APPLICATION: MA/10/1522 Date: 1 September 2010 Received: 13 September 2010
|
APPLICANT: |
Ms K Dignam |
|
|
|
|
LOCATION: |
OAK TREE FARM, LENHAM ROAD, HEADCORN, ASHFORD, KENT, TN27 9LG |
|
PARISH: |
Headcorn |
|
|
|
|
PROPOSAL: |
Retrospective planning application for the change of use of land from agriculture to mixed use for agriculture, keeping of horses, the stationing of two mobile homes for residential use and storage of one touring caravan with operational development being hard standing, paths, decking, fencing, entrance gates, cess tanks, sheds, greenhouse and horse shelters as shown on site location plan, site layout plan, and two photographs received 3 September 2010. |
|
AGENDA DATE:
CASE OFFICER: |
6th June 2013
Joanne Alexander |
The recommendation for this application is being reported to Committee for decision because:
● it is contrary to views expressed by the Parish Council
1. POLICIES
· Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000: ENV6, ENV26, ENV28, ENV34, ENV46
· Village Design Statement: N/A
· Government Policy: National Planning Policy Framework (2012), Planning Policy for Traveller Sites (2012)
2. HISTORY
Planning History
MA/09/0684 – full planning permission for the stationing of 2 no. mobile homes for residential purposes, storage of 1 no. touring caravan with associated works and keeping of horses, including hardstanding, boundary treatment, septic tank and 6 no outbuildings for utility/storage and animal shelters – REFUSED
MA/05/0739 – change of use of land to residential and stationing of 1 no. mobile home – REFUSED – APPEAL DISMISSED Jan 2006
MA/95/0418 – change of use of land from agricultural to land for the stationing of a caravan, creation of a hardstanding and siting of a hut – REFUSED – APPEAL DISMISSED
Enforcement History
There have been various investigations into the residential occupation of the land and the operational development. Prior to the personal circumstances of the occupant changing, authorisation was given to consider prosecution action in respect of failure to comply with a historic Enforcement Notice. This action is held in abeyance pending the outcome of this current application.
There are a total of 5 enforcement notices on the site issued between 1991 and 1994.
3. CONSULTATIONS
3.1 Parish Council – Headcorn Parish Council wish to see the application refused on the following grounds:
- the site is within the Wealden special landscape area … and the placing of two caravans and ancillary building would be harmful to the countryside
- overdevelopment of the site … the British Horse Society recommends that each horse have a minimum of 1 hectare of grazing. The area for grazing for both horses and chickens will become weed invested and muddy and will have an adverse affect on the animals as well as on the character and appearance of the countryside. The site is visible from footpath KH331B
- will result in a further consolidation of development in the Lenham Road which effectively creates a ribbon development. There is now a very high proportion of gypsy pitches along Lenham Road which now clearly outweighs the number of settled residential properties.
- will not be well served by public transport and transport to facilities would rely on use of the motor car – not a sustainable situation.
- two of the grandchildren are not minors and should therefore no longer be deemed as being dependants
- previous application MA/05/0739 was refused on visibility splays. The gates to the entrance are not traditional and are out of keeping with the countryside.
3.2 Environment Agency – no comment, noting that the application has a low environmental risk.
3.3 Environmental Health – Grant approval subject to comments
3.4 KCC Highways – raise no objection
4. REPRESENTATIONS
4.1 Neighbours – no responses received
4.2 CPRE – 2 mobile homes for residential purposes would be inappropriate along with the decking, sheds, essentially domestic paraphernalia. The development would harm the character and appearance of the countryside within the Low Weald SLA, especially as they would be among may other gypsy/traveller residential caravan settlements in a small area. The site is not convenient for regular attendance (by the grandchildren) in Chatham except by private car, which is not a sustainable situation. Pasture deterioration by the grazing of animals on the site would have an adverse effect on the character and appearance of the countryside.
