A cluster of mobile homes near Tunbridge Wells has been ruled unlawful under Green Belt policy—marking a clear message on land-use compliance.
What happens when mobile homes pop up on Green Belt land – and a planning inspector says they must go?
The quiet surface of rural Kent has become a battleground between housing demand and land-use regulation. Near Tunbridge Wells, a group of mobile homes and caravans has been placed on Green Belt land. The local council objected, residents voiced concern, and now a planning inspector has delivered a firm decision: the homes must be removed and the land restored.
At the heart of the issue lies how the inspector classified the site’s occupation. Rather than being seen as temporary accommodation (which might have been more favourably viewed), the inspector concluded the units were “caravans” under the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act and constituted a change of use. That change, he ruled, caused significant harm to the openness of the Green Belt—one of the chief statutory protections under UK planning law.
Local voices had raised the alarm. They argued the mobile homes set a precedent for further settlement expansion, changed the rural character of the site and reduced amenity for nearby properties. The inspector agreed: the site did not meet the “very special circumstances” test required for development in the Green Belt. He therefore directed removal, restoration and an end date for occupancy.
Yet the story also has a twist. On adjacent land — next to a pub — revised plans for two mobile homes were recommended for approval by the local planning committee. That demonstrates how even with the same broad typology (mobile homes), the outcomes can diverge based on context, justification and the framing of the application (temporary use vs. change of use).
For planners, property owners and communities alike, the decision signals a couple of clear lessons:
- Classification matters: whether units are seen as “temporary accommodation” or “caravans” makes a difference.
- Green Belt policy is non-negotiable: unless very special circumstances are demonstrated, development causing harm to openness will be refused.
- Consistency and precedent: neighbouring sites, different land-use histories and application details can lead to different outcomes—even within the same region.
“The occupation of the site by caravans causes unacceptable harm to the openness of the Green Belt.” — Planning Inspector’s decision
From a broader lens, the case touches on tensions many local authorities face: managing housing need (including temporary accommodation) while protecting rural character and environmental assets. For the site near Tunbridge Wells, the inspector clearly weighted the latter more heavily.
