11/00713/F - Borough Council of King's Lynn & West Norfolk

231
for Gypsy & Travellers. The park home currently onsite does not fall within
Circular 01/2006 or planning permission 10/00200/F, as both only permit for
the purpose of planning permission, the use of land as a caravan site. For the
purpose of planning law a caravan is as defined in the Caravan Sites and
Control of Development Act 1960 and the Caravan Sites Act 1968.
8.2 It is pertinent to note that the development the subject of this report was the
same development subject to the first appeal, the decision letter of which is
dated 09 March 2007. In that appeal the inspector found that the
development on site was not compliant with the definition of a caravan in the
Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 both because of its
dimensions and also the conservatory and utility area which prevented it
being moved as a single unit. Therefore, the Inspector found that the
structure on the appeal site was not a caravan for the purposes of planning
law.
8.3 During the more recent appeal the same arguments were rehearsed, and the
Inspector also states in paragraph 4 that,
“In line with the previous Inspector’s decision, without extensions, it was not
disputed that the mobile home/structure/park home on the appeal site is not a
caravan for purposes of planning law as it does not fall within the definition of
a caravan in the Caravan Sites Act 1968 (as amended) having a width of
7.35m compared to the Act limit of 6.8m. When the conservatory and utility
area are taken into account, the overall structure would not be capable of
being moved as a unit”
8.4 In terms of the park home the same planning harm remains. PPS1 and PPS7
state that isolated dwellings in the countryside should be strictly controlled
and only permitted where they are justified in connection with an agricultural,
forestry or other rural enterprise where it could not be met within an existing
settlement. Saved policy 9/6 of the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan
1998, states that applications for residential mobile homes (park homes) will
be determined as if they were permanent housing and will therefore be
subject to the same policies and criteria. No evidence has been submitted to
demonstrate that the park home is required in connection with an agricultural,
forestry of other rural enterprise. The Inspector in the recent appeal
addressed this issue and could not see any justification for a park home in the
countryside contrary to policy.
8.5 The retention of the park home would result in an unacceptable consolidation
of sporadic development which would be out of character with an otherwise
rural landscape and as a result would be detrimental to the character and
appearance of the countryside as a whole.
8.6 Whilst it is noteworthy that the park home currently onsite cannot become
lawful for the purpose of Section 191 of the Act, the continued failure to
remedy the breach of planning control may affect public perception and
confidence in the planning system.