The chalet lay within a cluster of holiday chalets in a panoramic landscape setting near the edge of a grassy cliff top. Whilst holiday users would generate similar requirements for basic amenities such as rubbish collections, permanent occupation would generate more travel movements for schools, work, health and shopping. It would also generate a need for external storage and domestic paraphernalia which would be at odds with the tranquil holiday character of the area, an inspector decided. It would therefore generate unsustainable trips mainly by car and the chalet itself at 53m2 would not provide adequate internal living space for a three or four-person family when occupied on a permanent basis.
A further concern related to the possible erosion of the cliffs. The site lay in an exposed location and there was a five per cent chance that the site would be lost to coastal erosion within the next 15 years. Allowing occupation all year round would increase the risk to human safety and in the event of loss or damage, permanent residents would need support in finding emergency shelter, temporary housing or a new home. The council had suggested that if the appeal were allowed a temporary permission should be granted and this highlighted the unsuitable nature of a permanent residential use.
Inspector: Jacqueline Wilkinson; Hearing