offices and public toilets associated with the rural business. The dwelling had been completed to foundation level and the appellant stated that he was unable to raise a commercial mortgage to complete the development. The construction of ponds on adjoining land outside his control had been subject to enforcement action and the council had requested the submission of a hydrological and ecological impact assessment in order to assess the implications for the fishery. This might take 15 years before he could be certain that no adverse impacts would arise by which time he might wish to retire from running the business.
Enabling the appellant to provide more spacious accommodation by securing a residential mortgage would be of benefit, the inspector accepted, allowing removal of the mobile home which was currently on site. The appellant had also expended money on successfully challenging a planning permission granted for the construction of the neighbouring ponds which had directly affected the water within his lakes making the levels too low to stock fish. The quality of the water was also poor.
However, these considerations did not justify removing the condition since this would lead to it becoming available on the open market in a location remote from services and employment. The principle of restricting such development in the countryside had to be upheld, the inspector decided, ruling that the personal circumstances of the appellant did not outweigh this consideration.
Inspector Ian Radcliffe; Hearing