Re: Static caravan in garden - Public forum - Planning Advisory Service (PAS)
Open group
|
Started - July 2012
|
Last activity - Yesterday
Re: Static caravan in garden
Hi all, Very sorry if this is an old chestnut! I have a 35ft static caravan in my back garden, and am now told that I need planning permission. Under what legislation can a caravan be considered to be a structure requiring permission? I thought that the Caravan Act 1960 covered that? Also, as the caravan is less than 2m from the boundary fence of the property, I'm told that I unlikely to get permission due to the size of the caravan. Our lease plan clearly shows the boundary about 2m further west than it actually is. All advice gratefully received!! Brian
Brian. One of my favourite subjects! I have succesfully argued many times, and have the Lawful Development Certificates to prove it, that a caravan that meets the definition in the 1960 Act (as amended by the 1968 Act), sited within a garden, and used for ancilliary purposes (including the provision of additional residential accommodation) does not amount to development requiring planning permission. On appeal, costs have been awarded against Councils who have tried to argue otherwise! Mike
Hello Michael - Apologies if this has already been answered prior or I have asked in the wrong place - but would this still be the same if the property were Grade 2 Listed. We live in a very small thatched cottage and our 2 children are growing up - we need some space and thought of buying a static caravan so the children can potentially sleep and play in thier own space, and even possibly live there in the future while saving for a deposit on thier own mortgage. The caravan would not be visable from any other properties and we live in a very rural setting - our only neighbours would be a livery and our property is shielded by tall hedgerows and trees. We would of plocated the static home / caravan as far away from the house as possible and leave at least 2m from any boundary. Many Thanks in advance Sean
Hi Sean. The fact that you are in a Grade 2 listed building is irrelevent to the assessment as to whether any development will take place! I one got a LDC for the siting of a caravan in the curtilage of a Grade 2* listed building. Provided that the caravan is not used independently of the main house planning permission will not be required. Regards. Mike Hyde.Sean Buckingham:Hello Michael - Apologies if this has already been answered prior or I have asked in the wrong place - but would this still be the same if the property were Grade 2 Listed. We live in a very small thatched cottage and our 2 children are growing up - we need some space and thought of buying a static caravan so the children can potentially sleep and play in thier own space, and even possibly live there in the future while saving for a deposit on thier own mortgage. The caravan would not be visable from any other properties and we live in a very rural setting - our only neighbours would be a livery and our property is shielded by tall hedgerows and trees. We would of plocated the static home / caravan as far away from the house as possible and leave at least 2m from any boundary. Many Thanks in advance Sean
Hello Michael,
I have read through this thread and it has been very helpful. My issue is I think an odd one. I have a lawful development certificate for my current mobile home, it also covers an area with nothing on it, this was decided by the council from ordnance survey plans. At the time this was no problem. I now want to replace my old mobile home with a new one, however the best and most sensible place to put it is just outside the current lawful development area. I am happy to extend the area, or apply for planning, however I need to move quickly to be in a new home by winter. The old one was damaged in a recent storm and is now really beyond economical repair. The council have not been very helpful in this matter and I am worried that if we just place a new mobile home it will cause issues. We have no neighbours and have lived here happily and peacefully for 30 years.
Many thanks in advance for any help or advice.
Jane
You query seems very different to the old orginal post as your mobile home is NOT associated with the garden of an existing house, resticted by neighbours or assocaied with construction, ancillary use or letting, a new subject would probably get a much clearer response on how planners might respond .
Some of the advise above is relevant, you should for example have a copy of the certifcate and check what it was for and what is says and how big the red line area was.
Your unit can be replaced with same size that conforms with the definition of a caravan, facilities can also be upgraded but usuing more or different land should go via a planning application unless you want to risk doing the work and probably getting a certifcate some years hence.
From the councils point of view they will probably not want a second site adajcent to the one you have ie 2 overall.but might be pragmatic if the application clearly only extends a reasonable degree, is just replacing / upgrading the caravan and NOT creating a second site. Removing the existing old unit should be a sensible part of the application to head off any concerns about.creating yet another mess in a rural location.