5. CONSIDERATIONS
5.1 Site Description
5.1.1 The application site relates to a parcel of land on the east side of Lenham Road within the parish of Headcorn. The site, for the purposes of planning, is located within the open countryside and in an area designated as part of the Low Weald Special Landscape Area. Public footpath KH331B runs parallel to the site to the south east, approximately 200 metres from the site boundary.
5.1.2 The site is generally flat in nature and extends approximately 65m back from Lenham Road. The frontage to Lenham Road is approximately 25m in width. There is a relatively large pond located in the central portion of the site. There is a sparse mixed hedge to the front of the site, with an amount of mature vegetation to the south eastern boundary and a fairly well established fir hedge to the southern boundary.
5.1.3 The site is open to farmland to the north and east, and bounds a gypsy site known as ‘Three Acres’ to the south east which has a temporary, personal permission. Adjacent to this to the south is a further gypsy site known as ‘Greenacres’ which was given permanent, personal permission at appeal (under MA/05/0518) for one caravan, but has more recently been given permission for 7 caravans on a temporary and personal basis for the new owner. There is a track to the western side of Greenacres which leads to a further gypsy site known as ‘Long Lane’ which has permission on a personal and temporary basis. On the opposite side of the road there is another gyspy site known as ‘The Meadows’ and behind this a large temporary gyspy site for up to 30 caravans. There are other gypsy sites within the vicinity in Lenham Road as well as sporadic permanent development, including residential.
5.2 Proposal
5.2.1 The application is retrospective and seeks permission for the change of use of land from agriculture to mixed use for agriculture, keeping of horses, the stationing of two mobile homes for residential use and storage of one touring caravan. The application also seeks to regularise the operational development being hard standing, paths, decking, fencing, entrance gates, cess tanks, sheds, greenhouse and horse shelters.
5.3 Principle of Development
5.3.1 There are no saved Local Plan Policies that relate directly to this type of development. Policy ENV28 of the Local Plan relates to development in the countryside stating that:
“Planning permission will not be given for development which harms the character and appearance of the area or the amenities of surrounding occupiers”
ENV28 then outlines the types of development that can be permitted. This does not include gypsy development as this was previously covered under housing Policy H36 but this is not a ‘saved’ policy.
5.3.2 A key consideration in the determination of this application is central Government guidance contained with ‘Planning Policy for Traveller Sites’ (PPTS) published in March 2012. This places a firm emphasis on the need to provide more gypsy sites, supporting self-provision and acknowledging that sites are likely to be found in rural areas.
5.3.3 Work on the Local Plan is progressing; however there is, as yet, no adopted Local Plan. Local authorities have the responsibility for setting their own target for the number of pitches to be provided in their areas in their Local Plans. To this end Maidstone Borough Council, in partnership with Sevenoaks District Council procured Salford University Housing Unit to carry out a revised Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment (GTAA). The GTAA concluded the following need for pitches over the remaining Local Plan period:-
Oct 2011-March 2016 105 pitches
April 2016- March 2021 25 pitches
April 2021- March 2026 27 pitches
April 2026 – March 2031 30 pitches
Total Oct 2011 – March 2031 187 pitches
These figures were agreed by Cabinet on the 13th March 2013 as the pitch target to be included in the next consultation version of the Local Plan.
5.3.4 Draft Policy CS12 of the Regulation 18 version of the Local Plan approved by Cabinet on 13th March 2013 that the Borough need for gypsy and traveller pitches will be addressed through the granting of permanent planning permissions and through the allocation of sites.
5.3.5 The timetable for the Local Plan’s adoption is July 2015.
5.3.6 Issues of need are dealt with below but, in terms of broad principles Central Government Guidance clearly allow for gypsy sites to be located in the countryside as an exception to the general theme of restraint.
5.4 Gypsy Status
5.4.1 Annex 1 of the PPTS defines gypsies and travellers as:-
“Persons of nomadic habit of life whatever their race or origin, including such persons who on grounds only of their own or their family’s or dependants’ educational or health needs or old age have ceased to travel temporarily or permanently, but excluding members of an organised group of travelling show people or circus people travelling together as such.”
