Appeal 6002811

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for Change of use of land for the stationing of 9 static caravan pitches, to be occupied by Gypsy and Traveller families, with associated hard surfacing/parking at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25/502765/FULL, and the plans submitted with it subject to the conditions in the attached schedule.

The Council refused planning permission on 14 November 2025, citing five reasons for refusal which can be described by the following four main issues: the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area, with particular regard to the Kent Downs National Landscape, the Ancient Woodland, highway safety and biodiversity, including the need for biodiversity net gain (BNG).

During the hearing the Council confirmed that they were no longer defending any of the reasons for refusal, having reviewed the evidence submitted by the appellant and having regard to the history of the site and the overriding need for Gypsy and Traveller pitches within the borough. In doing so, the Council agreed that the development would accord with the relevant policies within the Maidstone Borough Local Plan Review (2021-2038) (LPR).

The site is located within the Kent Downs National Landscape (KDNL). The statutory purpose of the National Landscape is to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the area. Section 245 of the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 (LURA) requires relevant authorities to ‘seek to further’ the statutory purposes of [name], including National Landscapes. Similarly, paragraph 189 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) requires great weight to be given to conserving and enhancing the landscape and scenic beauty in National Landscapes, which have the highest status of protection in relation to these issues.

The Council confirmed at the hearing that the proposal would not result in significant harm to the rural character and appearance of the area, and therefore would not conflict with part 2 of policy LPRSP9 and that it would not have a significant adverse impact on the setting of the Kent Downs National Landscape (part 5 of the LPRSP9).

The site is a former chalk quarry and has previously been used as landfill. The proposal would result in the removal of parts of the existing hardstanding, the introduction of a buffer zone to the Ancient Woodland and result in significant benefits from the additional planting. Whilst concerns had been raised about the impact of external lighting from the proposal, both parties were content that this could be adequately mitigated through the proposed conditions. On this basis the Council confirmed that the proposal would both conserve and enhance the KDNL.

Therefore, considering the proposed landscaping, which can be secured by condition, the removal of the hardstanding and the sites previous use as a chalk quarry, I am satisfied that the proposal would seek to further the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the area of outstanding beauty (now National Landscape) and therefore comply with paragraph 189 of the Framework and s85 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 as amended by s245 of the LURA.

The proposal would be in accordance with policies LPRSP9, LPRSP15, LPRHOU8 and LPRQD4 which together seek to ensure that the development would not result in significant harm to the rural character of the area, the setting of the KDNL; would respond positively to the character of an area, whilst retaining and adding to native vegetation appropriate to the local landscape, ensuring any impacts are appropriately mitigated.

In relation to the impact on the Ancient Woodland, the Council confirmed there would be no loss of Ancient Woodland as a result of the proposed development and that previous removal of habitat had been replaced following compliance with a restocking notice. The proposal also provides a 15m buffer zone to the Ancient Woodland as required by the Forestry Commission standing advice. On this basis, the proposal does not result in conflict with policy LPRSP14 (A) and LPRSP15, which requires development to protect positive landscape character, including areas of Ancient Woodland and respect and sensitively incorporate natural features such as trees.

In relation to biodiversity, the Council confirmed that the proposal is exempt from mandatory BNG and that whilst Policy LPRSP14(A) requires all development to secure a minimum of 20% BNG, the evidence provided indicated that provision at that level would be unviable and as such there was no conflict with the policy.

The appeal site is served by an existing access, which also provides access to the existing 4 traveller pitches located to the front of the site. The access was also deemed suitable when the Council approved 3 pitches on the appeal site in 2019 (19/501868), whilst this permission has subsequently lapsed, there is nothing before me to suggest that there has been any significant change in highway terms since that approval.

The Local Highway Authority, as a statutory consultee, has objected to the proposal, noting that the access is substandard due to a lack of deceleration and acceleration lanes. However, the Council confirmed that they were satisfied that sufficient visibility splays are achieved from the existing access and the overall increase in vehicles would be minimal. As such the development should not be prevented or refused on highway grounds as there would not be an unacceptable impact on the highway network.

I used the access when undertaking my site visit and had regard to the nature of the road, where vehicles can only enter and exit in one direction from the access. The appellants evidence directed me to other similar accesses onto the A429 in close proximity to the site, and I was able to see those as part of my visit. In this regard it is not unusual along this route that vehicles will be slowing to enter an access or waiting to exit. Therefore, I see no reason to disagree with the findings of the Council in this regard.

Therefore, the proposal, based on the specific circumstances of this appeal site, would be in accordance with policies LPRSP15 and LPRHOU8 which together require development to safely accommodate the vehicular movement generated by the proposal on the local highway network.

The Council accepts that it is unable to identify a five year supply of sites, with around 333 pitches required by 2027. The Council is working on a Gypsy, Traveller and [name], with the aim of this being adopted in January 2028.

Both parties confirmed that the appeal site had not been considered as part of the call for sites but the Council accepted that it was unlikely that the DPD would be able to meet all of the pitch requirements, noting the scale of the deficit. As such windfall sites, such as the appeal site, would still be required to meet future need, at least in the short term. The Council also set out that many of the sites which had been brought forward in the call for sites were existing sites seeking extensions and as such would not be available to the appellant.

This, and a lack of alternative sites within the borough for the appellant, has resulted in the Council reconsidering its position in relation to the overall suitability of the appeal site for the development proposed.

The Council has suggested 13 conditions which I have considered against the advice in the Framework and Planning Practice Guidance. As well as the standard implementation condition, I have imposed a condition to ensure that the proposal is carried out in accordance with the approved plan to provide certainty.