They dont have to agree with your view that more land used is the most sensible and best option but should be pursuaded by reason and evidence.
I don't see why it should be. Provided it is in your garden and used for ancilliary purposes there will be no material change of use. Mike
The important word being 'ancilliary'. Often the thing with caravans is that they have all the services of a dwelling and so if occupied can be seen as independent residences.
hi have you sited your caravan, we would like to site one in our yard while we renovate a house, we would be living in it
The 1960 Caravan Act states that subject to the provisions of paragraph 13 of this Schedule, a site license shall not be required for the use as a caravan site of land which forms part of, or adjoins, land on which building or engineering operations are being carried out (being operations for the carrying out of which permission under Part III of the Act of 1947 has, if required, been granted) if that use is for the accommodation of a person or persons employed in connection with the said operations. If a caravan does not need a site license, you do not need to apply for planning permission.
thankyou, michael, would we be able to let it out when we have finished the buils or is it solely for us to live in while we do the work, it will not be seen from the road and our nearest neighbour is a mile away,,,,,,,
Kathleen. You would need to apply for planning permission to let the caravan because that would not be covered by the exemption in the 1960 Act (or any other exemption). Whether permission would be granted would depend on the policies in the Council's Development Plan.
hi sorry to bother you again michael but you are so quick with your replies it s great, do you know if we would have to pay council tax on the caravan and would they collect our rubbish please, many thanks
Kathleen - Council Tax and Refuse Collection are (thankfully) nothing to do with planning ... you would need to ask the Council!
Hi, sorry to add to this thread. But for financial reasons (Fathers business has gone bust) my parents have to sell their house to clear a large tax bill - over 60K. I have a very large back garden and have offered my parents to put a static caravan in our garden rather than move into our home so they still have their own independence and we have our own space. Being an only child I have no brothers or sisters we can discuss this with. The static will be connected to utilities and have a living room, bathroom, kitchen and bedroom but they will spend time in my home and also have meals with us etc although they will also have meals sometimes cooked in the static. Do we require planning permission for this? The static will be 30x13ft.
Anthony, The use of the caravan must be ancillary to the main use of the dwelling and must not be a unit of accommodation in its own right. The degree in which your parents use the house and the caravan is critical in this but there is a phrase in planning called 'fact and degree' which keeps former enforcement officers like Mike and myself in business. You could set out exactly what you want to do and write to your local council to see if they agree that it is ancillary. They may well tell you to apply for a Lawful Development Certificate and may say that your letter is a pre-application letter for which they will charge. You could form the view yourself that the use is ancillary to the dwelling and just do it and then argue the point with the council should anyone find out/object and the enforcement officer calls. At that point you would need professional advice. If this is a short term problem the process itself can take 12 months to resolve and there is also the possibility of a temporary planning permission if such permission were required. This may be long enough for your parents to resolve their difficulties and re-locate.
Hi. My apologies if I have missed an answer already but. Our daughter needs to move nearer to us as she is expecting her second set of twins at the end of the year. We live in an area of outstanding natural beauty on the River dart in a small village. We have a large garden and space to put in a 3 bedroom static caravan or sectional home. It would be as ancillary accommodation to the house with them sharing cooking facilities in the house. Ideally we would include toilet facilities in the unit. Hopefully it would be for no more than a year while they sell their house but the pressure is on to get them moved before the pregnancy gets too far on, Are we likely to need planning please Many thanks Charles
Hi Charles. The simple answer is no, provided that the caravan is a caravan, that it is sited in the garden and that it is used for ancillary purposes. It is this last proviso that usually exercises the minds of the planners! They will often assume that because the caravan is capable of independent occupation, that is how it will be used. I've just submitted another application for a Lawful Development Certificate for a caravan in a garden (and have not yet had one refused). By all means get in touch (you just need to Google me!). Regards. Mike Hyde
What would the planning fee be for a proposed lawful development certificate be for a caravan in the garden?
Since the caravan is use of land not development, I think the fee would be £192.50 (half the £385 change of use as proposed) does this follow other's experience?
