DOMO8TPHVQ.Pdf

178

PART 2

SOUTH DOWNS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY

PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT OF THE SERVICE MANAGER PLANNING DEVELOPMENT

Applications to be determined by the council on behalf of the South Downs National Park Authority

PS.367 /2012 3 May 2012

SECTION 1 – SCHEDULE OF APPLICATION RECOMMENDATIONS

Item No.: 1 The information, recommendations, and advice contained in this report are correct as at the date of preparation, which is more than one week in advance of the Committee meeting. Because of the time constraints some reports may have been prepared in advance of the final date given for consultee responses or neighbour comments. Any changes or necessary updates to the report will be made orally at the Committee meeting.

PROPOSAL CHANGE OF USE OF LAND AND BUILDING FOR TRAVELLING SHOW PERSONS USE FOR ONE FAMILY INCLUDING THE RE-SITING OF CARAVANS (AS AMPLIFIED BY INFORMATION RECEIVED 8/7/11,18/7/11, 25/7/11 & 6/12/11) LOCATION: Warren Barn, Church Lane, Priors Dean, Petersfield, GU32 1BW REFERENCE : SDNP/51451/004 PARISH: Colemore APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs R Beach CONSULTATION 28 December 2011 EXPIRY : APPLICATION EXPIRY : 15 August 2011 COUNCILLOR(S): Cllr N Drew SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION: TEMPORARY PERMISSION

This application is included on the agenda at the discretion of the Service Manager Planning Development.

179 Site and Development

The site lies on the east side of Church Lane in an isolated rural location. The application site is adjacent habitats which form part of the Wealden Edge Hangers Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). This SSSI is part of the East Hampshire Hangers Special Area of Conservation (SAC). Part of the existing access to the site falls within the East Hampshire Hangers Special Area of Conservation (SAC), which is an internationally designated site, and the entire site is within the South Downs National Park (SDNP).

The proposal, which is part-retrospective, is for the change of use of the land and buildings for one travelling showperson's family, which incorporates the following:

 resiting and use of one mobile home for residential purposes, two touring caravans, a shed and boxes; and  siting of shower block and continued use of a barn for the storage of fairground equipment.

Whilst part of the site and adjacent land is occupied by the applicants and their family, it is proposed to relocate the mobile home, touring caravans, domestic and other paraphernalia associated with their life-style, from the SAC and to reinstate this area, with the exception of part of the access.

The site drops from the road, then levels out immediately within the site where the building is located, which is used for the storage of fairground equipment. The site then falls away to the north-west, where it is proposed to relocate the mobile home, touring caravans, shed and a box. To facilitate this relocation, it will be necessary to level this part of the site and provide hard surfacing.

The applicants' description of their proposal has been challenged. However, a travelling showmen's site is a use in its own class, which often combines residential, storage and maintenance uses for associated vehicles and fairground equipment. Therefore, it is considered the applicants' description is appropriate and fairly reflects the proposal.

Two previous proposals were refused on 13/4/10 and 8/3/11. This application is materially different from these proposals, in that the development is outside the SAC boundary, with the exception of part of an access to the site.

Prior to the occupation of the site, there was a building on the land, with accesses. It is understood historically, that the land and building were used for forestry/agriculture.

Relevant Planning History

51451/002 - Change of use of the land and building for travelling showpersons use for one family - Refused 13/4/10. 51451/003 - Change of use of the land and building for travelling showpersons use for one family - Refused 8/3/11

180 Development Plan Policies and Proposals

East Hampshire District Local Plan: Second Review

C4 - Nature Conservation C5 - Local Landscape Features GS1 - Sustainable Development GS3 - Protecting the Countryside GS4 - Making the Most of Existing Infrastructure, Services and Facilities HE1 - Design H14 - Other Housing Outside Settlement Policy Boundaries T2 - Public Transport Provision and Improvement R3 - Public Open Space Requirements

Planning Policy Constraints and Guidance

South Downs National Park

The application site falls within the National Park boundary. The two statutory purposes of the National Parks' designation are:

 To conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of their areas; and  To promote opportunities for the public understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of their areas.

If there is a conflict between the two, conservation takes precedence.

The provisions of government policy relating to National Parks (currently National Planning Policy Framework, English National Parks and the Broads circular dated March 2010) apply.

Communities and Local Government, Planning policy for traveller sites, March 2012.

The above national policy provides guidance on the planning aspects of sites for traveller sites. For the purposes of this planning policy, “travellers” means “gypsies and travellers” and “travelling showpeople”.

