CONTROVERSIAL plans to allow a temporary caravan site for 20 gypsy families to become permanent on Green Belt land at Walton have been approved by Warrington planners.
Despite various objections, members of Warrington’s planning committee voted to grant permanent planning permision for a total of 30 caravans for 20 gypsy families at Two Acre Park, Warrington Road, Higher Walton, including retention of hardstanding, day room and 3 amenity buildings, after hearing that the upheaval and upset caused by relocating families who had been established on the site for 20 years, warranted special circustances.
Members of the planning committee heard that the application site had a lengthy history of temporary consents for a gypsy accommodation. But the most recent temporary permission expired in December 2014 and therefore the application site was now unauthorised.
The temporary consent had related to a maximum of 15 families with 22 caravans but the site has now expanded beyond what was approved on a temporary basis.
The current plan involved the permanent retention of the unauthorised gypsy caravan site which would be accessed off Warrington Road with a barrier controlled access. The scheme also includes car parking spaces, for each plot, turning areas and hardstanding area to the rear of the site.
But Cllr Sharon Harris objected to the application saying it was an inappropriate development in the Green Belt and had now encroached further onto the Green Belt than the original site. She argued that the land should be returned to original Green Belt status
Cllr Brian Axcell also objected to the application saying it was inappropriate development in the Green Belt, in particular since the area of development has increased. He said a transit site would be available in Warrington in less than two years.
Objections were also received from Walton Parish Council along with 24 letters of objection from nearby residents who argued that as well as being in the Green Belt, it would result in loss of openness, encroachment into countryside, with no significant difference from previous refusals.
But planners said there was a need for a “Balancing Exercise” and although the proposal constituted inappropriate development in the Green Belt, there would be no significant harm to the character or appearance of the adjacent conservation area, and no harm to highway safety subject to the highway officer’s recommended conditions.
“Whilst there is harm to the Green Belt, limited harm to openness and limited harm to character and appearance of the countryside, this must be set against a clear unmet need for gypsy and traveller sites in Warrington and the lack of a five year supply of deliverable sites.
“There is also a current lack of other alternative sites in Warrington such that there are no pitches presently available and there is no alternative accommodation available to meet the needs of the residents on this site and significant weight is afforded to this.
“An important part of the applicant’s case for very special circumstances puts forward the upheaval and upset caused through the relocation of a community which has been established for 20 years. In the absence of alternative sites being available the residents of the site would be forced to move to the roadside.
“The applicant has provided personal information regarding each of the residents and their personal circumstances. It is recognized that residents on seven of the pitches have health concerns and these are supported by letters from doctors and practitioners. There are 29 children living on the site attending local nurseries, Stockton Heath Primary and Appleton Thorn primary. Some of these children also have educational needs. It is considered that these personal circumstances of the children at the site and their families add significant weight.”
The application was approved by a majority vote.
9 Comments
If these families have been here for two decades they are hardly travellers. Give them a council house and they can start paying their way like the rest of us.
They all drive round in flash cars and wear designer trendy clothes and some of their statics are top of the range posh ones. Surely they can easily afford to buy their own brick houses if they want to so why do you suggest give them our council houses? Theres plenty of other families and young people in Warrington who don’t have anywhere near the amount of money they have and who work hard but thru no fault of their own find them selves in situations where they are struggling and desperate for help and a council house but there’s non available. Maybe we could buy a bit of green field in a nice place between us and some static caravans and live as a happy little community. How long do you recon we would be allowed to stay there though eh?
Will the council be offering a compensation payment to those living nearby who for almost 20 years have seen a drop in the value of their homes and found it a struggle to sell too because of the unlawful travelers site? While people living nearby know that the group of travelers are decent folk all prospective buyers see is a traveler site and google searches show the battle for years to get rid of it. It doesn’t bode well does it?
There was always hope that after all the previous refusals by WBC over the years for permanent residency and expansion that this time the answer would be a final NO.
Having always refused why have the council suddenly decided to roll over, accept and allow?
Another question is WHY have the council not taken any legal action over the unauthorised enlargement of the site? Surely digging part of the embankment away close to the bridge is not only unlawful but dangerous !
I have no issue with the people who live there and the way of life they chose but I do have issue that they have been allowed to buy green belt land and finally get their own way. Yet again we see different rules applying to the traveling community than those that apply to the rest of us. It’s wrong !
I seriously doubt that house values have dropped for 20 years.
I’m sure all those opposed to the councils Local Preferred Development Option Plan will have read the section relating to Traveller/Gyspy provision. Two Acre Caravan Park was mentioned along with 2 other existing sites.
The council stated in their documentation that they had “assessed the three unauthorised sites currently located in the Green Belt” and their findings were “these sites are well established and perform relatively well against the national planning policy criteria for site location. The sites also perform poorly in respect of their contribution to the Green Belt”
They finished by stating that “The Council is therefore proposing to remove these sites from the Green Belt and formally allocate them as permanent Gypsy and Travellers sites”
So there you have it. The land was going to be re-classed as non green belt and the council were already of a mind to grant permanent permission further down the line regardless of having to make a decision to approve or refuse the existing planning application that was in. If the council’s development control committee had voted to refuse this planning application then they would have been going against their own [the councils] PDO and future plans.
Yes I read that too in the Council’s PDO documentation that is out for consultation. It was obvious that the planning application would be approved after seeing it in there.
Until the PDO is approved it is the current LDP which is the official plan.
While some people are annoyed at the approval to be honest I expected it this time around and I can’t say the decision bothers me at all.
They are all really friendly and polite as are their kids. They keep their site clean and tidy and all the years they have been there they have never caused any trouble.
It’s a pitty the same thing can’t be said for other residents of the local area who regularly dump their crap in the back alleys behind their own homes or drop their litter wherever they like. Then there’s those kids, many from the new hosing developments, who roam the streets night and day causing mischief or riding round on bikes dressed in black doing wheelies down the centre of the local roads playing cat an mouse with drivers. Idiots and we can do without them !
I am pleased at this result. I have had work done by people from the site for about 7 years and always had an excellent (if pricey!) satisfactory result. This site has always been maintained in an immaculate way and maintained to be clean and tidy by Mr Smith and his family. No noise, litter, trouble of any kind has occurred. For 20 years the site has been immaculate and a credit to its owners. They deserve their permanent status, which is long overdue.
Jean, Moore