Development plan policy concerning new rural enterprise dwellings required evidence of a functional need for a dwelling and the economic sustainability of the enterprise. There was no dispute over the viability of the longstanding and well occupied park and no claim by the appellant that a manager's dwelling was essential to maintain its economic sustainability. He was retiring and wished his son to take on the role of manager.
Examining the functional need for the dwelling, the inspector accepted that having a manager/warden on site would benefit maintenance activity, provide an emergency response for elderly residents and contribute to site security. However, the test also required that no other dwellings were available within or adjacent to the site or a nearby settlement that could meet the required need. In this respect, the inspector could not see why one of the six vacant homes on the site or seven plots permitted to be relocated within the park should not be used. Although site rules limited eligibility to the over-55s this was not a planning restriction on occupancy and the inspector did not consider children would necessarily have an adverse effect on the amenity of residents. He dismissed the appeal.
Inspector: David Richards; Hearing