Agenda item

Continued use of land as a private residential Traveller site for sole use of the applicants and family, including use of the erected barn as a dayroom/workshop/store, 1 mobile home, 1 touring caravan and a mobile van (Revised description/additional information).

The Senior Planning Officer presented the application. The application site was identified on the location plan, together with adjoining land in the applicant’s ownership outlined in blue. An aerial view and the proposed site layout were shown. The elevations of the workshop building were presented, illustrating a natural‑stone structure with a pitched roof, timber cladding and natural slate roofing. The wider site included orchard planting, a new hedgerow, and seven zones forming part of an agreed woodland management plan.

A series of photographs were shown, including views from Meerhay Lane, public rights of way and the main workshop building. Images of the parking area, hedging, access onto the lane, as well as the main static mobile home and workshop were shown. A view taken from the south of the site during winter demonstrated the extent of vegetation cover. Additional images included the stream crossing and a view of the site from the footpath, along with photographs of the woodland proposed for enhancement through the application.

The Officer advised that the Council could not demonstrate a five‑year supply of traveller sites and that paragraph 11(d) of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) therefore applied. The Senior Planning Officer referred to Policy SUS2 and explained that the site’s proximity to Beaminster meant it had reasonable access to a wide range of local facilities and services and was a sustainable location. The applicants’ traveller status had been examined in detail, including assessment of their historic travelling patterns. Information on their movements had been shared with the Gypsy and Traveller Liaison Officer, who had met with the applicants and was satisfied that they met the relevant definition. The Senior Planning Officer highlighted the clear and growing unmet need for traveller sites within the area.

It was explained that the materials proposed were subdued and used natural finishes appropriate to the National Landscape. Existing planting had already contributed to mitigation and the woodland management plan would deliver further improvements. The nearest dwelling lay approximately 40 metres from the site and officers concluded that there would be no overlooking or loss of amenity and there was no objection raised by Dorset Council Highways.

Public representation was received in opposition to the application from James Green, Katherine Haskins and John Steel KC. They raised concerns about the application including about setting a precedent in the area for allowing traveller site applications, the lack of alternative sites that had been explored and questioned the traveller status of the applicants.

Public representation in support of the application was received from Reverend John Herbert, Catherine Burton on behalf of Paula Tuff, Simon Ruston and Cllr Monks. Amongst their points of support, it was noted that the applicants traveller status was supported by the Council, Planning Inspectorate and the charity, Kushti Bok. In addition, it was mentioned that the applicants had not been offered an alternative permanent pitch by the Council and that even if they had, it would not impact the application. 

Cllr Monks left the Council Chamber 10:43.

In response to public statements, the Senior Planning Officer noted that the applicant’s traveller status had been determined by looking at the past four years’ worth of travelling to festivals and was supported by the Gypsy and Traveller Liaison Officer and the Chair of Kushti Bok. It was also explained that the recommendation related to the specific application, which included benefits such as woodland management and so there was not a concern of a precedent being set.

Officers provided the following responses to members questions:

·       It was not considered that the application would set a precedent as the recommendation for approval was based on the specific activities of the family at the site and the low level of impact of activities, which were mitigated by the landscape management.

·       The applicants produced art and metal work in their workshop on site, which they sell at festivals and this level of activity is considered to be low impact.

·       Members were advised by the Legal Business Partner that the application of policy was a matter of judgement for them and they would only be acting unlawfully if they made a decision outside the remit of a planning committee or if they failed to apply the relevant policies properly.

·       A separate application relating to the business activities on site was not considered necessary, as the workshop was specifically listed in the application proposal.

It was proposed by Cllr Wheller and seconded by Cllr Kimber that the application be granted.

An amendment was proposed by Cllr Northam and seconded by Cllr Bawden, that the wording of condition 2 be changed from ‘their resident dependents only’ to ‘their children, subject to continuing traveller lifestyle’.

Upon being put to a vote the motion to amend the substantive motion fell.

Decision: That the application be granted subject to the conditions set out in the appendix to these minutes.