The main intentions of the policy are:

 "that local planning authorities should make their own assessment of need for the purposes of planning  to ensure that local planning authorities, working collaboratively, develop fair and effective strategies to meet need through the identification of land for sites  to encourage local planning authorities to plan for sites over a reasonable timescale  that plan-making and decision-taking should protect Green Belt from inappropriate development

181  to promote more private traveller site provision while recognising that there will always be those travellers who cannot provide their own sites  that plan-making and decision-taking should aim to reduce the number of unauthorised developments and encampments and make enforcement more effective  for local planning authorities to ensure that their Local Plan includes fair, realistic and inclusive policies  to increase the number of traveller sites in appropriate locations with planning permission, to address under provision and maintain an appropriate level of supply  to reduce tensions between settled and traveller communities in plan-making and planning decisions  to enable provision of suitable accommodation from which travellers can access education, health, welfare and employment infrastructure  for local planning authorities to have due regard to the protection of local amenity and local environment."

National Planning Policy Framework, March 2012. (NPPF) Circular 06/2005: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation - Statutory Obligations and Their Impact Within the Planning System. Circular 06/05: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation - Statutory Obligations and Their Impact Within the Planning System The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010.

Consultations and Town/Parish Council comments

CPRE Hampshire - Objection

The previous application was refused for clear policy reasons, which the CPRE Hampshire fully support. Nothing in new application which addresses the previous reasons for refusal

Highways Authority - No Objection

There is a limited bus service available a short distance from the site.

There has been a building on the site for some time and the site benefits from two existing accesses from the Public Highway. These accesses have good visibility however the gradient of the drives is steep. This said the site falls away from the Public Highway and it would be difficult to reduce the gradient without loss of the screening that is available at present.

The road leading to and from the site is single track with few passing places and shows some overrunning of the verges.

HY10 - GATES SET BACK PROVISION Any gates provided shall be set back a distance of 6m from the edge of the carriageway of the adjoining highway. Reason - In the interests of highway safety.

182 County Ecologist - No Objection

The applicants have re-organised the site layout in an endeavour to avoid the SAC site. This would address the Reason for Refusal No 3 of the previous application, as the new application proposes that all structures are moved out of the designated site, and the land where the dwelling currently sits be restored to former level with some removal of planting and trees. I note that they plan to leave the site to regenerate "in accordance with a scheme to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority" (Drawing 10025-2); this could be the subject of a planning condition, should you be minded to grant permission.

I am of course aware that there were other reasons for refusal that you need to consider. However, it is my opinion that the new application would not cause a significant impact upon the SAC, provided there was appropriate boundary planting/management and the use of the rest of the applicant's land-holding was such as to cause no potential for impacts such as run- off.

Natural England 1st Comment - Objection

The application site is adjacent to habitats which form part of the Wealden Edge Hangers Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). This SSSI is part of the East Hampshire Hangers Special Area of Conservation (SAC). This letter comprises our statutory consultation response under provisions of Article 10 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995, Section 28 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010.

In respect of the previous correspondence surrounding the Wealden Edge Hangers Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) boundary, Natural England has no further comment at this stage in respect of this SSSI.

Whilst Natural England welcomes the relocated proposal and attempt to avoid impact on the East Hampshire Hangers SAC, in light of the information submitted as part of this application, Natural England maintains its objection to the above proposal due to lack of information in the following areas: i) Natural England is concerned that there has been no additional ecological assessment in relation to the environmental impacts on the East Hampshire Hangers SAC. ii) Further details are needed to be clear on the area intended to be regenerated, how that will be implemented and secured in the long term. iii) The applicant should provide more details with regards to what is meant by regeneration that is “proportionate to changes that have been effected by the applicant alone”, along with a clear plan of works. This currently indicates that the scope of any works will be limited. iv) Natural England would also wish to see further information on the forestry activities the applicant intends to continue, in particular to understand their location (and nature of planting) in relation to the SAC.

183 v) Natural England would suggest that any scheme to be agreed with the LPA and NE needs to be done in advance of a decision of the planning application, to ensure that it is sufficient to avoid likely significant effect.

Natural England 2nd Comment - No Objection

Natural England would recommend that an appropriately worded condition be secured through legal agreement to ensure the timely and appropriate delivery of the regeneration within the SAC.

In order to make an assessment under the Habitats Regulations it is necessary to have proposals to assess prior to the determination. Natural England would therefore remind the Council of their statutory duty to have regard to the requirements of the Habitats Directive when dealing with European sites (particularly in reference to regulation 9(5) of the Habitats Regulations 2010 and Article 6(2) of the Habitats Directive).

