Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Notice upheld3 March 20253351497

Land at Whiston , Penkridge , Staffordshire, ST19 5QH

(i) the unauthorised material change of use of the Land to a mixed use for agriculture and a residential Gypsy Traveller caravan site, and (ii) unauthorised operational development to facilitate th e unauthorised use comprising of (a) a wooden shed in the approximate position marked in pink on the Plan; (b) the laying of hardstanding shaded in purple on the Plan; and (c) the construction of closed board entrance gates which exceed 2 metres in height from ground level

Authority
South Staffordshire District Council
Appeal type
enforcement · Enforcement Notice
Procedure
Written Representations
Development
caravan-gypsy · Major traveller and caravan pitches
Inspector
Hartley D

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Whether the development is inappropriate development in the Green Belt including its effect on the openness and purposes of Green Belt
  • The effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area
  • The effect of the development on the setting of Whiston Mill which is a Grade II listed building
  • The effect of the development on the integrity of the Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
  • Whether the occupiers of the site would be at risk of flooding
  • The effect of the development on highway safety
  • Whether the development has occurred on previously developed land
  • Whether the development impedes the use of a public right of way
  • The effect of any intentional unauthorised development occurring on the land
  • Whether any 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 development

What decided it

The substantial harm caused to the openness of the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, combined with harm to the listed building setting, character and appearance, flood risk, and SAC integrity, are not clearly outweighed by the lack of alternative Traveller sites and personal circumstances of the families, such that very special circumstances do not exist to justify the development.

Framework references: 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 27, 28, 116, 143, 154, 155, 175, 193, 195, 215

Plan policies cited: GB1, H6, EQ2, EQ3, EQ11

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.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every other appeal around it, with the full reasoning summary, the letter held on file, and the case law it applies.