®Planning appeal decision
The north and west of Oak Meadows and Sunday's Stables, south and west of Lough Butts Wood and east of the M6, Carlisle, CA1 3GT
a) Unauthorised change of use of the land from agricultural to a mixed use of residential and open storage; b) Placing of approximately 24 caravans within the red line area on the attached plan; c) Bringing on to the Land and storing and depositing construction materials and equipment; d) Erection of fencing on the Land. e) Operational development relating to the mixed residential and storage use by creating hardstandings on the Land. f) Installation of electricity, septic tank and drainage services to facilitate the unauthorised use of the Land for residential occupation; g) Unauthorised engineering operations on the Land through the creation of a soil mound from imported materials and the laying of hardcore
- Authority
- Cumberland
- Appeal type
- enforcement · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- caravan-gypsy · Change of use
- Inspector
- Franks Z
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether there were any defects in the enforcement notices, and if so whether such defects could be corrected without causing injustice to the main parties, such that the notices are a nullity
What decided it
The notices omitted the statutorily required reasons for expediency (Regulation 4(a) and section 173(10)), rendering them hopelessly ambiguous and uncertain as to the planning harm alleged.
Judgments cited: Miller-Mead v MHLG [1963] 2 WLR 225; Koumis v SSCLG [2014] EWCA Civ 1823; Silver v SSCLG & Camden LBC & Tankel [2014] EWHC 2729 (Admin); Oates v SSCLG v Canterbury CC [2018] EWCA Civ 2229
The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.