Regulation 61 requires your authority, before deciding to give any consent to a project which is (a) likely to have a significant effect on a European site (either alone or in combination with other plans or projects), and (b) not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site, to make an appropriate assessment of the implications for the site in view of its conservation objectives. In this case, Natural England would advise that a significant effect is likely, due to a lack of information (as detailed above), and an appropriate assessment must demonstrate that there would be no adverse impact on integrity, prior to grant of any permission. The Council may find that the information contained within the ecological assessment is sufficient for the purposes of conducting such an assessment. However, under Regulation 61(2) the Council may request additional information if it is necessary for assessment under the Habitats Regulations.

On receipt of any additional information Natural England must be consulted on how your authority plans to proceed. Pending this, any approval of planning permission would be contrary to the Habitats Regulations.

Natural England 3rd Comment - No Objection

It is Natural England’s advice that we remove our objection to this application (51451/004) subject to the following condition and informative being attached to any subsequent approval of this development.

The applicant will submit, within one month from the date of approval/decision notice, a detailed Restoration Plan, to be agreed by East Hampshire District Council in consultation with Natural England, providing a clear rationale and methodology for the planned restoration of land falling within the East Hampshire Hangers Special Area of Conservation (SAC).

This will include a framework to monitoring the outcome of this restoration and be undertaken over an agreed period upon the completion of the sites restoration.

184 Informative

As an informative to this condition, its purpose is to help guide the applicant to the extent/requirements of the Restoration Plan. A clear rationale will describe in full the planned relocation of development from within the East Hampshire Hangers SAC to its new location and detail how the restoration plan will be effective through a clear methodology of on the ground habitat improvement and monitoring (up to 2 years from restoration completion), all of which should support the conservation objectives of the SAC. In terms of the key habitats favoured for the site, and as a guide to developing aspects of the Restoration Plan to establish new native woodland, Natural England would recommend that such plans combine the use of local/native English Oak, Hazel and Hawthorne as a mosaic of suitable restoration planting.

Any movement or importing of soils should consider the nature of the soil within the habitat, including consideration of natural topsoil and its pH (the control of pH on degraded sites is frequently a first step in the process of restoration). When considering a restoration scheme, objectives for the vegetation and faunal communities should ideally be based on the existing soils on site. However, these soils may be so degraded that soil restoration in some form is required. Should this be required then it will be important to ensure soils on site are handled and managed appropriately.

Colemore & Priors Dean Parish Council - Objection

While we appreciate that the applicants have made significant efforts to establish their credentials as travelling showpeople and to meet the objections over SSSI and SCA, we note that Nature England still have substantial objections and fundamentally we still feel that a site like this outside a residential area in a National Park is quite unsuitable for such a development. Moreover the granting of permission would set a highly dangerous precedent.

Hawkley Parish Council - Objection

Strongly objects to this planning application. Principal reasons for this position are as stated at the time of the original application.

Hawkley Parish original objection:

"The documents accompanying this planning application confirm that the land is situated in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. It is also within the proposed South Downs National Park. It can in no way be said to be on the outskirts of a built up area, nor a brown field site. It is a new development in the open countryside, away from existing developments and is outside any Settlement Policy Boundary. This kind of development that should be strictly controlled in accordance with paragraph 45, CLGC 04/2007.

There is an agricultural storage barn close by the site, but it is set back off the road and blends in, consistent with rural agricultural scenery.

185 The new development is an eyesore and is seriously detrimental to the publics enjoyment of the countryside and in our view full planning permission should be denied.

The Parish Council is sensitive to the needs of Show People and Travellers alike. We understand that HCC and EHDC are working on the provision of authorised sites but we have no knowledge of the availability of suitable sites for this community now or in the near future. While we would prefer no grant of permission, if it is the case that there is currently a shortage of sites and you feel minded to grant permission on the merits of this particular application, then such permission should be temporary, for the period until such time as appropriate accommodation has been provisioned. Further, agreement must be reached as to exactly how many adults and precisely what type of equipment be permitted on the site. "

Froxfield Parish Council - Objection

The Parish Council thanks EHDC for the invitation to respond to this planning application, to which it objects very strongly. Two previous applications have been summarily rejected and the Parish Council can see no material difference in this one to warrant any change of view.

