Blackbrook: Drone footage of gypsy camp in Newcastle

We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. More info

Since the approximate 16 travellers – including children – scrambled to build their site from 700 tonnes of rubble and fencing on a remote field, they’ve had two planning permission applications rejected by the council. More than 230 people objected to the application in Blackbrook, Staffordshire, for reasons including highway safety, inappropriate development in the open countryside and flooding concerns.

The last application requested consent for four pitches, four amenity buildings, a stable and hardstanding.

But Newcastle Borough Council, which the Tories took this month for the first time in decades, rejected it, stating the field near a garden centre is “unacceptable location for residential development”.

The travellers are appealing the decision, Stoke-on-Trent Live says, and a hearing in the county will now run for four days.

Jack Smyth, representing the council, spoke on Tuesday of “the reprehensible manner in which the site was established”.

He told the inquiry: “Whilst the planning system allows retrospective applications, recently the Government changed the guidance so decision makers can take into account the manner in which the breach of planning control arises.

“Here the establishment of the gypsy traveller site was clearly calculated and well-planned. The High Court was sufficiently concerned about the risk that even more work would be undertaken to expand and entrench the site that it granted an injunction to halt the ring and prevent further breaches.”

He added: “The unattractive track record of compliance reflects poorly on the appellants. The council doubts the appellants will offer any apology for their conduct – defiance will probably be the order of the day.

“The council remains firmly of the view the site is in an unacceptable location for residential development. Had the appellants liaised with the council prior to establishing the unauthorised site they would have realised it occupies a sensitive location in a local landscape.

“The site enjoys protection under a local landscape planning designation. The unauthorised development causes significant harm to the character and appearance of the area. The two metre high acoustic fence in particular is a conspicuous and incongruent feature.

“The site is marooned off the A53, such that its occupants will inevitably be dependent on the private car. There’s no realistic public transport option for the site whatsoever, given the dangerous walk route on the A53, which is unlit and lacks a pedestrian walkway.”

The A53 connects the rural Blackbrooks with Newcastle-under-Lyme itself, and Market Drayton, Shropshire, in the west.

But Mark Willers QC, representing the appellants, said there were bus stops on the rural road just a few hundred metres away from the site.

“There isn’t any significant conflict with the development plan and in the circumstances ask you to apply presumption in favour of sustainable development and grant planning,” the lawyer said.

“But if you conclude against us that there is some significant harm rising from the development we will be inviting you to look at the material considerations, which we would say outweigh that harm identified.

“That would include the national, regional and local need for gypsy site provision, the adequacy of the development plan policy and the fact that there is no five-year supply of developable sites, the personal needs of the site residents for a gypsy site, the lack of availability of alternative site provision, the personal circumstances of the site residents which are a separate factor from their need for a site and finally the human rights of those living on the site – and particularly the best interests of their children.

“In weighing those against the harm that may have been found to arise from the development, we would invite you to conclude that in this case permanent permission ought to be granted. Or failing that, at least temporary planning permission, subject of course to conditions which we would invite you to conclude can be imposed with the knowledge that they will be satisfied.”

Maer and Ashton Parish Council member Andrew Mainwaring also spoke.

He said: “The appellants’ agent, Philip Brown, states that if the appeal fails it is likely that the families would have to leave the appeal site and take up a roadside existence. This would result in an interference with their human rights.

“The appellants were well aware their illegal actions could have resulted in them being refused permission, and that their resulting existence would be in jeopardy but of their own doing. I believe they came from a stable site in Cheshire and were not homeless.

“The 230 or so residents that wrote into the council objecting to the planning application were informed that their objections should be restricted to planning matters alone. It is evident that the appellants and their agent have used all sorts of emotive issues to highlight and prioritise their personal circumstances and health issues.

“Many law-abiding residents in the locality have personal feelings, needs, emotive issues and health conditions which were forbidden from being brought to the attention of the planners and the inspector.”

Mark Lee, who part owns the site and lives there with his family, revealed in 2020 they have faced verbal abuse from passing motorists and people snooping on the encampment.

Speaking last year, he said: “There are four families here and we want to pay council tax. None of us are claiming benefits. We’re not going to cost the council any money.”

Source: Read Full Article