26/02299/FUL is a retrospective planning application for a Traveller Site next to 55 Hillside. This site is subject to enforcement notices that were never appealed and the applicants are now attempting to bypass the planning system by applying retrospectively.
This application is the third attempt by the current applicants. The council completely dismissed the previous two using “Section 70C” rules, but not in this case, with the following justification:
"Th[is] application is an attempt to secure
planning permission for a different use than
has been applied for previously, and is not a
repeated application used as a delaying tactic.
The planning merits regarding whether or not
this is a suitable site for such a use, given
the shortfall of sites across South Cambridgeshire
identified in the Gypsy & Traveller Accommodation
Needs Assessment in 2024, have not been fully
tested. It is therefore considered appropriate
to allow the application to be determined and
not exercise the discretionary power under
Section 70C of the aforementioned Act."The use of Section 70C would in effect dismiss the application without the right to appeal. If the council could be persuaded to apply Section 70C for a third time would pile the pressure them to finally prosecute or send in the diggers to restore the site to its previous condition.
Case law has changed very recently and there is no indication that the council is keeping their decision on Section 70C under proper review.
You might be surprised that the application mentions the health needs of the proposed occupants of the site. This is because national Planning Policy for Traveller Sites (PPTS) mandates that Human Rights, family health and children’s education must be balanced against (but not override) environment harms.
The site is classified as “open countryside” by virtue of it being outside the village boundary, as defined in the Local Plan. This is an important consideration in opposing the application.
The lack of pedestrian and cycle access to the site also makes it unsuitable, meaning that most journeys will have to be by car.
Loss of biodiversity is an important consideration for this application. Unfortunately the site has already been cleared without permission, removing (or accidentally burning down) nearly all its hedges, mature trees and grass.
The law requires a biodiversity impact assessment based on the previous condition of the site. This is called the “biodiversity baseline”. However, the assessment attached to the current application post-dates the clearance.
Please consider using your local knowledge and recollections of the site as it was to inform your comments.
Other planning applications for this site have failed over concerns for road safety. The current Case Officer has indicated that he does not currently see the need to call in safety reports from the relevant experts so your personal experiences of traffic on the A603 and your observations of the site entrance could carry considerable weight.
The entrance to the site is off the A603 at a complex junction including a farm track, Rectory Farm Lane and the new haulage yard opposite. The junction has no filter lanes or right-turn lanes.
The southern part of the site and the access to the A603 shared with the neighbouring plot are quite small and cramped. You might have concerns that larger emergency service vehicles, for example, will struggle to enter the site, turn around and safely exit onto the main road.
The application seems to contain several factual errors and misleading statements. If you spot any then please include them in your opposition comments, giving as much supporting evidence as possible.
There have been numerous planning applications to develop this site over the years. The most recent failed application (21/04955/FUL) was appealed in 2023 and you can read the conclusion of the appeal process here:
21_04955_FUL-APPEAL_DECISION_COVER_LETTER-6181609.pdf
The main issues decided were suitability of the site and the effect on biodiversity. These are still relevant to the current application, so you can reflect the language in the appeal decision into your own comments.
The council will the collate and summarise the comments that it receives during the public consultation into an Officer’s Report.
If the application is deemed important enough, or if there have been a large number of objections, then the report might go to the planning committee for a decision. If not, it might be decided by a single Planning Officer. No appeal is possible.
To ensure that there is proper scrutiny this application can be “called in” in front of the committee. Our ward councillor, Aidan Van de Weyer, can influence this. However, he will need to show sufficient public interest, so by adding your comments on the planning portal you can influence how the application proceeds.