Representations

6 letters of objection have been received a) Causes serious ecological and visual harm to the SDNP, in particular the EH Hangers SAC - an area of international biological and landscape important - contrary to European Union Habitats Directive - causes harm to the Wealden Edge Hangers SSSI, Ashford Hanger National Nature Reserve - also falls within or is adj to land designated under the Catchment Sensitive Farm Delivery Initiative: Priority Catchment Area 41, the National Inventory of Woodland and Trees (England) - Ancient Woodland - the Wealden Edge Hangers Local Nature Reserve, EH Hangers Biodiversity Opportunity Area, Hampshire Wildlife Trust Reserve: The Warren, Hampshire Treasure (The Warren). An appropriate assessment on the impact on this sensitive area for the purposes of the Regulations has not been received - PA has duty to undertake appropriate assessment - precautionary principle to be adopted - open to judicial review. b) Contrary to South Downs Management Plan- fails to conserve and enhance landscape character, natural beauty, local landscape wildlife and amenity of the downs - fails to contribute a net gain to the environment - fails to ensure the sympatric management of a key habitat, the "hangers" - conflicts with statutory purpose of SDNP designation - LA has duty to further the purposes of the NP. c) Contrary to policies GS1, GS3, HE1, H14, IB3 of the Local Plan. Contrary to Core Strategy policies C5, CP15, CP16, CP30 & national advice in PPS9 and National Parks Circular DEFRA, March 2010. Circular 04/2007 clearly establishes that LPAs are entitled to refuse private applications in locations that do not comply with planning policies. d) Proposal retrospective - should be judged by the same standards as an application submitted in advance - application form misrepresents extent of proposal - omits key details -

186 stationing of a mobile home and two caravans etc - blue land integral to the applicants' intentions should be considered as part of the application - possibility of intensification over time - no justification to be in countryside. e) Supporting documents significantly overstate the consequences of NE's letter - they have not expressed any doubt over the SSSI boundary on the land marked in blue - not consented to any operations that would damage the SSSI - dangerous precedent - no material change to proposal since previous refusal - restoration plan unacceptable. f) Baseline Ecology Assessment very superficial and fails to assess the numerous other environmental, ecological, biodiversity and heritage designations - in contrast with previous surveys on the ecological value of the site - fails to consider damage already done and the impact of the development - clearance of trees, planting of conifers etc, introduction of free- range chickens - does not include reference to the extensive literature relevant to The Warren. g) Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment significantly understates the overall sensitivity and magnitude of the development - fails to consider the correct visual envelope of the site - by not addressing the public viewpoints from the surrounding land. h) Council previously indicated it would refuse any new development in the area. i) No overriding public interest in allowing this development - rights of the family are overwhelmingly outweighed by ecological and visual imperatives. j) Forestry and agricultural activities only operated from land recently - no justification for an on-site presence. k) Not travelling showpeople for the purposes of the legislation - convincing evidence needed - principal occupation of Mr Beach is a builder, which has not been rebutted - fairground activities form a small part of their life, work and income - at best familial status as travelling showpeople - not supported their status as occupational showpeople. l) Road access fails on two of the site criteria recommended by the Showmen's Guild of Great Britain - should have good vehicular access and close proximity to a good road network - breached on both counts. m) AONB - contrary to Policy C1 - outside settlement policy boundary -development seriously detrimental to the character of the landscape - noise and light pollution affects tranquility and quality of landscape - gates and fencing out-of-keeping - special attention in terms of designations need to be paid - not a suitable location for residential. n) Site is isolated rural unsustainable location - not located close to schools or other facilities - development unlikely to promote peaceful and integrated co-existence between site and the local community.

187 o) Support exercise to identify additional sites for this use - conditions preventing outside storage.

Determining Issues

1. Planning policy for traveller sites, March 2012. 2. Principle of development 3. Natural conservation 4. Impact on area 5. Impact on amenity of neighbours 6. Developers' contributions 7. Highways Issues 8. Human Rights

Planning Considerations

1. Planning policy for traveller sites, March 2012.

The Government’s overarching aim in the above planning policy document (PPD) "...is to ensure fair and equal treatment for travellers, in a way that facilitates the traditional and nomadic way of life of travellers while respecting the interests of the settled community."

To achieve this aim, local planning authorities should make their own assessment of need for such sites within their area for the purposes of planning and "...should set pitch targets for gypsies and travellers and plot targets for travelling showpeople which address the likely permanent and transit site accommodation needs of travellers in their area, working collaboratively with neighbouring local planning authorities."

With regard to a traveller accommodation assessment (TAA) for the national park, the South Downs National Parks Authority has commenced work on this. However, it is at a relatively early stage and a level of need has not, as yet, been identified.

