Issue - meetings

REFUSED

Description of application - Use of land for private Gypsy and Traveller caravan site comprising 1 pitch accommodating one mobile home and one touring caravan. (Revision to planning application ref. 10/02059/FULL2 allowed at appeal comprising removal of existing mobile home and its replacement with twin mobile home unit in a re-sited position within the site with associated slab and access ramps, without compliance with

Condition 5).

Oral representations in objection to and in support of the application were received.  Oral representations from Ward Member, Councillor Richard Scoates in objection to the application were received at the meeting. 

Councillor Scoates referred to the planning history of the site from agriculture land to its current use within the Green Belt and to paragraph 2 of the late representation from Cudham Residents’ Association and in his view, the proposed mobile home resembled a large chalet bungalow appearing to be of bricks and mortar and no very special circumstances had been demonstrated.

He also referred to the Inspector’s comments at a previous appeal and in particular the harm to the Green Belt. 

In reply to a question from Councillor Fawthrop regarding very special circumstances, the applicant said she had a personal planning permission to live on the land in a mobile home and her very special circumstances were to provide a larger adapted mobile home for health reasons.

The Chief Planner’s representative confirmed that a late representation had been received from Cudham Residents’ Association and circulated to Members.

Councillor Bob Evans confirmed the site had been allocated in the draft Local Plan as a traveller site in the Green Belt.

The Chairman and Councillors Joel and Boughey objected to the application and were surprised at the Chief Planner’s recommendation for permission as the report referred to inappropriate development and harm in the Green Belt.

Members having considered the report, objections and representations, RESOLVED that PERMISSION BE REFUSED for the following reason:-

1.  The proposal would constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt and would by reason of its scale and siting result in harm to the openness and rural character of the Green Belt, constituting an undesirable form of urbanised development and resulting in an intensification of the existing use of the site.  No very special circumstances have been demonstrated and the proposal would be contrary to Policies G1, BE1 and H6 of the Unitary Development Plan, Policy 7.16 of the London Plan, the National Planning Policy Framework and the Planning Policy for Traveller Sites (2015).