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

9.0 CASE PUT FORWARD BY THE OCCUPIER’S AGENT
9.1 Mr Wilson’s agent has submitted to the planning department that the site can
be sold to a person claiming to be a gypsy and a travelling showman. Mr
Wilson’s agent asserts that this person’s occupation of the site will
automatically comply with the terms of planning permission 10/00200/F, in
particular condition 2 & 3, see above.
9.2 In summary the Local Planning Authority disagrees with the submission that
condition 3 would be complied with. The Agents argument that the condition
was imposed purely for site licensing purposes is misconceived. Planning
permission was granted taking into account Mr Wilson’s gypsy status and
therefore special policies in Circular 01/2006 applied.
9.3 In addition part 5 of Schedule 2 to the General Permitted Development Order
which permits the use of land, other that a park home, as a caravan site, in
circumstances set out in paragraphs 2 to 10 of Schedule 1 to the 1960 Act.
Paragraph 10 refers to the use of land for a travelling showman…who is
travelling for the purpose of his business. It is understood that the occupier
intends to use the site as his permanent residence so cannot claim that
planning permission is not required.
9.4 It is therefore considered that a travelling showman is not exempt from the
requirements of condition 3.
9.5 It is also argued that a personal consent should be issued to Mr Wilson and
his partner for the lifetime of the consent. However, this option was open to
the Inspector at the recent appeal (and indeed the previous Inspector), and
the Local Planning Authority feel that given the appeal decisions, this would
be difficult to justify. Likewise the suggestion that an application for a variation
of condition 3 seeking to allow the existing structure to remain could be
submitted, is not considered sufficient reason to prevent taking action against
the unauthorised structure. This is because it would very likely be refused
given the appeal decisions and the harm described above.
10.0 REMEDYING THE HARM
10.1 There is a real need to uphold planning control and enforce material breaches
in the public interest (which corresponds with the clear conflict between the
development and the Development Plan and National Guidance). The options
before the Council include prosecution, injunction or direct action to secure
compliance with the enforcement notice in respect of the unauthorised
stationing of the park home and all items and services brought onto the land
in connection with its residential use. The merits of each course of action are
set out below:
Prosecution
232
10.2 Section 179 provides that criminal offences are committed where the owner or
other person having control of the land continues the prohibited activity or
uses, or fails to take the steps required by the enforcement notice. The