The applicant has provided some evidence of a current lack of alternative pitches/sites and the PA is not aware of any available accommodation within the locality or East Hampshire. However, it is not clear how pressing the need is or the precise level at this stage, especially as, historically, East Hampshire has not received any general enquires about such provision within the locality. It is, however, anticipated that the TAA is likely to identify a need for traveller sites within the park.

2. Principle of development

The starting point in considering this proposal is Government advice in the 'Planning policy for traveller sites' This planning policy document (PPD) advises that:

"Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise".

188 There is no policy in the Local Plan for a travelling showperson's site, as it is not a 'saved' policy on advice from Government office for the South East in that it was not in line with the advice in Circular 04/2007, which stated that “…local landscape and local nature conservation designations should not be used in themselves to refuse planning permission for travelling showpeople’s sites”. (This circular has been superseded by the PPD)

The PPD goes on to advise that:

"Applications should be assessed and determined in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development and the application of specific policies in the National Planning Policy Framework and this planning policy for traveller sites."

The PPD then sets out the criteria that local planning authorities should consider, amongst other relevant matters, when determining planning applications for traveller sites, which is as follows:

"a) the existing level of local provision and need for sites b) the availability (or lack) of alternative accommodation for the applicants c) other personal circumstances of the applicant d) that the locally specific criteria used to guide the allocation of sites in plans or which form the policy where there is no identified need for pitches/plots should be used to assess applications that may come forward on unallocated sites e) that they should determine applications for sites from any travellers and not just those with local connections."

The PDD advises that:

"...if a local planning authority cannot demonstrate an up–to-date five-year supply of deliverable sites, this should be a significant material consideration in any subsequent planning decision when considering applications for the grant of temporary planning permission."

When concerning sites in rural areas, the PPD states:

"When assessing the suitability of sites in rural or semi-rural settings, local planning authorities should ensure that the scale of such sites does not dominate the nearest settled community."

It also advises that:

"Local planning authorities should strictly limit new traveller site development in open countryside that is away from existing settlements or outside areas allocated in the development plan. Local planning authorities should ensure that sites in rural areas respect the scale of, and do not dominate the nearest settled community, and avoid placing an undue pressure on the local infrastructure."

189 Whilst there are constraints relating to such developments in open countryside, there is an acceptance in this PPD that travellers' sites may be located within rural areas.

The site is within a nationally recognised designated area; the SDNP and in open countryside away from existing settlement and outside of areas allocated in development plan documents.

The NPPF on developments within national parks advises that:

"Great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty. The conservation of wildlife and cultural heritage are important considerations in all these areas, and should be given great weight in National Parks and the Broads."

The proposal is for a travelling showmen's site for one family. The family operates 4 stalls and 2 small rides at shows, which are stored on the site. It is also understood that Mr Beach is a builder, by profession. The applicants are not members of the Showman's Guild and no evidence has been provided that they are members of any similar organisation. However, information provided in the application indicates that both the applicants are from showmen's families and are involved in this lifestyle. From information provided, they previously rented space at an authorised showmen's site at Fairlands in Grayshott. However, they had to move off, as it was required by the owner's daughter.

Travelling showpeople are defined in the PPD as:

"Members of a group organised for the purposes of holding fairs, circuses or shows (whether or not travelling together as such). This includes such persons who on the grounds of their own or their family's or dependants’ more localised pattern of trading, educational or health needs or old age have ceased to travel temporarily or permanently, but excludes Gypsies and Travellers as defined above."

As stated above, the applicants are from a travelling showmen's background and are involved in shows and public events. Therefore, it is considered, on balance that the applicants' lifestyle/business falls within the definition of a showperson as defined in the PPD. The advice in the PPD is, therefore, material to the determination of the proposal.

The planning criteria in the PPD, when determining such proposals, are as follows: a) the existing level of local provision and need for sites

EHDC is not aware of any travellers site within the park area. Concerning the need for such sites within the park, this will form part of the TAA, which as stated above, is at an early stage.

190 b) the availability (or lack) of alternative accommodation for the applicants

There are 18 authorised travelling showmen's plots within East Hampshire, which are outside the park. As these sites are in private ownership, there are no records of plot turnover or occupancy. The Council is not aware of any vacancies on these site, and anecdotal evidence suggests that there may be more families/caravans on these authorised pitches then that provided for by their permissions.