To limit the visual impact the number of caravans and the size of vehicles to be kept at the site are to be restricted. For similar reasons details of landscaping and any external lighting are also required to be submitted, agreed and implemented. I have also imposed a condition restricting permitted development rights as this is justified noting the site’s location within the National Landscape.

In order to ensure appropriate foul and surface water drainage is provided on the site details are also required. I have also found it necessary to impose a condition requiring the submission of details of the ecological and biodiversity enhancements.

I have not imposed a condition requiring the removal of the caravans if the use of the site ceases, as the use of the land for the siting of caravans has been given on a permanent basis.

I have also not imposed some of the councils suggested conditions which duplicate the matters set out within the council’s suggested condition 06, the level of detail set out is a matter for the Council to consider and communicate with the appellant as part of any application to discharge their conditions and it is unnecessary duplication for this information to be subject to separate conditions.

I therefore conclude that the proposal would accord with the development plan as a whole and, as other material considerations do not indicate a decision to the contrary, that the appeal should be allowed.

Appeal Decision APP/U2235/C/17/3175400 & 3173195 Land at [site address] .

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing nos J005052-DD-01 Site Location Plan; J005052-DD-05A Proposed Site Plan; J005052-DD-04A [name]; 1160-L01 Landscape Proposal; 1160-L02 [name].

The site shall not be occupied by any persons other than Gypsies and Travellers, defined as persons of nomadic habit of life whatever their race or origin, including such persons who on grounds only of their own or their family’s or dependants’ educational or health needs or old age have ceased to travel temporarily or permanently, and all other persons with a cultural tradition of nomadism or of living in a caravan, but excluding members of an organised group of travelling showpeople or circus people travelling together as such, in accordance with Planning Policy for [name] or replacement planning policy or guidance.

No more than 9 caravans [as defined in the [name] and Control of Development Act 1960 and the Caravan Sites Act 1968 as amended] shall be stationed on the land at any time.

No vehicle over 3.5 tonnes shall be stationed, parked or stored on the site.

Notwithstanding the provisions of Schedule 2 Part 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no gates, fences, walls, other means of enclosure shall be placed on the land or other means of access formed to the adjacent highway other than those expressly authorised by this permission.

The use hereby permitted shall cease and all caravans, structures, equipment and materials brought onto the land for the purposes of such use shall be removed within 56 days of the date of failure to meet any one of the requirements set out in i) to iv) below: i) Within 3 months of the date of this decision a scheme for a) the means of foul and surface water drainage of the site, along with details regarding the provision of potable water and waste disposal; b) proposed and existing external lighting on the boundary of and within the site. These details shall include measures to shield and direct light from the light sources so as to prevent light pollution; c) the internal layout of the site, including the siting of caravans, plots, extent of hardstanding, access roads, parking and amenity areas; d) details of landscaping, including all existing trees and hedgerows; and details of the number, size, species, maturity, spacing and position of any proposed native trees and soft landscaping enhancements around the perimeter of the site, using indigenous species; e) details of the measures to enhance ecology at the site through the provision within the site of measures such as bird and bat boxes, bug hotels, log piles, wildflower planting and hedgehog corridors f) details of precautionary mitigation from commencement of works (including site clearance) for protected species, including but not limited to Badgers, Bats, and nesting birds. If at any time a protected species is discovered within the works area, all works must stop while a suitably qualified ecologist and/or Natural England are consulted. (hereafter referred to as the site development scheme) shall have been submitted for the written approval of the local planning authority and the scheme shall include a timetable for its implementation. ii) If within 11 months of the date of this decision the local planning authority refuse to approve the scheme or fail to give a decision within the prescribed period, an appeal shall have been made to, and accepted as validly made by, the Secretary of State. iii) If an appeal is made in pursuance of ii) above, that appeal shall have been finally determined and the submitted scheme shall have been approved by the Secretary of State. iv) The approved scheme shall have been carried out and completed in accordance with the approved timetable. Upon implementation of the approved site development scheme specified in this condition, that scheme shall thereafter be maintained/retained/remain in use as appropriate. In the event of a legal challenge to this decision, or to a decision made pursuant to the procedure set out in this condition, the operation of the time limits specified in this condition will be suspended until that legal challenge has been finally determined.

The landscaping required by condition 7 (i) (d) shall be designed in accordance with the principles of the Council's landscape character guidance (Maidstone Landscape Character Assessment Supplement 2012). The detailed landscaping drawings shall include: a) details of all existing trees, hedgerows and blocks of landscaping on, and immediately adjacent to, the site and indicate whether they are to be retained or removed. b) measures for the protection of retained landscaping, trees and hedgerows (including roots), from commencement of works (including site clearance). These measures shall be in line with The British Standard "Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction to Construction - Recommendations" (BS5837) (2012); c) details of the number, size, species, maturity, spacing and position of proposed trees and landscaping. d) Planted species should align with a nearby Tree Preservation Order (TPO) in the adjacent [name] - 5005/2024/TPO Woodland of mixed deciduous species including [name], Birch and Hornbeam. e) a planting specification, implementation details and a ten [10] year landscape management plan (Only non-plastic guards shall be used for the new trees and hedgerows, and no Sycamore trees or [name] (Prunus laurocerasus) shall be planted).

All planting, seeding, and turfing specified in the approved landscape details shall be completed in accordance with the approved timetable for implementation. Any seeding or turfing which fails to establish or any existing or proposed trees or plants which, within ten years from planting die or become so seriously damaged or diseased that their long-term amenity value has been adversely affected shall be replaced in the next planting season with plants of the same species and size as detailed in the approved landscape scheme. -END-