Object

Representation ID: 64475

Received: 05/05/2014

Respondent: Lee Jackson-Clarke

Wishes this document to personal representations against site GT19

Green Belt:

Of the five preferred sites, Site GT19 is in the only site located within the Green Belt.

The Government has consistently stated that Green belt land should only be used in exceptional circumstances.

In a written statement to Parliament on 1st July 2013 , Brandon Lewis, Local Government Minister stated:

"Our Policy Document Planning for traveller sites was issued in March 2012. It makes clear that both temporary and permanent traveller sites are inappropriate development in the green belt, and that planning decisions should protect green belt from such inappropriate development.

The secretary of state wishes to make clear that, in considering planning applications....he considers that the single issue of unmet demand, whether from traveller sites of for conventional housing, is unlikely to outweigh harm to the green belt...to constitute the "very special circumstances" justifying inappropriate development in the green belt"

This was reiterated by Brandon Lewis in his Jan 2014 statement The Secretary of State remains concerned about the extent to which planning appeal decisions are meeting the Government's clear policy intentions, particularly as to whether sufficient weight is being given to the importance of green belt protection. Therefore, he intends to continue to consider for recovery appeals involving traveller sites in the green belt.

Planning Policy for Traveller Sites (PPTS:

WDC has not shown that very exceptional circumstances exist for including GT19 in the list of preferred sites as required by Policy E-14: (Traveller Sites in the Green Belt). This contravenes Government Policy.


The consultation document states that previous development has been allowed on the site, but it is equally the case that permission has been refused due to its impact on the Green Belt.

In addition, the Green Belt argument was used against Kite's Nest site being a gypsy and traveller site. It is less than a mile away and similar in several aspects. The argument applies equally if not more so to site GT19. There is a lack of consistency by WDC when appraising similar sites.

WDC Site Assessment Criterion:

Availability of the Site (including impact on existing uses on the site:

* The owner of Site GT19 does not want to sell it for a Traveller and Gypsy site, therefore a CPO would be needed. WDC has stated that a CPO could be used. This is I contravention of ministerial statements.

* The use of CPO powers could set up conditions for a legal challenge

* The owners business would be put at risk, with consequent compensation

* Expenditure on this and the CPO would not be an appropriate use of limited financial resources of WDC

Proximity to Other Residential properties:

* There is a close knit and neighbourly sense of community amongst the occupiers of the 10 or so dwellings in the immediate vicinity of the proposed GT19 site.

* The provision of five pitches on this site would increase the housing density by 25% and thus would change the local dynamics.

The Kites Nest Inspector found and the Sec. of State agreed that Kites Nest site was situated within a community of about 10 households and that community would be dominated by 13 or 8 pitch scheme. It could be argued that the approval of GT19 would be going against the Inspectors Comments.

PPTS Policies:

GT19 would also contravene PPTS Policy B, para 11(a) -policies should "promote peaceful and integrated co-existence between the site and the local community" and PPTS-Policy C -authorities should "ensure that the scale of such sites does not dominate the nearest settled community"

Safe Access from the Site for Vehicles and Pedestrians:

Approval of the GT19 would locate the pitches between the canal and the fast and busy A4177. At this section of the proposed site the road narrows and constructed with tight bends. Traffic on this road is already dangerous and if proposed housing developments occur it would be set to increase.

The road has already had two fatal in the last five years and a serious accident in March 2014

The movement of caravans and large vehicles in and out of the site on such a fast and busy road would be potentially dangerous to the proposed occupiers of GT19 and increase likelihood of more accidents to other traffic . Possibility of increasing risk of catastrophic accident involving the petrol station.

An application by current owner for Timber storage and cutting facility was refused on Green Belt and [highway safety] grounds. Contradictory to refuse owners application on these grounds and ignore them when assessing GT19.

Impact on Visual Amenity including the visibility of the site and surrounding area:


The Inspector for Kits Nest Appeal found that the development was very prominent through "gappy hedges" and from public footpaths, and that the existing caravans were an "extremely jarring element"

* Site GT19 would be similarly visible through gappy hedges
* The road is higher than the proposed site and it would be overlooked-screening would be required on the road side to give the residents privacy from passing traffic and screen off caravans from neighbouring houses. Screening issues for Site GT19 are even more extensive than Kites Nest.
* Site GT19 would also be visible from the canal which is a tourist attraction with its many locks.

Distance to Nearby Schools:
Local Budbrooke School is already struggling with numbers due to rising population. Ferncombe School in Hatton is also full.

Impact of Land Contamination, Noise and Other Disturbance
* The five pitches present potential noise and disturbance for nearby residents:

* Possible land contamination if dumping of rubbish takes place on the site.

Compliance with PPTS-Policy B-Para 11(e) -Health and Wellbeing:

* There is no criterion listed to address this policy
* The site is adjacent to a canal -with potential detrimental effects to the health and well-being of young people living nearby.
* Also putting children on a site near potentially dangerous road and service station does not appear to comply with this Policy.

Impact on heritage assets and setting of heritage assets:

* The Gypsy and Traveller Site would have an adverse impact on the history and heritage of the area -flight of 21 locks "Stairway to heaven" [including its potential for future development for leisure and recreation].
* Understand that the current site owner is developing plans I conjunction with British waterways for a marina, restaurant, conference centre, and heritage and visitor area.
* Encouraging tourism, preservation of heritage and possible employment opportunities should take precedence over inappropriate use of expenditure on CPOs and potential financial compensation.