As regard alternative accommodation, the Council is not aware of any such accommodation being available within the locality (or East Hampshire) and a refusal could result in the occupiers becoming homeless. Therefore, the Committee needs to consider whether a temporary planning permission would be appropriate, as advised by the PPD. c) other personal circumstances of the applicant

To avoid repetition, these are set out under the heading "Human Rights Act 1998". d) that the locally specific criteria used to guide the allocation of sites in plans or which form the policy where there is no identified need for pitches/plots should be used to assess applications that may come forward on unallocated sites

Policy CP13 in the East Hampshire District Local Plan: Joint Core Strategy sets out a policy for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople, which has been drafted in accordance with the advice in Circulars 01/2006 and 04/2007. However, as the strategy is not adopted, it is considered that limited weight may be given to this policy, at this stage. Further, this policy may need to be revised to accord with the advice in the PPD. e) that they should determine applications for sites from any travellers and not just those with local connections.

The applicants were formerly residing at Grayshott, which may be viewed as a local connection, albeit this is not relevant to the determination of the application.

Having regard to the advice in the PPD and the lack of any alternative provision, the principle of a temporary planning permission may be acceptable in this locality, which is referred to further under the Human Rights Act 1998 heading.

3. Nature conservation

The site lies adjacent a SAC, which is an internationally designated site of nature conservation. This important nature conservation area benefits from statutory protection and is safeguarded under the planning system. A small part of the existing access to the site lies within the SAC. The current use of adjacent land by the applicant has resulted in the loss of features to the SAC.

The NPPF recognises the importance of nature conservation sites and the need to protect and enhance such areas.

191

Regulation 61 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (Habitat Regs), places a duty on local planning authorities when determining proposals to make an appropriate assessment where a proposal is:

"(a) likely to have a significant effect on a European site (either alone or in combination with other plans or projects); and (b) not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site to make an appropriate assessment for the site in view of its conservation objectives."

An ecological assessment has been provided by the applicant and Natural England and the County Ecologist have been consulted regarding the proposal. Whilst the former originally raised an objection to the proposal, this was subsequently withdrawn. This is subject to a condition requiring that "... within one month from the date of planning permission a detailed Restoration Plan and framework to monitor the outcome of this restoration for the area within the SAC currently occupied by the applicants being submitted for approval to the Planning Authority ...". (Whilst a Restoration Plan was submitted as part of the application process, this was unsatisfactory).

Due to the removal of the proposal from the SAC, the restoration of this part of the SAC and a framework for monitoring the outcome of this restoration, it is considered that the proposal is unlikely to have a significant effect on this European site and that an appropriate assessment of the impact of the proposal under the regulations has been undertaken by the PA.

In accordance with Regulation 62 of the Habitats Regulations, the Council must consider:

(a) whether it is satisfied that there is no alternative solution available; and (b) notwithstanding the negative impact of the proposal, is there an imperative reason of overriding public interest, that would warrant the grant of a temporary planning permission?

With reference to (a), there is an alternative solution available to mitigate or avoid the loss of part of the SAC, by the removal of the development currently within this sensitive area onto adjacent land, which is in the applicants' ownership.

Concerning (b), with the exception of a small part of the access, the development would be relocated outside the SAC and this area restored, thereby removing any significant impact on this area. (Natural England has no objection to the use of the existing access). Therefore, it is considered that there is no need for the applicant to establish an imperative need for the development.

The proposal would not result in the loss of part of an internationally designated conservation site as with the previous two proposals and should secure the reinstatement of the SAC damaged by the current use of the land.

192 4. Impact on area & the SDNP

The site is within the South Downs National Park, which the Government has confirmed as having the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty. As advised in the NPPF: "Great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty."

The proposal would be located further into the site and, therefore, views from Church Lane should be limited, due to fencing/screening along this boundary. However, by relocating the mobile home, etc, further into the site, on previously undeveloped land, this would have more of an impact on the locality, to the detriment of the area. Further, the proposal is considered an incongruous and alien form of development, out-of-keeping with the character and appearance of this attractive rural location. The current use of the land has also included the removal of trees and vegetation which has further degraded the character and appearance of this sensitive rural locality. Therefore, the proposal fails to conserve and enhance the SDNP and detracts from the intrinsic quality and visual amenities of this sensitive rural location. This is contrary to national advice, the purposes of the SDNP and Local Plan policies GS3, C5 & HE1.

However, as the site is occupied by the applicants and their six children, who state they have nowhere else to live, it is necessary to consider whether this amounts to an overriding public interest argument to grant a temporary planning permission, whilst an alternative site is found. This is dealt with under the heading 'Human Rights Act 1998'.

