Planning appeal decision
Land at Rapiers, Little London Road, Silchester , Hampshire , RG7 2PP
Planning appeal 3210244 at Land at Rapiers, Little London Road, Silchester , Hampshire , RG7 2PP (Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council) was allowed in part (a split decision) on 6 July 2022 by Inspector Steen A, following a hearing. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: whether the development protects and enhances valued landscapes or recognises the intrinsic character and beauty of the landscape.
without planning permission: 3.1 The material change of use of the Land from agricultural to a residential caravan site. 3.2 The siting of mobile homes/caravans for residential occupation on the Land. 3.3 The laying of hard standing and sub base
- Appeal type
- enforcement · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Hearing
- Development
- caravan-gypsy · Major traveller and caravan pitches
- Inspector
- Steen A
- Postcode
- RG7 2PP
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- whether the development protects and enhances valued landscapes or recognises the intrinsic character and beauty of the landscape
- whether the development affects ecology and biodiversity in the area
- the effect of traffic relating to the caravan site on the safe and efficient operation of the highway network in the vicinity of the appeal site and the use of public rights of way
- whether occupiers of the residentially occupied caravans would enjoy satisfactory living conditions, having particular regard to noise and odours
- the effect of the development on flood risk
- whether the caravan site is in a suitable location in terms of its location in respect to adjacent settlements, services and facilities
- whether there are other material considerations that could outweigh any conflict with development plan policies, such as the need for gypsy and traveller accommodation within the District and the personal circumstances of the appellant and other site occupiers
What decided it
The cumulative harm to landscape, ecology, highway safety, living conditions and flood risk, amounting to conflict with the development plan, was not outweighed by the need for gypsy and traveller accommodation or the personal circumstances of the prospective occupiers.
Great weight attached to conflict with the development plan (landscape, ecology, highway safety, living conditions and flood risk harms) plus modest weight against the intentional unauthorised nature of the development were not outweighed by the considerable weight given to the need for gypsy and traveller accommodation and the personal circumstances of prospective occupiers, including the best interests of children.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy EM1Policy EM7Policy EM10Policy EM12Policy CN5Policy CN9Policy SS3.9Policy SS3.10Policy SS3.11Policy SS3.12
- Judgments
- Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council v William Connors & Ors [2018] EWHC 0011 (QB)
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision


More decisions in Basingstoke and Deane
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2022
- Allowed26 October 2026600755075 Park Prewett Road, Basingstoke, RG24 9RG
- Notice varied and upheld14 September 20263369273Flats 1 to 4, 51 & 53 Alexandra Road, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG21 7RQ
- Notice upheld1 September 2026335025216 Avon Road, Oakley, Basingstoke, RG23 7DJ
- Allowed10 July 20266004025Basingstoke Sports and Social Club, Fairfields Road, Basingstoke, RG21 3DR
- Allowed26 May 20263375485Land North Of Whitchurch Station, Whitchurch, RG28 7ED
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.
®