Reference number:R14/1383
Site address: Land adj to Rosefields, Hinckley Road, Wolvey
Description:Continued use of land for the siting of a temporary mobile home and the siting of a temporary building containing WC, shower and utility area for mobile home and stable for a temporary period of 3 years.
Case Officer Name & Number: Nathan Lowde 01788 53725
Description of proposed development
The application seeks the change of use of land for the siting of a temporary mobile home for a temporary period of 3 years together with the erection of a building containing a WC, shower and utility area for the home and stable for a temporary period of 3 years. The building will measure 6.07m by 3.6m, will have an eaves height of 2.4m and a ridge height of 4.2m. It will be constructed of timber with a profiled cladding roof.
Description of Site
The site is located in the Green Belt and comprises a parcel of land located between Rosedene Cottage and Rosemere on the eastern side of Hinckley Road. This part of Hinckley Road is characterised by small isolated groups of houses separated by small paddocks and fields. The opposite side of Hinckley Road is more open, comprising larger agricultural fields.
The site measures around 50m x 50m and is fairly flat with limited features. A 1.5m high concrete wall runs along the southern boundary to Rosemere and a conifer hedge runs along the eastern boundary.
Third Party Comments
Neighbours (5) objections
-Inappropriate development in the Green Belt
-No need or justification given that the applicant has only recently moved on to the site
-No very special circumstances advanced
-Chosen to reside elsewhere until very recently
-Conditions associated with the previous permission was never met
-Not in keeping with the locality
-Land should only be used for agricultural purposes
-Lead to Green Belt erosion
-Already a large transient community within the parish (Bramcote Barracks)
Parish Council objection
-Constitutes inappropriate development within the Green Belt , and requests that the RBC investigate if there are any exceptional circumstances
Ward Member Cllr Chris Pacey-Day
No objection
Technical Consultation Responses
WCC Highwaysno objection subject to conditions
Environmental Servicesno objection subject to conditions
Relevant planning policies/guidance
Core Strategy
CS1Development Strategy
CS16Sustainable Design
CS22 Sites for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople
Saved Local Plan Policies
E6Biodiversity
National Policy
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
Part 7 – Requiring good design
Relevant Site History
R09/0426/PLNErection of detached bungalowWithdrawn 7th July 2009
R09/0704/PLN Change of use of land for siting ofTemporary consent granted
a mobile homeuntil 7th July 2014,
Assessment of proposal
Government policy on traveller sites is now set out in Planning Policy for Traveller Sites (March 2012) (PPTS) which has replaced Circular 01/2006.
The Government's overarching aims include: that local planning authorities should make their own assessment of need for the purposes of planning;
-encouraging local planning authorities to plan for sites over a reasonable timescale;
-reducing tensions between settled and traveller communities in plan-making and planning decisions;
-enabling provision of suitable accommodation from which travellers can access education, health, welfare and employmentinfrastructure; and
-local planning authorities to have due regard to the protection of local amenity and local environment.
Local planning authorities should set pitch targets for gypsies and travellers which address likely needs. In producing their local plans they should:
-identify and update annually, a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide five years' worth of sites against their locallyset targets; and
-identify a supply of specific, developable sites or broad locations for growth, for years six to ten and, where possible, foryears 11-15.
The selection of sites should 'relate the number of pitches or plots to the circumstances of the specific size and location of the site and the surrounding population's size and density' and protect local amenity and environment. Criteria should be set to guide land supply allocations where there is identified need and the determination of applications which come forward.
In addition to the general guidance in Policy B of the PPTS, that traveller sites should be sustainable economically, socially and environmentally, there is specific guidance for sites in rural areas and the countryside. When assessing the suitability of sites in rural or semi-rural settings, local planning authorities should ensure that the scale of such sites does not dominate the nearest settled community.
Unlike Circular 01/2006, which stated that gypsy and traveller sites were appropriate in principle in rural settings where not subject to special planning constraints, the PPTS says that new traveller site development in open countryside that is away from existing settlements or outside areas allocated in the development plan should be strictly limited. However, whilst sustainability and accessibility clearly continue to underpin National Planning Guidance, the specific reference in Circular 01/2006 which states that "local planning authorities should first consider locations in or near existing settlements with access to local services, e.g. shops, doctors and schools" is not repeated in the PTTS.