5. Impact on amenity of neighbours

Due to the location of the development in relationship with neighbouring properties, it is considered the proposal should not have an adverse effect on the amenities of the occupiers of these properties, by reason of overlooking, noise or disturbance.

6. Developers' contributions

The development is, effectively, for the equivalent of one permanent dwelling. New residential developments are required under Policy R3 to provide public open space. None is proposed on site and a contribution in lieu of provision is, therefore, required. Contributions would also be required for alternative transport measures and environmental improvements in accordance with policy. These contributions have been paid and, therefore, the proposal accords with policies GS4 and RS3.

7. Highways

The Highway Authority has raised no objection to the proposal.

193 8. Human Rights Act 1998

Grounds for refusal 2, 3, 5, 6 & 7 relating to the previous proposal under reference 51451/003 have been addressed by this proposal (ie nature conservation issues and payment of developers' contribution). However, it does not address grounds 1 and 4. As regards the latter, which relates to the unacceptable loss of established landscape features, this may be mitigated by the imposition of a landscape condition for the site and by the restoration of the land currently occupied. Concerning the former, the site is considered to be in an unsuitable and unsustainable location and the proposal is considered to cause significant harm to this sensitive rural location. This, however, has to be balanced against the human rights of the applicants, their family and those of third parties

The applicants have advised that this was the only land available, following the need to move from their previous pitch and being unable to secure an alternative site. It is recognised that there may be a modest unmet need within the park area. However, this, in itself, does not necessarily override the demonstrable harm caused to this important rural location. Therefore, it is necessary to balance the needs of the applicants and their family to live on the land, against the significant harm caused to the SDNP and any other material considerations.

The applicants and their six children are living in a caravan on the land. Four of the children attend school outside the local area: two of the children are below school age. One of the children has learning difficulties and receives a daily programme of specialist teaching. Whilst this difficulty is recognised, it is considered that there are no exceptional schooling or health issues relating to the family, that require the occupation of this site. That being said, it is recognised that a settled base may ensure easier access to medical and similar facilities and for children to attend school regularly, albeit the latter is not in the local area.

As advised in the PPD, the lack of available alternative accommodation is material to the determination of the application, as are other personal circumstances. As regards alternative accommodation, as stated above, the Council is not aware of any such accommodation being available within the locality (or East Hampshire) and a refusal could result in the occupiers becoming homeless. Therefore, the Committee needs to consider whether a temporary planning permission would be appropriate.

The advice on the use of temporary permissions is contained in paragraphs 108 – 113 of Circular 11/95, The Use of Conditions in Planning Permission. Paragraph 110 advises that a temporary permission may be justified where it is expected that the planning circumstances will change in a particular way at the end of the period of the temporary permission. Where there is unmet need with no available alternative traveller provision in an area, but there is a reasonable expectation that new sites are likely to become available at the end of that period, local planning authorities should give consideration to granting a temporary permission.

Assessing the accommodation needs of travellers has commenced, albeit, it is at an early stage. There is an expectation that, as a result of this work, some need is likely to be identified within the national park and that new sites become available.

194 Having regard to all material planning considerations, which include the human rights of the applicants, their family and third parties, a refusal may result in them becoming homeless. This is considered an exceptional reason and a temporary planning permission for 3 years in the circumstances described in the PPD would be appropriate.

If the Committee is minded to accept the recommendation, the fact that a temporary planning permission has been granted on this basis should not be regarded as setting a precedent for the determination of any future applications for full permission for use of the land as a travellers' site.

Conclusion

The proposal causes harm to the purposes of the SDNP and is considered contrary to policies in the Local Plan. Previous nature conservation objections should be addressed by the proposal and the required developer contributions have been paid. Having regard to all material planning considerations, there are considered, on balance, to be exceptional circumstances, which would warrant the grant of a temporary 3 year planning permission in accordance with the advice in the Planning Policy Document relating to travellers' sites.

RECOMMENDATION TEMPORARY PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1 The occupation of the site hereby permitted shall be carried on only by the applicants Mr Raymond Beach and Mrs Amelia Beach and their resident dependants and shall be for a limited period, being the period of three years from the date of this decision, or the period during which the premises are occupied by them, whichever is the shorter. Reason - The application was granted due to the specific circumstances of the applicants and their family.

2 When the premises cease to be occupied by Mr Raymond Beach, Mrs Amelia Beach, and their resident dependants, or at the end of 3 years, whichever shall first occur, the use hereby permitted shall cease, all caravans, vehicles, materials and equipment brought on to the premises in connection with the use shall be removed and the land restored to its former condition. Reason - The application was granted due to the specific circumstances of the applicants and their family and to ensure that the site is properly restored to its former condition at the expiry of the permission.

