The appellants proposed to graze 30 sheep on the 2ha site and asserted that that this would necessitate somebody living permanently in the caravan.
But the inspector found their evidence inadequate. It failed to justify a need for the caravan or to prove that the enterprise was planned on a sound financial footing, he ruled.
He accepted the council's contention that the appellants' evidence could at best be described as negligible and at worst derisory, relying on selective quotes from national planning guidance on siting caravans for agricultural workers. In his view, the scheme was a clear attempt to abuse planning concessions for agricultural dwellings in the countryside. The appeal was without merit and flew in the face of established countryside policies and this justified a full award of costs to the council, he ruled.
DCS No: OT100-044-808; Inspector: John Davies; Inquiry.