Hi, This is very similar to the above questions,there is a mobile home in my parents garden which can be seen on google earth since 1999, it has in fact been there for at least 15 years.
My wife our dogs and I are about to become homeless and need to move there until we are sorted out.
The old mobile home is very dilapidated and we decided to buy something newer and better insulated. My mother being one of those people who wants to "do it right" went to the council to ask if it was ok to take out the old one and install a replacement. MVDC said, no, you need to seek planning permission. It was pointed out to them that when the original MH was put in the garden it was with the councils permission. They dug their heels in
Trouble is our home will go in the next few weeks and we want to have the new mobile home in place, long before a planning case can be heard.
Should I wait or just go for it?
By the by, I used to use it as office and bedroom in my batchelor days and eat and ablute in the house, I would want to plumb the new one in but it would still be for ancilliary use.
Any good advice would be gratefully received
Hi Roger. I'm having to make a couple of assumptions here, but hopefuly they are on the right lines? The first is that the caravan in your parents garden has only ever been used for ancilliary purposes, and has not been occupied at any time as a separate, self-contained, unit of accommodation. You said that you used it as an office and bedroom, which would be ancilliary. The second is that when you, your wife and dogs move in, you will not be so dependent on your parents, or more particularly the facilities in their house? If this were to be the situation, then I would on balance probably concur with the Council. Have they said that if you did apply, they would be likely to refuse your application? If however I am wrong in my second assumption, and you can demonstrate that in effect the house and the caravan will act as a 'single planning unity', then you should be able to have a Lawful Development Certificate issued (this would confirm that no planning permission is required'). It therfore all comes down to how separate the use of the caravan would be. If for example, it has no separate services, postal address, council tax registration etc, and you eat and use the facilities in the house on a regular basis, this would be the route to go down. Regards. Mike Hyde
Thanks so much for the response Micheal, your first assumption is correct but when we get to the second part. Firstly, as far as the council are concerned the old MH is dilapidated and needs to be replaced. we only went to them wanting to ensure that we can do the replacement without worrying about any repercussions.
[quote]it has no separate services, postal address, council tax registration etc, and you eat and use the facilities in the house on a regular basis, this would be the route to go down.[/quote]
We would still be using the new HM as an ancillary to the house, the reason I want to connect up the water and sewer is that My wife used to stay sometimes when I was a batchelor and hated my portaloo and hated going into the house at night to use the facilities there. The MH kitchen was never used in the past, it is not intended to use it now.
Our address would be the house address, we would contribute to the utility bills and share the phone line like in the past.
Regards Roger
Hello Roger. The basic premis is that you do not need planning permission to site a caravan (as defined in the Caravan Sites etc. Acts) in a garden provided that the use of the caravan remains ancilliary to the use of the house. There should therfore be no problem at all with you replacing the existing caravan with a new one. There should also be no problmem with the caravan being connected to the services, provided that these are shared with the house (i.e. not separately metered). It's also not relevent that the caravan is capable of indepedent occupation, it is HOW it is used (or is going to be used) that is determinative. Based on what you have said I think that you should be applying for a Lawful Development Certificate for the proposed siting of an ancilliary residential caravan. I've submitted a number of these over the years and have not had one refused yet! Mike
Roger ... apologies if I didn't reply to your last post. There are two types of LDC, proposed and existing. You could either apply for an existing use LDC, on the basis that there has been a caravan oin site for 10+ years, and that this did not need permission. If you got this you could then replace the old caravan with a new one without needing a further approval. Alternatively, you could apply for a proposed use LDC on the basis that you want to site a new caravan to replace the old one, and that becuse this will be ancilliary, this will not need planning permission. MIke
Michael Hyde:Hello Roger. The basic premis is that you do not need planning permission to site a caravan (as defined in the Caravan Sites etc. Acts) in a garden provided that the use of the caravan remains ancilliary to the use of the house. There should therfore be no problem at all with you replacing the existing caravan with a new one. There should also be no problmem with the caravan being connected to the services, provided that these are shared with the house (i.e. not separately metered). It's also not relevent that the caravan is capable of indepedent occupation, it is HOW it is used (or is going to be used) that is determinative. Based on what you have said I think that you should be applying for a Lawful Development Certificate for the proposed siting of an ancilliary residential caravan. I've submitted a number of these over the years and have not had one refused yet! Mike