Under PPTS Policy H, amongst other relevant matters, the issues to be considered in determining planning applications are:
a) the existing level of local provision and need for sites
b) the availability (or lack) of alternative accommodation for the applicants
c) other personal circumstances of the applicant
d) that the locally specific criteria used to guide the allocation of sites in plans or which form the policy where there is no identified need for pitches/plots should be used to assess applications that may come
forward on unallocated sites
e) that they should determine applications for sites from any travellers and not just those with local connections.
In respect of applications for permission made in the 12 months from the date PPTS came into effect in March 2012, if a LPA cannot demonstrate an up-to-date five year supply of deliverable sites, Policy H says that this should be a significant material consideration when considering the grant of temporary planning permission. Also under this policy LPAs are advised to attach weight to:
a) effective use of previously developed (brownfield), untidy or derelict land
b) sites being well planned or soft landscaped in such a way as to positively enhance the environment and increase its openness
c) promoting opportunities for healthy lifestyles, such as ensuring adequate landscaping and play areas for children
d) not enclosing a site with so much hard landscaping, high walls or fences, that the impression may be given that the site and its occupants are deliberately isolated from the rest of the community.(Policy H para.24)
Gypsy Status
It is accepted that the appellants and the occupiers are gypsies and travellers in terms of planning policy and falls within the definition of gypsies and travellers in Annex 1 to the PPTS.
Principle
There is a clear statement within Core Strategy policy CS1 that only where national policy allows will development within the Green Belt be permitted. This statement is repeated in Policy CS22. The development of gypsy and traveller sites is not one of the limited forms of development that may be considered ‘appropriate development’ in the Green Belt as stated in the NPPF. Policy E of the Planning Policy for Traveller Sites states that the development of traveller sites in the Green Belt is inappropriate development. As inappropriate development the proposal is therefore harmful to the Green Belt by definition.
The NPPF states that inappropriate development in the Green Belt should not be approved except in very special circumstances and that substantial weight should be given to any harm to the Green Belt. Very special circumstances will not exist unless the harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations. Where inappropriate development is proposed in the Green Belt, permission should not be granted unless it can be demonstrate that there are very special circumstances to justify a grant of planning permission that will cause is harm to the Green Belt.
It should be noted that the written ministerial statement by Brandon Lewis in July 2013 stated that the single issue of unmet demand, whether for traveller sites or for conventional housing, is unlikely to outweigh harm to the green belt and other harm to constitute the ‘very special circumstances’ justifying inappropriate development in the green belt. This has been confirmed in recent appeal decisions.
A supporting document submitted with the application highlights the strong local connection the applicant has with the Wolvey area and surrounding areas with the applicant’s daughter attending School at Wolvey and Hinckley and now has a job within the Hinckley area. In addition, the applicant highlights that there is a large unmet need within the Borough for gypsy and traveller sites, an unavailability of suitable alternative sites in the Rugby area.
Core Strategy Policy CS22 requires applicants to demonstrate that a sequential approach has been taken towards the selection of sites. Alternative sites must be able to provide suitable, available, affordable and lawful accommodation. The Council have discussed with the applicant and number of possible alternative sites, with reference to the following sites: i) Fieldview Park, Kirk lane Enderley, ii) New Beggers Field, Beggars Lane, Enderby and iii) The Gables, Bagworth Road, Barlestone. Whilst the application site presents its own challenges in terms being sited within the Green Belt, through discussions with the applicant it is not considered that these sites at present offer a suitable alternative to the application site. The applicants seek a further temporary permission to allow time to find a suitable alterative site.
Without a settled base the applicant and his family would find it difficult to gain access to health provisions and employment. Whilst the personal circumstances which apply in this case do not necessarily require the continued occupation of the application site, they nevertheless provide important weight in support of a settled base which the application site would provide, albeit for a temporary time period.
It is accepted that there is a significant need for additional sites and that the Council is currently unable to demonstrate an up to date five year land supply of deliverable gypsy and traveller sites, as required by the PPTS. Work on a Gypsy and Traveller Sites Allocations Development Plan Document (“DPD”) commenced in 2012 with a view to adoption in summer 2014. Two call for sites exercises were undertaken: one as part of the Strategic Land Availability Assessment; and another specifically for Gypsy and Traveller Sites. For the second call for sites correspondence was sent to the following; existing Gypsy and Traveller sites within the Borough; Gypsy and Traveller liaison groups; Warwickshire County Council and other bodies that may have landholdings such as Warwickshire Police, National Grid and Severn Trent.