3 The occupation of the site hereby permitted shall be carried on only by a single travelling showperson's family, as defined in paragraph 2 in Annex 1 attached to the Communities and Local Government, Planning Policy for traveller sties, March 2012. Reason - The site lies in a locality where permission would not normally be granted for residential development.

195 4 No more than 3 caravans, as defined in the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 and the Caravans Sites Act 1968 (of which no more than 1 shall be a static caravan or mobile home) shall be stationed on the site at any time. Reason - To control the level of residential use on the land, and in the interests of amenity.

5 Within one month from the date of planning permission a detailed Restoration Plan, shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for approval. The Restoration Plan should provide a clear rationale and methodology for the planned restoration of land falling within the East Hampshire Hangers Special Area of Conservation (SAC). The Plan should show boundary treatment between the application site and the SAC and a framework to monitor the outcome of this restoration and be undertaken over a 2 year period upon the completion of the site's restoration.

Within 3 months of the date of the Planning Authority's approval, the Restoration Plan for the site shall be fully implemented, strictly in accordance with the approved details.

Following the implementation of the restoration scheme, the SAC shall not be used in connection with any activity associated with the use of the adjacent land as a travelling showperson's site, including the siting/storage of mobile homes/caravans, parking/storage of vehicles, items, structures, equipment and other paraphernalia. Reason - To secure the reinstatement and the protection of the SAC.

6 Within one month of the grant of planning permission a fully detailed landscape and planting scheme for the site shall be submitted in writing by the Planning Authority for approval. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and in accordance with the recommendations of the appropriate British Standards or other recognised codes of good practice. These works shall be carried out in the first planting season after approval of the details, unless otherwise first agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. Any trees or plants which, within a period of 3 years after planting, are removed, die or become seriously damaged or defective, shall be replaced as soon as is reasonably practicable with others of species, size and number as originally approved unless otherwise first agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason - In the interests of the visual amenities of the locality.

196 7 No commercial activity, including the storage of materials or equipment relating to a commercial activity, shall take place on the site, nor on the remainder of the site in the applicants' ownership and occupation, other than in the barn shown on drawing number 10025-2 and the parking of vehicles in the authorised site. Reason - In the interests of amenity of the area.

8 There shall be no external lighting on the site unless details of any such lighting have been previously submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and installed in accordance with the approved details. Reason - In the interest of the amenity of the area.

9 Any gates provided shall be set back a distance of 4.5m from the edge of the carriageway of the adjoining highway. Reason - In the interests of highway safety.

10 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and particulars:

Letter dated 17 June 2011 Baseline Ecological Assessment Dwg no. 10025/2 - location and block plan Planning, Access and Design Statement Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment July 2011

Reason - To ensure provision of a satisfactory development

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1 The Council has granted permission because:

The proposal causes harm to the purpose of the SDNP and is considered contrary to policies in the Local Plan. Previous nature conservation objections should be addressed by the proposal and the required developer contributions have been paid. Having regard to all material planning considerations, there are considered, on balance, to be exceptional circumstances, which would warrant the grant of a temporary 3 year planning permission in accordance with the advice in the DDP relating to travellers' sites.

It is therefore considered that subject to compliance with the attached conditions and taking into account all other material planning considerations, including the provisions of the development plan, the proposal would be acceptable. This also includes a consideration of whether the decision to grant permission is compatible with the Human Rights Act 1998.

197 2 The purpose of this informative is to help guide the applicants to the extent/requirements of the Restoration Plan. A clear rationale will describe in full the planned relocation of development from within the East Hampshire Hangers SAC to its new location and detail how the restoration plan will be effective through a clear methodology of on the ground habitat improvement and monitoring (up to 2 years from restoration completion), all of which should support the conservation objectives of the SAC. In terms of the key habitats favoured for the site, and as a guide to developing aspects of the Restoration Plan to establish new native woodland, Natural England would recommend that such plans combine the use of local/native English Oak, Hazel and Hawthorne as a mosaic of suitable restoration planting.

CASE OFFICER: Lesley Wells 01730 234223 ———————————————————————————————————————

198 SECTION 1 Item 1 Warren Barn, Church Lane, Priors Dean, Petersfield, GU32 1BW

Site Plan

199

SECTION 1 Item 1 Warren Barn, Church Lane, Priors Dean, Petersfield, GU32 1BW

Block Plan

200