Dear Michael, I have looked at the caravan site act and can see the exception for site licence for ancillary use but can you please point me in the right direction as far as 'planning permission is not required' regards Julie
Julie. Planning permission is not required becuse provided that the caravan is within the curtilage of the dwelling, and is not used other than for ancilliary residential purposes, there would be no development taking place, i.e. there would be no material change of use of land. It does not say this explicitly anywhere, it is just a fact! regards, Mike Hyde
Thank you for you help Michael, i was hoping that it would be written down in plain English so I could show the planning department. I think this is going to be a long drawn out process, it took them 5 weeks to answer my original request for clarification and they only came back with pay £80 and fill a form in. When I questioned this, and said that I believe mobile homes don't need planning permission so why would I want to fill in a pre planning application form, they said if it's a mobile home it will need planning permission. I then went on to mention that I had read about ancilliary use within the garden being except on a goverment document and they said they would have to go away and look into it. That was over a week ago. Julie
Julie. You should simply apply for a Certificate of Lawful Proposed Use or Development (CLOPUD) on the basis that the siting of your caravan does not need planning permission (provided that it is (a) a caravan, (b) within the curtilage and (c) used only for ancilliary purposes). The should find it hard to refuse, I've submitted loads and have never had one turned down yet! Regards. Mike Hyde MH Planning Associates
this is the reply from the council. If i go for a certificate of lawful development it shouldn't be as an out building should it? It also says that you can't sleep in it which is also incorrect isn't it?
As advised by my colleagues on 19th September, if you would like anything in writing relating specifically to your property a pre application enquiry form along with a fee of £144 would be required for written advice. I can however, as discussed on the 14th October provide general advise, not relating to your property, as to whether mobile homes are considered to be permitted development or not.
Please appreciate these views represent the opinion of an individual officer and do not necessarily reflect the view that might be taken by the Council itself. Consequently any opinion expressed will not bind the Council.
Mobile homes that are to be used as separate self-contained residential units would be subject to the grant of planning permission. In order for the mobile home to be classed as a self-contained unit, the mobile home would be used as habitable accommodation, and/or would have its own bathroom facilities and cooking facilities. If the proposed mobile home would be ancillary and incidental to the use of the main dwelling, in as much as it would not be used for overnight sleeping, and would not have its own cooking and bathroom facilities, then the proposal may fall within the permitted development rights of an outbuilding.
You have indicated that the mobile home would be used for ‘additional bedrooms’ which would be classed as habitable accommodation, being used for overnight sleeping purposes. As such, this use would not be incidental to the use dwellinghouse and would require planning permission.
.If after considering the above information you consider that the application is permitted development (would meet with the requirements of the permitted outbuilding and would be incidental and ancillary to the use of the dwellinghouse), you can apply for a certificate of lawfulness (LDP application). If the Council consider that the proposed building is lawful, a legally binding certificate will be issued to this effect.
Wow this unspecified LPA is going to charge you £££££s for non binding planning advice which is wrong in law..........! I`m with Mike, if its ancillary living accommodation as in its not a functional separate planning unit then you do nt need pp. Its down to fact and degree. If a family was to move in and live independently that is a different matter. if i was you I would hire MIke to take them on, after all he can produce examples from elsewhere to challenge the LPA.
Thanks Chris, looks like I will have a fight on my handsChris Weetman:Wow this unspecified LPA is going to charge you £££££s for non binding planning advice which is wrong in law..........! I`m with Mike, if its ancillary living accommodation as in its not a functional separate planning unit then you do nt need pp. Its down to fact and degree. If a family was to move in and live independently that is a different matter. if i was you I would hire MIke to take them on, after all he can produce examples from elsewhere to challenge the LPA.
julie smith:Thanks Chris, looks like I will have a fight on my handsChris Weetman:Wow this unspecified LPA is going to charge you £££££s for non binding planning advice which is wrong in law..........! I`m with Mike, if its ancillary living accommodation as in its not a functional separate planning unit then you do nt need pp. Its down to fact and degree. If a family was to move in and live independently that is a different matter. if i was you I would hire MIke to take them on, after all he can produce examples from elsewhere to challenge the LPA.