This process did not lead to the identification of any new sites that were available specifically to accommodate the needs of the gypsy and traveller community.
The failure of the call for sites to identify any deliverable sites to meet the large unmet for gypsy and traveller accommodation in the Borough is one of the reasons why there has been a delay in production of the DPD. Another reason for the delay is the need to update the Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment Study following Lord Taylor’s review of planning policy guidance. The DPD will not be adopted in summer 2014 as originally intended.An updated Local Development Scheme (January 2014), timetables the adoption of the DPD for April 2016. It should be noted that the authority are currently out to tender on an updated needs assessment to inform the DPD. The production of the DPD will therefore not assist in meeting the immediate need for 41 permanent pitches by 2016 that is outlined in Policy CS22. This outstanding need currently stands at 26 pitches.
Visual amenity
The layout of the site with the mobile home to the rear and proposed building and a large paddock area along the road frontage coupled with hedgerow and tree planting helps maintain a more open rural appearance on this site.It is therefore considered that the site will continue to maintain a fairly open appearance, particularly along the road frontage. The siting of a mobile home of the site which reflects the character,scale and appearance of a small bungalow would not appear out of keeping within the streetscene given the surrounding neighbouring properties and in particular the neighbouring property Rosedene.
The proposed building is relatively small and low level, with a maximum ridge height of around 4.2m. This will be constructed of timber with a cladding roof. It is considered that the design and size of the proposed building are in keeping with the rural area and the impact on visual amenity is acceptable.
The area of hardstanding proposed for parking a horsebox is located between the proposed building and the boundary hedge and is relatively close to the approved position of the mobile home. This location ensures that the horsebox will be seen in association with these buildings and reduces the impact on visual amenity.
The impact on the character of the area and the visual amenity of the Green Belt is therefore considered acceptable.
It is considered that taking the above into consideration together with the temporary nature of the development that it would not have an adverse impact upon the visual amenity of the area in accordance with policy CS16.
Other Harm
One of the five purposes that the Green Belt serves is to safeguard the countryside from encroachment. The proposed development would result in encroachment into the countryside and as such conflict with one of the purposes of the Green Belt. However, it is considered given the layout of the development and its site coverage with a large proportion of the site remaining open and undeveloped, the extent of encroachment is ameliorated by these factors.
Openness is the most important attribute of Green Belts and any proposal should be assessed by reference to its nature, scale, bulk and site coverage. The proposed development would cause harm to the openness of the Green Belt, however, given the scale and size of the development, together with the proposed landscaping, and site coverage, and its temporary nature, the harm arising from the development upon the openness of the green belt, is not considered to be significant andwould be lessened by its temporary nature and as such would not endure.
Other Material Consideration
Beyond the sequential approach, policy CS22 requires the suitability of the site to be considered. The criteria set out within policy CS22 requires 1) The site is cumulatively appropriate and proportionate in scale to the nearest settlements, its local services and infrastructure; 2) Vehicular access into the site via the public highway is appropriate; 3) The site is capable of sympathetic assimilation into the surroundings; 4) If screening is required, suitable landscaping and planting will be provided and maintained by the developer; and 5) development of the site will not cause unacceptable nuisance to existing neighbours by virtue of noise and other disturbance caused by movement of vehicles to and from the site.
1) The site is cumulatively appropriate and proportionate in scale to the nearest settlements, its local services and infrastructure
The site is located within a 2km walking distance of the village of Wolvey which contains a primary school, a church, a Post Office store and two public houses. The site is linked to the village by a footpath along the Hinckley Road. The site therefore has convenient access to services without the use of the private car.
2) Vehicular access into the site via the public highway is appropriate
Following consultation with Warwickshire County Council Highway Authority it is considered subject to conditions that the proposed development would not be detrimental to highway safety.
3) The site is capable of sympathetic assimilation into the surroundings
As detailed within the report, it is considered that the development as proposed, would not have an adverse impact upon the visual amenity of the area in accordance with policy CS16.
5) development of the site will not cause unacceptable nuisance to existing neighbours by virtue of noise and other disturbance caused by movement of vehicles to and from the site.
Given the distance of the proposed mobile home and building to neighbouring properties it is not considered that the proposed development would have an adverse impact upon the neighbouring properties in accordance with policy CS16 and the core principles of the NPPF which seek to secure a good standard of amenity for existing and future occupants of land and buildings.