5.4.2 The application confirms that Mrs Dignam is an Irish Traveller born in Dublin. She has been living on the site since 2005, and is in her mid 60’s. She lived on the site with her partner, her daughter and her daughters 3 children until 2009 when unexpectedly her partner and daughter both passed away. She now resides on the site with her three grandchildren. Much of Mrs Dignams family remain in Ireland. The applicant’s three grandchildren were brought up by their grandmother for long periods due to their mother’s health, although have lived on and off in housing when their mother was alive; and in their older years stopped on the application site at weekends. Since their mothers death in 2009, they have been residing on the site with Mrs Dignam.
5.4.3 The Council had evidence at one point that due to the fact that the applicants name was as a licensee at a public house that she was living in housing. This matter has since been clarified. From the evidence provided, I consider that Mrs Dignam complies with the definition of a gypsy as outlined in Government guidance in Planning Policy for traveller sites.
5.6 Need for Gypsy Sites
5.6.1 The PPTS gives guidance on how gypsy accommodation should be achieved, including the requirement to assess need.
5.6.2 As stated above, the projection of accommodation requirements is as follows –
Oct 2011-March 2016 105 pitches
April 2016- March 2021 25 pitches
April 2021- March 2026 27 pitches
April 2026 – March 2031 30 pitches
Total Oct 2011 – March 2031 187 pitches
5.6.3 Taking into account this time period, since 1st October 2011 the following permissions for pitches have been granted (net):
35 Permanent non-personal permissions
6 Permanent personal permissions
0 Temporary non-personal permissions
21 Temporary personal permissions
Therefore a net total of 41 permanent pitches have been granted since 1st October 2011. And hence a shortfall of 64 remains.
5.6.4 It must be noted that the requirement for 105 pitches in the initial 5 year period includes need such as temporary consents that are yet to expire (but will before the end of March 2016) and household formation. Therefore although the pitch target is high for the first five years, the immediate need is not, in my view, overriding. However, the latest GTAA clearly reveals an ongoing need for pitches.
5.7 Visual Impact
5.7.1 Planning permission was previously refused in June 2009 under MA/09/0684 which sought permission for the stationing of 2no. mobile homes for residential purposes, storage of 1no. touring caravan with associated works and keeping of horses, including hardstanding, boundary treatment, septic tank and 6no. outbuildings for utility/storage and animal shelters. This application was refused (with no appeal being lodged) on the grounds that the proposal would result in a loss of openness to the site harming the character and appearance of the open countryside and the quality of the Low Weald Special landscape Area; however, the proposal at that time was to site the caravans to the rear part of the site, as opposed to the front part. The decision also noted that the combined use of the site together with other gyspy in the vicinity would result in harm to the character and appearance of the of the open countryside and they quality of the SLA; and that the use of the site for residential occupation would lead to an unsustainable form of development that due to the distance from Headcorn, would have a heavy reliance on the private car. On this second point, consideration has to be given to legislation change, decisions given by the Council and appeal decisions by The Planning Inspectorate which leads me to conclude that the combined use of this site and the other gyspy sites in the vicinity neither overdominates the settled community, nor results in unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the countryside. Further, it has been accepted that whilst there would be some reliance on the private car, the site is not unsustainable.
5.7.2 The latest guidance in the PPTS states that Local Planning Authorities should strictly limit new traveller development in open countryside (paragraph 23) but goes on to state that where sites are in rural areas, considerations are that sites do not dominate the nearest settled community and do not place undue pressure on local infrastructure. No specific reference to landscape impact is outlined, however, this is addressed in the NPPF and clearly under Local Plan policy ENV28.
5.7.3 At present on the application site, one mobile home is positioned on site adjacent to the front boundary with Lenham Road. Given its location and the existing planting both on the front boundary, and the eastern side boundary, this caravan is not particularly visible; however, the solid green metal gates to some 2.5 metres in height at the entrance, together with the high fencing to the north eastern corner of the site creates a harsh appearance to the site that results in unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the area.