Just had another look at caravan site act 1960 and it does say incidental and not ancillary to main dwelling.
Also found these defernitions of the 2 words, so looks like bedrooms may not be covered by this act.
Planning Definition
There is so much case law examining ancillary/incidental it is difficult to briefly summarise – but it is along the lines of:
Ancillary (needs planning permission) = generally anything you (as a person ) could do normally in a standard house as built; e.g. eat, sleep, sit comfortably, pray, study, watch tv, shower.
Incidental (permitted development) = generally everything else. Including storage, swimming, bowling, gym, art studio, or something that can be classed as a hobby. An incidental use is “parasitic” on the primary use- it cannot exist without it. Also ancillary use can be incorporated as long as it’s subordinate to the incidental, i.e. shower room for gym or small bar area- these are seen to not materially extend the normal living accommodation at the property.
Given that Permitted Development rights are supposed to make life easier, the confusion over what you can and can’t do in outbuildings is horrible messy.
Before you embark on your outbuilding development we strongly recommend you make absolutely sure you don’t need planning permission.
Julie
The LPA have got it hopelessly wrong, but this is not the first time I've come across exactly the same bad advice. Starting from first principles, development takes place when either operations (building, engineering, mining or other), or a material change of use takes place. The SITING of a CARAVAN is not operational development and so the provisions of the Permitted Development Order relating to the erection of incidental buildings is simply not relevant. This is where the difference between incidental (storage, studio, sunroom) and ancilliary (part of the primary use, so including bedrooms) becomes critical, you can erect an incidental building as permitted development but not an ancilliary one! The only question to be answered in your case is however whether a MATERIAL change of use will take place. A change of use will not be material provided that the use of the caravan remains ancillary to the primary residential use. The fact that the caravan COULD be used as independent accommodation is equally not relevant, it is how it is proposed to be used that will form the basis of a Lawful Development Certificate application. As an example a client I recently helped had had permission for a domestic outbuilding refused because his dwelling was in the Greenbelt. Rather than appeal the refusal, with little chance of success, I submitted a LDC for a caravan. It was approved within 3 weeks, no questions were asked. He now has all the additional accommodation that he needs (in this case his mum was going to occupy the caravan and him, his wife and new baby the house).
Regards
Mike
Michael Hyde:Julie
The LPA have got it hopelessly wrong, but this is not the first time I've come across exactly the same bad advice. Starting from first principles, development takes place when either operations (building, engineering, mining or other), or a material change of use takes place. The SITING of a CARAVAN is not operational development and so the provisions of the Permitted Development Order relating to the erection of incidental buildings is simply not relevant. This is where the difference between incidental (storage, studio, sunroom) and ancilliary (part of the primary use, so including bedrooms) becomes critical, you can erect an incidental building as permitted development but not an ancilliary one! The only question to be answered in your case is however whether a MATERIAL change of use will take place. A change of use will not be material provided that the use of the caravan remains ancillary to the primary residential use. The fact that the caravan COULD be used as independent accommodation is equally not relevant, it is how it is proposed to be used that will form the basis of a Lawful Development Certificate application. As an example a client I recently helped had had permission for a domestic outbuilding refused because his dwelling was in the Greenbelt. Rather than appeal the refusal, with little chance of success, I submitted a LDC for a caravan. It was approved within 3 weeks, no questions were asked. He now has all the additional accommodation that he needs (in this case his mum was going to occupy the caravan and him, his wife and new baby the house).
Regards
Mike
Dear Mike
thank you once again for your advice.
Julie
Julie just came across this from the excellent planning lawyer Martin Goodall from 2011 see the third bottom paragraph:
Friday, 27 May 2011
Another curtilage query
If you have found this post by searching for “curtilage” on the internet, you may like to know that there has been a total of 7 posts on this topic in this blog – on 25 January 2011, 27 May 2011, 12 August 2011, 18 August 2011, 6 December 2011, 19 December 2011 and 2 January 2012. If you wish to display them all on the page together, just put “curtilage” into the search box at the top left-hand corner of this page (but NOT in the ‘Google’ or ‘Jeeves’ box above that).
