10-family caravan site at Land To The West Of Chelmsford Road, Felsted

What was proposed

The application sought 10 family caravan pitches, each with two caravans, 10 utility buildings, hardstanding and a new access.

“PROPOSAL: Change of use of land to use as a residential caravan site for 10 Gypsy families, each with two caravans, including laying of hardstanding, erection of 10 no. utility buildings and construction of new access (alternative scheme to planning permission UTT/23/2526/FUL approved on appeal)”

Officer report

The site and its setting

The site was agricultural land beside Chelmsford Road at Causeway End, with listed buildings nearby and a hedgerow along its frontage.

“The site lies on the west side of the B1417 Chelmsford Road at the southern edge of Causeway End and comprises arable farmland consisting of approximately 1.59 hectares. The property of Millbanks and Glandfield Farm lie to the north, whilst two dwellings lie to the south on the east side of Chelmsford Road. Millbanks Farmhouse is Grade II listed as is Blackhorse Cottage to the south.”

Officer report

Earlier permissions and applications

Five pitches were allowed on appeal in December 2024, while earlier five-pitch and housing applications were refused or dismissed.

“Permission for the change of use of land to use as a residential caravan site for 5 Gypsy families, each with two caravans, including laying of hardstanding, erection of 5 no. utility buildings and construction of new access was approved at appeal in December 2024 (UTT/23/2526/FUL / APP/C1570/W/24/3348002).”

“Particularly relevant to the proposals are applications UTT/23/2526/FUL and UTT/19/3091/FUL which both sought to change of use of land to use as a residential caravan site for 5 gypsy families albeit with different layouts and designs. The former was refused and then allowed in appeal in December 2024 and remains an extant permission. The latter was refused and dismissed at appeal in October 2022.”

Officer report

Consultation and objections

The highways authority and several consultees had no objection, while the parish council and 12 letters raised concerns including scale, access, countryside and heritage.

“From a highway and transportation perspective the Highway Authority stated that the impact of the proposal is acceptable to the Highway Authority subject to compliance conditions. The Highway Authorities consultee response can be found in Appendix 1 of this report.”

“There are twelve letters of objection for this application. The following comments were received: • Scale of development too large / overdevelopment • Negative highway impacts / access is dangerous / increased trip generation • Insufficient access arrangements • Impacts on amenities of neighbouring occupiers • No pedestrian access to the site / no street lighting • No access to public transport • Harm to rural character of area / urbanising effects • Out of keeping…”

Officer report

Who spoke

A councillor spoke against the application, a parish council representative spoke against it, and the applicant spoke in support.

What members discussed

Members discussed the busy road, missing footpaths, the development’s scale and whether the location was suitable for the number of pitches.

“In response to questions from Members, Officers said: - • The site had an extant permission for five pitches but was currently unoccupied. • The Council was engaged in an outside process concerning two other gypsy and traveller sites, but this was unrelated to the Application. • There was a needs assessment relating to the allocations within Core Policy 60 of the Local Plan.”

“Members discussed: - • The site’s proximity to a busy road and the lack of appropriate footpaths. • The scale of the development and the increase in development in the area it represented. • Whether the location was appropriate for the number of pitches.”

Minutes

The vote

A motion to refuse was proposed, seconded and approved by the committee.

“Councillor Pavitt proposed refusal of the application, and this was seconded by Councillor Sutton.”

“RESOLVED that the Strategic Director of Planning be authorised to refuse permission for the development in accordance with the reasons set out in section 17 of the report.”

Minutes