5.7.4 The second mobile home is currently positioned in the rear section of the site, to the far end of the pond, together with a small summerhouse with decking, and a small field shelter. It is in this part of the site where the siting of two mobiles were previously proposed under application MA/09/0684. The mobile home, decking and summerhouse in this location appear as an alien features in the attractive rural environment and whilst the site is currently in a tidier state than previously noted, it could result in further domestification of this part of the site which stretches back into the rural landscape. This was the same conclusion that was reached in the previous application at the site.
5.7.5 During the consideration of the application, the agent has confirmed that her client is willing to relocate this second mobile home, together with the summer house and decking, to the front part of the site, potentially adjacent to the existing mobile. This will alleviate the visual impact that results from the original scheme and could be dealt with by way of a condition requiring submission of a site development scheme.
5.7.6 Negotiations have also been undertaken regarding the gates and fencing to the front of the site and written confirmation has been received that the applicant is content to accept a planning condition, should permission be forthcoming, which requires the gates to be reduced to PD height of 2m. I consider that to reduce their visual impact, the appearance of the existing metal gates should be altered to reflect their rural location. Again, this is something that can be dealt with by way of planning condition.
5.7.7 As stated above, the site is location within the open countryside with policies within the development plan seeking to protect the character and appearance of such areas. The proposed development in the form of the siting of two mobile homes, the utility room, summerhouse and decking in the part of the site adjacent to Lenham Road will not be readily visible from public vantage points outside the site. On approach along Lenham Road from either direction, the site is relatively well screened. The timber field shelter in the bottom paddock will be visible from approach along Lenham Road. However, it is small in size and is a typical equestrian building which will not result in significant detriment to the visual appearance of this part of the countryside. The site is visible from Footpath KH331B, however, if the proposed development was located in the front part of the site, its visual impact to the rural area would be somewhat reduced.
5.7.8 In its current form, I consider the gates and part of the fencing to the north of the gates and the trellis on part of the front fence serving the site to be excessive in height and result significant visual detriment to this part of Lenham Road. The applicant has confirmed that she is content to accept a condition to require the gates to be reduced to 2m, together with the reduction of the fence to the north of the gates to 2m and the removal of the trellis on the part of the fence which fronts Lenham Road to the south of the gates. This will reduce the visual impact of this part of the development.
5.7.9 The siting of two mobiles and one touring caravan, together with the utility building, summerhouse, fencing, gates and the associated domestic paraphernalia is harmful to the area, however given the existing screening to the site on approach along Lenham Road in both directions, and the lack of medium to long range views, the harm to visual amenity is somewhat localised.
5.8 Personal Circumstances
5.8.1 This application is seeking permission for a site for Mrs Dignam and her three grandchildren. The grandchildren have been brought up by the applicant on and off given their late mothers health; and since her death in 2009, have been dependant upon Mrs Dignam. No specific health reasons to live at this site have been put forward, other than that Mrs Dignam suffers with high blood pressure and is being seen by her doctor in Headcorn and that this has been Mrs Dignam’s home since 2005.
5.8.2 This application is for a single gypsy woman who lives on the site with her 3 grandchildren who have lost their mother, who prior to her death was raising her children as a single mother. Whilst the grandchildren are grown-up, their dependant living relative is their grandmother, the applicant, Mrs Dignam.
5.8.3 I consider that these unusual personal circumstances should be given significant weight.
5.9 Residential Amenity
5.9.1 There are neighbouring residential gypsy sites, including an adjacent site to the south (Acers Place). There is boundary treatment between the two sites so sufficient privacy is provided. The nearest houses are some 160m away and hence, I do not consider there would be any harm to the amenity of those occupiers.
5.10 Highways
5.10.1 KCC Highways and transportation have been consulted on the application, raising no objection. They note that there have been no reported injury crashes during the latest 3 year period, and that the proposal will not lead to any significant increase in traffic movements.
5.11 Other Matters
5.11.1 There is a large, well maintained pond on the site. In terms of impact on ecology, the site has been in existence for some 8 years and so any implications for ecology occurred at that time. The continued use of the site is unlikely to impact further on any protected species on or near the site.
