The inspector found that the building had a harmful impact on the countryside in a relatively remote and unsustainable location. But he decided that the personal circumstances of the appellant, who was planning to start an organic farming enterprise, and his family justified granting a temporary permission to retain the building.
He judged that it would be irrational and unsustainable to require removal of the building when another might be required in two years' time once the enterprise was fully established. If the farm enterprise had not developed sufficiently by that time, he reasoned, it could be removed under the terms of the temporary permission.
DCS No: 42226554; Inspector: David Rusdale; Inquiry.
