Planning appeal decision
Land on the North side of Middle Lane, Congleton, Cheshire, CW12 1PX
change of use of land to a gypsy/traveller site for one family with two caravans, including access track, hardstanding and bio-disc sewage treatment plant. Appeal
- Authority
- Cheshire East
- Appeal type
- enforcement · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Hearing
- Development
- caravan-gypsy · Minor traveller and caravan pitches
- Inspector
- Hartley D
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- whether or not the developments would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt including their effect on openness and the purposes of the Green Belt
- the effect of the developments on the character and appearance of the area
- the effect of the developments on highway safety
- whether the site is sustainably located
- whether intentional unauthorised development has taken place
- the provision and need for Gypsy and Traveller sites
- the personal circumstances of the family
- if the developments are inappropriate, whether the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations so as to amount to the very special circumstances necessary to justify the developments
What decided it
The harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, together with the other identified harm, was not clearly outweighed by the personal circumstances, unmet need and lack of alternative sites so as to amount to very special circumstances.
Very substantial adverse weight attributed to Green Belt harm (inappropriateness, loss of openness and conflict with a Green Belt purpose), together with modest adverse weight for intentional unauthorised development and harm to character and appearance, was not clearly outweighed by the personal circumstances of the family, best interests of the children, unmet Gypsy and Traveller need and lack of an immediately available alternative site, so the appeals were dismissed.
Framework references: 147, 148, 137, 138, 111, 105
Plan policies cited: SC7, PG3, HOU 5, HOU 7, SE1, SE4, HOU7 (5), SC7 2(i), PG 6, PG 10, HOU 5(3)
Judgments cited: Turner v SSLG & East Dorset Council [2016]; Smith v SSLUHC & Ors (2022) EWCA
The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.
®