5.11.2 Sustainability of the site has been raised and I also note that one of the reasons for refusal of the 2009 application was that the use of the site for residential occupation would lead to an unsustainable form of development that due to the distance from Headcorn, would have a heavy reliance on the private car. Since the refusal of that application, policy has changed somewhat and consideration must also be given to the outcome of the many subsequent decisions for similar development at other sites in the vicinity. Permission has been given at land to the rear of The Meadows, Greenacres, Acers Place, Long Lane and Martins Gardens. As such, I do not consider that the proposed residential use of this site can be considered unsustainable.
5.10.3 The number of sites on Lenham Road has been raised. The PTTS states that sites should not dominate the nearest settled community. This was an issued discussed in the Public Inquiry appeal decision into the land to the rear of The Meadows which is the site almost opposite the subject site and proposed 10 mobiles and 19 tourers (56 people) in 2011. Here the Inspector considered that the communities of Headcorn and Ulcombe were too large and too distant from the appeal sites for them to be dominated by the proposed developments. In terms of Lenham Road, he considered that the site would not be so large or so close as to harmfully dominate the settled community which, he stated, includes a significant number of Gypsy and Travellers. For this reason, I do not consider that 2 mobiles for 4 people proposed to live on the application site could be said to dominate the nearest settled community.
5.10.4 CPRE has raised the issue of pasture deterioration by the grazing of animals on the site stating that this would have an adverse effect on the character and appearance of the countryside. The application includes the keeping of horses however, whilst on site recently I have not noted an excessive number of horses being kept on the field; nor significant harm to the grass. Whilst in the past I have notes excessive grazing by horses on parts of the site, I understand that Mrs Dignam would only look to keep a limited number and is not a horse dealer.
5.10.5 A completed Foul Drainage Assessment Form accompanies the application. The application proposes continues use of the installed cess pits. Environmental Health raise no objection on this issue.
6. CONCLUSION
6.1 The site is located in the countryside and Special Landscape Area, however, gypsy sites can be accommodated in the countryside.
6.2 It is considered that the applicant is a gypsy and complies with the definition contained within the Planning Policy for Gypsy Sites.
6.3 Other sites in the vicinity have been given planning permission on varying basis. The subject site is located on the eastern side of Lenham Road, being at a lower level than the road. It enjoys good screening on the approach along Lenham Road and good existing screening to the front of the site. The existing position of the second mobile in the rear part of the site, together with the summer house, is unacceptable in terms of visual harm; however, the applicant has agreed that the second mobile and summerhouse with the decking could be moved to the front part of the site and this could be subject to a planning condition. It has also been agreed that the high metal entrance gates would be reduced in height and appearance and parts of the fencing adjacent to the road reduced.
6.4 Given the specifics of the subject site – its location, topography, screening, amount and layout is such that its visual impact is arguably less intrusive than other sites along this stretch of Lenham Road.
6.5 The application development, when combined with other gypsy sites in the vicinity, and in relation to the existing authorised development, does not dominate the settled community.
6.6 The application site is considered to be in a sustainable location that is not so remote from services and facilities to justify a refusal.
6.7 The application development does not have any adverse impact on residential amenity.
6.8 The application development does not lead to any increased risk to highway safety.
6.9 The site has been in existence for some 8 years and so any implications for ecology occurred at that time. The continued use of the site is unlikely to impact further on any protected species on or near the site.
6.10 The relocation of the second caravan, summerhouse and decking which are currently located to the rear of the site, to the front of the site can be secured by planning condition; as can the change to the existing metal entrance gates and some of the fencing.
6.11 There is a current need for Gypsy and Traveller sites as identified by the revised GTAA.
6.12 There are no other significant planning issues that would warrant refusal of the application.
6.13 Taking all the above into account, and having given consideration to the unusual personal circumstances of the applicant, to the site specifics, and to the ongoing need for gypsy sites, has lead me to conclude that a permanent personal permission should be granted in this instance.
