Adjacent to White House, Aston Lane, Sudbury, Ashbourne, Derbyshire, DE6 5HG
Derbyshire Dales District Council — appeal dismissed
- Outcome
- Dismissed
- Decision date
- 2 October 2024
- Authority
- Derbyshire Dales District Council
- Inspector
- Barnes D
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Casework type
- Planning Appeal
- Type detail
- Planning Appeals - Full
- Development type
- Minor general industry/storage/warehousing
- Appellant
- Mr & Mrs J Roobottom
- LPA reference
- 24/00066/FUL
- ONS LPA code
- E07000035
- Jurisdiction
- Transferred
- Link status
- Not Linked
- Start date
- 25 June 2024
Summary AI
This appeal was dismissed due to the proposed development's adverse effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding area, conflicting with LP Policies S4 and PD5. The appellants' failure to provide sufficient evidence to justify the development was a key factor in this decision.
PDF text
Adjacent to White House, Aston Lane, Sudbury, Ashbourne, Derbyshire, DE6 5HG — Derbyshire Dales District Council — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 17 September 2024 by D J Barnes MBA BSc(Hons) DipTP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 2 October 2024 Appeal Ref: APP/P1045/W/24/3343309 Land Adjacent to White House, Aston Lane, Sudbury, Ashbourne DE6 5HH • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr and Mrs J Roobottom against the decision of Derbyshire Dales District Council. • The application Ref is 24/00066/FUL. • The development proposed is the erection of an agricultural building. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Main Issue 2. It is considered that the main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the surrounding area. Reasons 3. Policy S4 of the Derbyshire Dales Local Plan (LP) concerns development in the countryside and refers to proposals for agricultural development and new agricultural buildings that maintain the landscape quality and character of the countryside being granted planning permission.
Adjacent to White House, Aston Lane, Sudbury, Ashbourne, Derbyshire, DE6 5HG — Derbyshire Dales District Council — Appeal Decision LP paragraph 4.28 explains that development within the countryside will be required to submit evidence to justify why such a location is required. 4. The proposed development includes the erection of an agricultural building in part of a field albeit sited adjacent to a group of other buildings associated with Ashton Heath Farm. By reason of the relationship to this existing group of buildings, and other near-by groups of buildings fronting Aston Lane, the appeal scheme would not adversely affect the open and verdant character of the surrounding countryside. There would not be a conflict with LP Policy PD5 provided the proposed agricultural building is justified as identified above. 5. At the date of the appeal application, the appellants owned about 1 hectare of land as identified on the location plan. Subsequently, the appellants have purchased a further 3 hectares which has not been identified. The intention of the appellants is to establish a market garden/small holding with the proposed building being used for storage and livestock.
Adjacent to White House, Aston Lane, Sudbury, Ashbourne, Derbyshire, DE6 5HG — Derbyshire Dales District Council — Appeal Decision At the time of the site visit, there were some sheep in the field within which the proposed building would be sited but the appellants have stated that the intention is to increase the number of livestock, including domestic animals. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate
Adjacent to White House, Aston Lane, Sudbury, Ashbourne, Derbyshire, DE6 5HG — Derbyshire Dales District Council — Appeal Decision At the time of the site visit, there were some sheep in the field within which the proposed building would be sited but the appellants have stated that the intention is to increase the number of livestock, including domestic animals. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate Appeal Decision APP/P1045/W/24/3343309 6. However, other than generalised stated intentions, the appellants have not provided any further details about how the proposed market garden/small holding would be operated and how it could, for example, be a viable enterprise if this is what is intended. Accordingly, the type of evidence required to justify the erection of a new agricultural building on the appeal site has not been provided and there is a conflict with LP Policy S4. The erection of an unjustified agricultural building in the countryside would also conflict with LP Policy PD5. 7. For the reasons given, it is concluded that this appeal should be dismissed because the proposed development would cause unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding area and, as such, there would be a conflict with LP Policies S4 and PD5.
Adjacent to White House, Aston Lane, Sudbury, Ashbourne, Derbyshire, DE6 5HG — Derbyshire Dales District Council — D J Barnes INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2
Main issues and findings
Character and appearance Against appellant ¶4
The proposed development would not adversely affect the open and verdant character of the surrounding countryside.
Character and appearance Against appellant ¶5
There would not be a conflict with LP Policy PD5, provided the proposed agricultural building is justified.
Character and appearance Against appellant ¶7
The proposed development would cause unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding area.
Housing land supply Against appellant ¶6
The appellants' failure to provide sufficient evidence to justify the development conflicted with LP Policy S4.
Policies relied on
| Reference | Weight |
|---|---|
| LP Policy S4 |
Determinative |
| LP Policy PD5 |
Substantial |
Site constraints from the Casework Database
Source
Decision letter, 2 pages, issued by the Planning Inspectorate on 2 October 2024 under the Open Government Licence.