As you will see from the note on the top bar entitled “Getting in touch”, you cannot communicate with me personally by posting a comment on a specific item in the blog, because I will have no means of knowing what your email address is, even if you include it when posting your comment. The only way of establishing contact is for you to send a separate email direct to me. Of course, I cannot give detailed advice without formal instructions, and that advice will have to be paid for on the usual professional basis, but I do respond politely to bona fide emails, even if only briefly.
An anonymous reader recently tried to seek my advice by leaving a comment on a piece I wrote a short time ago on “curtilage confusion”. It was clear from that query that the confusion continues, so I will try to explain the point again.
Without going into the precise facts of the case which was put to me, the questioner was concerned about threatened enforcement action in respect of the stationing of a ‘mobile home’ on their property which is in fact used solely for storage in connection with domestic stables on the property accommodating the owners’ own recreational horses. Both the planning officer and the questioner seem to be exercised over the question as to whether the stables, and the area immediately next to the stables where the mobile home is stationed, are or are not within the domestic curtilage of the house.
This, with due respect to all concerned, is irrelevant. In fact, in the case in question, it does not really matter whether the stables are within the same planning unit as the house, although from the details provided it appears that they are, being part of an 11-acre site, comprising the house, gardens and other land, stables, other outbuildings and hardstandings (etc.)
Even if the stables were not part of the same planning unit as the house, the stationing of the mobile home on the same planning unit as the stables purely for storage purposes in connection with the use of the stables would not amount to a material change of use of the land on which the mobile home is stationed. It is obvious that this is a purely ancillary use in connection with the use of the stables. There is clear authority for this proposition. The case I have in mind is Wealden DC -v- SSE ([1988] JPL 268). That case was concerned with storage for agricultural purposes, but the principle holds good for ancillary storage for any purpose. On the other hand, if the stables are not within the same planning unit as the house, and the mobile home were to be used as residential accommodation, then that would amount to a material change of use in respect of that (non-domestic) planning unit.
In the present case I think we can assume that the mobile home is stationed within the same planning unit as the house. If a mobile home or caravan is stationed anywhere within a planning unit comprising a single private dwellinghouse and the land enjoyed with it for domestic purposes, it can be used for any ancillary (and not merely ‘incidental’) purpose in connection with the residential use of that planning unit, e.g. to provide additional bedroom space or other accommodation, provided that this did not amount to use as a separate dwelling.
This is a point which planning officers just don’t seem to be able to get their heads around. The use of any existing buildings and the use of any part of the land occupied together with a single private dwellinghouse for any purpose which forms part of the domestic use of that planning unit within Use Class C3 is perfectly lawful, irrespective of whether the particular part of the planning unit in question falls within the more narrowly defined ‘curtilage’ of the house. Defining the curtilage is only relevant to deciding whether or not the permitted development rights granted by Part 1 of the Second Schedule to the GPDO allow the erection of a new outbuilding or extension in that precise location.
If the questioner recognises their property from the description given above and would like my further professional help on the matter, perhaps they would care to email me. It may take a reasonably firm letter from me to the planning officer to resolve the matter, but I am in no doubt that we can see the planning officer off in this case in fairly short order.
© MARTIN H GOODALL
This backs Mike and my views up
Chris Weetman:Julie just came across this from the excellent planning lawyer Martin Goodall from 2011 see the third bottom paragraph:
Friday, 27 May 2011
Another curtilage query
If you have found this post by searching for “curtilage” on the internet, you may like to know that there has been a total of 7 posts on this topic in this blog – on 25 January 2011, 27 May 2011, 12 August 2011, 18 August 2011, 6 December 2011, 19 December 2011 and 2 January 2012. If you wish to display them all on the page together, just put “curtilage” into the search box at the top left-hand corner of this page (but NOT in the ‘Google’ or ‘Jeeves’ box above that).
