Report and appendices published Tuesday 2 June 2020.

The Cabinet Member for Planning introduced the report and explained that the policy sought to give guidelines and standards on planning applications that came forward on park homes. He explained that the policy would support housing options for the elderly, which was currently lacking in SBC’s Local Plan, but would be addressed as part of the new Local Plan.

The Cabinet Member for Environment supported a policy on park homes but suggested there should be more detail in the policy.  He raised concern about how the policy might contrast with a breach of 12 month occupancy of caravans in Planning regulations.  The Cabinet Member for Environment also raised energy efficiency issues and said that many residents of park homes were in fuel poverty and he hoped to see the same British Standards on energy efficiency for houses placed on park homes.

Councillor Cameron Beart had concerns over the implications from the policy which he said went further than those listed in the report and said that the policy might just add housing numbers onto the Council’s lack of a 5 year supply. He highlighted contradictions in the policy and reports circulated, and asked how much weight the policy would be given in future? Councillor Beart said there would be a detrimental impact to tourism on the Isle of Sheppey in implementing the policy and raised concerns over the sustainability of residential parks in areas of poor transport links and facilities.  He also said that park owners might need to reduce the number of units on their site in order to comply with standards which might cause homeless issues.

The Leader explained that it was an evolving policy, which would be discussed at Full Council, and reminded Members that the policy would be Borough-wide, not just the Isle of Sheppey.

The Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing said that her initial concerns had been addressed and she praised the good design of other park homes throughout the Borough. She said that the Council needed to consider different cohorts of residents and their housing needs.

The Cabinet Member for Housing highlighted the proposals at paragraph 3.2 of the report and said that the policy was not an alternative to affordable housing but was another product to assist those in the Borough with specific needs.

In supporting the policy, Councillor Benjamin A Martin warned against creating brownfield sites or inadequate park homes for the future.

The Cabinet Member for Economy and Property spoke in support of the proposal to provide a wide choice of housing for residents in the Borough.

The Cabinet Member for Planning reminded Members that without the policy, applications could still be made, but there would be no guidance to judge against.  He explained that the policy was always intended to be Borough-wide.

Recommended:

(1)  That the Interim Planning Policy as set out in paragraph 3.2 is adopted as a material planning consideration.