Permanent traveller site at Land Off Sandhills Sconce, Tolney Lane, Newark-on-Trent

“Planning permission is sought to remove Condition 1 attached to the current permission under reference 21/00891/S73, to allow the temporary gypsy and traveller use of the site to become permanent and to allow for a general permission, rather than a personal permission.”

“And shall be for a limited period being the period up to 30 November 2023, or the period during which the land is occupied by them, whichever is the shorter. When the land ceases to be occupied by those named in this condition 1, or on 30 November 2023, whichever shall first occur, the use hereby permitted shall cease and all caravans, materials and equipment brought on to the land, or works undertaken to it in connection with the use shall be removed and the land restored…”

“Original site location plan submitted under 12/00562/FUL 1.2 The site measures 1.35 hectares in area, is roughly rectangular in shape and its authorised use is as a gypsy and traveller residential caravan site on a temporary basis. The site is sub-divided into 10 pitches, all served by a central roadway. There are open fields to the north-west and south-west of the site, with a more recent gypsy and traveller site to the south-east.”

“Aerial view of the application site taken from Google maps 1.4 The majority of the site, towards the south west, is located within Flood Zone 3b on the Environment Agency’s flood maps, which means it is at the highest risk of fluvial flooding, and is defined as being within the functional floodplain.”

“18/01443/FUL - Application for the variation of condition 1, to make the temporary permission permanent, attached to planning permission 12/00562/FUL granted on appeal at Plots 1-10 Green Park, Tolney Lane (PI Ref: APP/B3030/C/12/2186072 and APP/B3030/A/12/2186071) (Change of use from paddock to gypsy and traveller residential caravan site - retrospective). Temporary permission was extended for a further 3 years until 30 November 2021.”

“The Environment Agency have advised that if, as the Local Planning Authority, NSDC is minded to approve the application on a permanent basis, they would consider instigating the ‘call-in’ direction, as they consider the risks to this site are too significant to allow permanent ‘highly vulnerable’ development to proceed, without further work to reduce flood risk to the site beforehand.”

“In terms of the personal element of Condition 1, which the application also seeks to delete, the Inspector, when considering the original application, attached great weight to the ability of future residents to evacuate the site within 8 hours of the first flood alert warning.”

“Taken alongside completions and commitments post-2019 these new site allocations will allow for the minimum requirements of the Planning Policy for Traveller Sites (PPTS) to be exceeded, and a five-year land supply established. Through the Policy Area – those part of Tolney Lane at least flood risk and sites where additional pitch allocations have been identified would be brought inside the Urban Boundary.”

“As a consequence, the adverse impact of granting permanent consent would in my view significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits – when assessed against the policies in the Framework and up-to-date parts of the Development Plan. There has been no material change since the original Public Inquiry, which would lead me to draw a different conclusion to the Inquiry Inspector.”

“Whilst I do not consider there is the case to support the granting of permanent consent, I would raise no objection to a further short term temporary consent of up to a year, in order to allow the site allocation process to conclude and provide the applicants with certainty over that period. No comments have been received from any local residents or third parties. Comments of the Business Manager – Planning Development 7.1.”

“Members considered the application and a Member commented that this was not an allocated site on the allocated plan, with that taken into consideration it was felt that only one year should be supported for this site.”

“A vote was taken and lost to extend the planning permission for a further two years, with 5 votes For and 6 votes Against.”

“AGREED (unanimously) that Planning Permission be approved subject to the conditions, including the variation of Condition 1, as opposed to its removal, as contained within the report.”