Appeal 6004767

The appeal is dismissed.

During my site visit I observed the hay store to be in situ. A close boarded fence, approximately 1.8m in height, was present to the boundary with [name]. However, this differs from the application drawings. I have determined the appeal based on the plans before me and considered by the Council.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development upon the character and appearance of the area.

The appeal site comprises an elongated plot of land within the countryside. It is positioned to the south of [address], adjacent to [name] with agricultural fields beyond to its eastern and southern boundaries. To the north of the appeal site lies a detached dwelling and cluster of buildings adjacent to [site address] on the opposite side of [name]. Within the wider area there are sporadic buildings of various designs and uses. Given the relatively flat landscape these buildings can be seen for some distance from public roads and footpaths.

Amongst other things, Policy LP16 of the Fenland Local Plan 2014 (LP) requires development to make a positive contribution to the local distinctiveness and character of the area, enhancing its local setting, responding to and improving the character of the local built environment, reinforcing local identity and not adversely impacting on the streetscene or landscape character of the surrounding area.

The appeal site is relatively narrow and consequently, the building is positioned close to the road. The hay store has an industrial appearance with the inclusion of a tall, mono-pitch roof and roller shutter doors. Owing to the buildings position, along with its height and built form the store appears incongruous. In particular, the roller shutter doors contrast starkly with the external appearance of the remainder of the building, and the overall built form appears at odds with the surrounding rural character.

The dark external finish to its elevations helps assimilate the hay store into its surroundings, from long range views including views from [site address] . Nevertheless, the building appears discordant and prominent when viewed from [name]. A condition for additional landscaping would not meaningfully mitigate the identified harms.

My attention has been drawn to buildings and structures within the locality. [name] observed buildings of varying uses and form within the wider landscape, these are generally infrequent and form part of wider farmsteads. In addition, their external appearance differ from the appeal scheme before me. Moreover, I do not know the circumstances under which these buildings were erected which limits my ability to draw any meaningful comparisons. In any event, I have determined the appeal on its own merits.

For the reasons stated, I conclude that the proposed hay store materially harms the character and appearance of the area. This draws the proposal into conflict with the aims of Policy LP16 of the LP, as set out above.

The Council has no concerns regarding the proposed stable and fencing. From the evidence before me I have no reason to conclude otherwise.

The absence of harm in respect of highway safety is a neutral matter in the determination of the appeal.

The proposal would conflict with the development plan when read as a whole, and material considerations, including the National Planning Policy Framework, do not indicate that the decision should be made other than in accordance with it. I therefore conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.