In a recent appeal ruling Planning Inspector Chris Turner rejected plans for a house to be used by the manager of a fishery in the Derbyshire green belt on the grounds that there was no functional need for somebody to live permanently on site.
The appellants argued that someone needed to live on the land to ensure the security of the fish stocks because alternative methods were too expensive and would not provide the same degree of security. The Inspector noted PPS7’s advice that the protection of livestock from theft or injury may contribute to the need for a dwelling, but he did not accept that this was sufficient justification by itself. The Inspector commented that police evidence did not state that a dwelling was the only means of improving security.
The Inspector also doubted the business’s ability to afford the construction of a dwelling. He foresaw a significant risk that the business would fail, leaving a new dwelling in the countryside. He felt that this would increase pressure for residential use to become unencumbered and available for sale on the open market. As there was no functional need and the financial position of the business was unproven, he dismissed the appeal.