As you will see from the note on the top bar entitled “Getting in touch”, you cannot communicate with me personally by posting a comment on a specific item in the blog, because I will have no means of knowing what your email address is, even if you include it when posting your comment. The only way of establishing contact is for you to send a separate email direct to me. Of course, I cannot give detailed advice without formal instructions, and that advice will have to be paid for on the usual professional basis, but I do respond politely to bona fide emails, even if only briefly.
An anonymous reader recently tried to seek my advice by leaving a comment on a piece I wrote a short time ago on “curtilage confusion”. It was clear from that query that the confusion continues, so I will try to explain the point again.
Without going into the precise facts of the case which was put to me, the questioner was concerned about threatened enforcement action in respect of the stationing of a ‘mobile home’ on their property which is in fact used solely for storage in connection with domestic stables on the property accommodating the owners’ own recreational horses. Both the planning officer and the questioner seem to be exercised over the question as to whether the stables, and the area immediately next to the stables where the mobile home is stationed, are or are not within the domestic curtilage of the house.
This, with due respect to all concerned, is irrelevant. In fact, in the case in question, it does not really matter whether the stables are within the same planning unit as the house, although from the details provided it appears that they are, being part of an 11-acre site, comprising the house, gardens and other land, stables, other outbuildings and hardstandings (etc.)
Even if the stables were not part of the same planning unit as the house, the stationing of the mobile home on the same planning unit as the stables purely for storage purposes in connection with the use of the stables would not amount to a material change of use of the land on which the mobile home is stationed. It is obvious that this is a purely ancillary use in connection with the use of the stables. There is clear authority for this proposition. The case I have in mind is Wealden DC -v- SSE ([1988] JPL 268). That case was concerned with storage for agricultural purposes, but the principle holds good for ancillary storage for any purpose. On the other hand, if the stables are not within the same planning unit as the house, and the mobile home were to be used as residential accommodation, then that would amount to a material change of use in respect of that (non-domestic) planning unit.
In the present case I think we can assume that the mobile home is stationed within the same planning unit as the house. If a mobile home or caravan is stationed anywhere within a planning unit comprising a single private dwellinghouse and the land enjoyed with it for domestic purposes, it can be used for any ancillary (and not merely ‘incidental’) purpose in connection with the residential use of that planning unit, e.g. to provide additional bedroom space or other accommodation, provided that this did not amount to use as a separate dwelling.
This is a point which planning officers just don’t seem to be able to get their heads around. The use of any existing buildings and the use of any part of the land occupied together with a single private dwellinghouse for any purpose which forms part of the domestic use of that planning unit within Use Class C3 is perfectly lawful, irrespective of whether the particular part of the planning unit in question falls within the more narrowly defined ‘curtilage’ of the house. Defining the curtilage is only relevant to deciding whether or not the permitted development rights granted by Part 1 of the Second Schedule to the GPDO allow the erection of a new outbuilding or extension in that precise location.
If the questioner recognises their property from the description given above and would like my further professional help on the matter, perhaps they would care to email me. It may take a reasonably firm letter from me to the planning officer to resolve the matter, but I am in no doubt that we can see the planning officer off in this case in fairly short order.
© MARTIN H GOODALL
This backs Mike and my views up
Thanks Chris
Hi. I have a similar question ai hope is ok to ask here. ...I have PP for a holiday caravan on land I own (not in a garden of a domestic house I know), but I want to replace the static with something more modern, and water-tight; and quite a bit bigger than the existing static. Would I need to get additional PP to do this? And secondly would the replacement caravan have to be located in same area of land as existing? I know I should speak to the LPA but unfortunately I haven't found them very "approachable" so wanted some advice before having to go down that route. Hope someone here may be able to advise or point me in the right direction. Many thanks.
Hi Katie. Provided that there was no condition on the original planning permission stating that only that specific caravan could be sited on the land, and provided that the new caravan (and it has to be a caravan as defined in the 1960/1968 Caravan Sites Acts) is within the red line on the approved planning permission plan, you should not need to apply for permission again. MIke Hyde, MH Planning Associates.