7. RECOMMENDATION
GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:
1.
The
occupation of the site hereby permitted shall be carried on only by Ms Kay
Dignam and her resident dependants and when the site ceases to be occupied by
Ms Kay Dignam the use hereby permitted shall cease and all materials and
equipment brought onto the land in connection with the use, including
hardstandings, fencing and gates, sheds, greenhouses, utility room, outbuildings
hereby approved shall be removed and the land restored to its former condition.
Reason: The site is in an area where the stationing of caravans/mobile homes is
not normally permitted and an exception has been made to reflect the personal
need of the named person and her family; and to safeguard the character and
appearance of the countryside in accordance with Policy ENV28 and ENV34 of the
Maidstone Borough Wide Local Plan 2000.
2.
No
more than two static residential caravans, as defined in Section 24(8) of the
Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 and the Caravan Sites Act 198
and one touring caravan, which shall not be used for habitation purposes, shall
be stationed on the site at any one time.
Reason: To accord with the terms of the application and in the interests of the
visual amenity in accordance with Policy ENV28 and ENV34 of the Maidstone
Borough Wide Local Plan 2000.
3.
Within
1 month of the date of this decision, a site development scheme shall be
submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. This scheme shall
include the relocation of the caravan, summerhouse and associated decking in
the rear of the site to the front of the site, a change to the entrance gates
and fencing.
Reason: In the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policy ENV28 and
ENV34 of the Maidstone Borough Wide Local Plan 2000.
4.
Within
3 months of the approval of the site development scheme, the works within that
scheme shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Local Planning
Authority.
Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with Policy ENV28
and ENV34 of the Maidstone Borough Wide Local Plan 2000.
5.
Within
1 month of the date of this decision, details of the means of storage prior to
disposal and the method of disposal of faecal, bedding or other waste arising
from the animals housed within the development shall be submitted to the Local
Planning Authority for approval. Such waste material arising from the animals
so housed shall be disposed of solely in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: No such details have been submitted and to safeguard the enjoyment of
their properties by adjoining residential occupiers and the amenities of the
surrounding area in accordance with Policy ENV46 of the Maidstone Borough Wide
Local Plan 2000.
6.
No
commercial activity shall take place on the land, including the storage of
materials.
Reason: To accord with the terms of the application and in accordance with
Policy ENV28 and ENV34 of the Maidstone Borough Wide Local Plan 2000.
7.
No
vehicle over 3.5 tonnes shall be stationed, parked or stored on this site.
Reason: To accord with the terms of the application and in accordance with
Policy ENV28 and ENV34 of the Maidstone Borough Wide Local Plan 2000.
8.
No
external lighting shall be installed on the site at any time unless previously
agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of the area and to prevent
light pollution in accordance with Policy ENV28 and ENV34 of the Maidstone Borough
Council Local Plan 2000.
Informatives set out below
The applicant is advised that it will be necessary to make an application for a Caravan Site Licence under the Caravan Sites and the Control of Development Act 1960 within 21 days of planning consent having been granted. Failure to do so could result in action by the Council under the Act as caravan sites cannot operate without a licence. The applicant is advised to contact the Environmental Health Project Manager on 01622 602145 in respect of a licence.
Note to Applicant
In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the NPPF, Maidstone Borough
Council (MBC) takes a positive and proactive approach to development proposals
focused on solutions. MBC works with applicants/agents in a positive and
proactive manner by:
Offering a pre-application advice and duty desk service.
Where possible, suggesting solutions to secure a successful outcome.
As appropriate, updating applicants/agents of any issues that may arise in the
processing of their application.
In this instance:
The applicant/agent was advised of minor changes required to the application
and these were agreed.
The application was considered by the Planning Committee where the
applicant/agent had the opportunity to speak to the committee and promote the
application.
The proposed development, subject to the conditions stated, is considered to comply with the policies of the Development Plan (Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000 and the South East Plan 2009) and there are no overriding material considerations to indicate a refusal of planning consent.