Agricultural workers’ caravan at Chelson Fields, Killerby, Scarborough

What was proposed

The application sought a caravan or lodge for agricultural workers, with garden space, parking and vehicle turning.

“SCAZF25/00993/FL - application for change of use of land for the siting of a caravan/lodge to provide agricultural workers accommodation - Chelson Fields, Killerby, Scarborough…”

“The Head of Development Management – Community Development Services sought determination of an application for planning permission for the siting of a caravan/lodge to provide agricultural workers’ accommodation, including the creation of amenity/garden space and vehicle parking/turning area at Chelson Fields, Killerby, Scarborough.”

Minutes

The site

The site was outside settlement development limits, was treated as countryside and lay within Flood Zone 1.

“The application site fell outside the Development Limits of Cayton or any other settlement as defined in the Scarborough Local Plan, as such it is regarded as 'countryside'. The site fell within Flood Zone 1.”

Minutes

Earlier permission

A three-year temporary caravan permission was granted in 2016 to develop the agricultural enterprise and gather evidence for a permanent dwelling.

“Planning permission for a caravan for a temporary period of 3 years was allowed in 2016 to allow for the agricultural enterprise to be developed and for information to be collected to demonstrate the case for a permanent dwelling.”

Minutes

Officers’ recommendation

Officers recommended refusal because the agricultural enterprise and essential accommodation need were not demonstrated, and deferral would not resolve the main concerns.

“The agent had requested that the application be deferred to allow for additional information to be submitted and stated there were errors in the report but has not specified what these errors were, or what additional information they intended to submit. However, officers were of the opinion that no additional information could be submitted that would overcome the first and second reasons for refusal and did not consider that a deferral would be warranted.”

“Officers were of the opinion that no additional information could be submitted that would overcome the first and second reasons for refusal and did not consider that a deferral would be warranted in this case. Officers recommended refusal on the grounds set out in the report, subject to a minor rewording of (iii) in the reasons for refusal as follows:”

Minutes

The agent’s request

The agent asked for deferral to submit more information and said there were errors in the report, without identifying either in detail.

Members’ discussion

Members discussed the site’s use and maintenance, utilities and occupation of the existing caravan, agricultural need and the earlier temporary permission.

“During consideration of the application, the Committee discussed:”

“The current use and maintenance of the site • Whether the existing caravan had utilities and was inhabited. The officer confirmed that there were utilities but the caravan was not inhabited • The viability of the small site to demonstrate an essential need to provide accommodation for an agricultural worker • A permission granted in 2016 for the temporary siting of mobile home for 3 years to provide agricultural workers accommodation.”

Minutes

The vote

The motion to refuse the application was proposed by Councillor Sharma, seconded by Councillor Bastiman and passed by five votes to one.

“It was moved by Councillor Sharma and seconded by Councillor Bastiman that the application be refused for the reasons set out in the report, including the amendment to (iii).”

“(iii) The proposed development is not considered to fall within the definition of ‘Self- Build and Custom Build development’ as such it is not exempted from providing biodiversity net gain required by Schedule 7A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as inserted by the Environment Act 2021). Insufficient information has been provided regarding the Biodiversity Net Gain baseline figure for the existing site.”

Minutes

The decision

Planning permission was refused for the stated reasons, including the amended reason concerning biodiversity net gain information and compliance.

“That planning permission be REFUSED for the reasons detailed in the report, including the following amended reason (iii).”

Minutes