Michael-Many thanks for your reply. I hoped that was the case, but is fantastic to hear that it is so. Thanks again.
hello again. I have another qu
estion about planning permission regarding siting caravans. As I said above there is PP for a holiday caravan on the land ...but I am unclear as to the situation re any necessary groundworks to site the caravan (it is quite sloping and some levelling and/or hardcore/foundations may be needed.
.
the land has an Article 4 direction on it (but not aware of any permitted development even without the Article 4 as not a house or farm etc) but not sure if I'd need further PP for any works even if minor. (all works would be hidden under area of caravan) Thanks
Hello, all
I wanted some advice on building a small home on a bit of land (someone wants to sell their garden, not attached to their home and has shared access to the street). The garden backs up to an open car park and there are neighbors to both sides. The garden is small as it measure 7.5 meters by 7 meters. I am not sure if I would get planning permission for building a small home, suitable for 2 people. Would I need planning permission as I have been looking at flat-pack homes, micro homes, container homes, etc.? Thank you kindly,
Daniel
Andrew Chalmers, modified 9 Years ago.
RE: Re: Static caravan in garden
Advocate Posts: 172 Join Date: 20/10/11 Recent Posts
0
Yes you would need planning permission.
I would check out first what planning policies if any specifically apply to this site. These will be set out in the Local Plan. This government had a real downer on garden development and infill because it was termed rightly or wrongly as "town cramming". As a result the plan may contain policies specifying where new housing is appropriate and whether garden development is supported or not and what criteria might be considered in looking at planning proposals. In addition look for any advice on line at supplementary planning documents or planning guidance that your local council Planning Department has produced around subjects such as space around dwellings, overlooking etc and how new developments relate to existing houses. Clearly this is not a big site. Many authorities will also have a space requirement for outside garden space. With only 49 sq metres to go out there isn't going to be very much and you may be required to have off street parking too.
I would contact the planning department for an informal chat to make sure there is a prospect of getting permission before buying the site.
Interestingly (?!) I just rang my local council to ask if I'd need planning permission to site a mobile/satic caravan whilst renovations and extension were being carried out on the property I've just bought. Their response was that if I was undertaking the majority of work myself then no planning permission required, but if builders were doing the majoirity of the work then yes! - odd??
Hi Mike, thanks for taking the time to respond, if I am reading this correctly the moving in of a replacement should not be an issue as It is not against planning rules for it to be there. As there will be no seperate metering or billing it will meet part of the ancillary criteria.
I assume that this advice :-
[quote]....should be applying for a Lawful Development Certificate for the proposed siting of an ancilliary residential caravan.[/quote]
is about confirming the legitamacy of the development whilst also making sure that when the time comes to sell the property it would go with a certificate to show that the mobile home is officially sanctioned.
I have been puting together an online planning case through the .gov planning portal, am I correct in thinking that I can apply for the certificate whilst still going ahead with replacing the old MH? Is the important thing that there has been "a" mobile home on the site for more than ten years even if it is not the same one?
Regards Roger
Hi, A bit of a follow on... We are looking at siting a static caravan in our garden for our son and his girlfriend to live in. It will be connected to services, but they will have some meals etc with us in the house. Our council planning department (Lincoln) have told me that if it is in the back garden, or at the side of the house, we will not need planning permission. However, we would like to put it in the front garden, which is quite large and is easier to access (we would have to crane it into the back garden. But have said that we would need planning permission to do this. Is this correct? Regards Garth
Simply put no. If it is not a building but a use of land it can go anywhere. It is only an ancillary building that you cannot put in the front. Ask them for their legal authority for their decision. Les
The Council seem to be confusing permitted development rights for the erection of buildings, with uses of land. The former are of no relevance if what you are proposing to do does not result in a material change of use of land. The most significant issue will be how independent your son and his girlfriend will be from the main house. You have said that they will have "some meals" with you in the main house. If that is the only functional link between the two then it may well be the case that you will need planning permission for the a change of use. Will things like services, bills, council tax etc. be shared? Will the caravan have its own postal address. I hope this helps? Mike