Plans for Gypsy and Traveller site on former Surrey green belt rejected amid safety and sustainability concerns
New homes that would have helped meet the need for more Gypsies and Travellers pitches in Surrey were thrown out amid fears the site would be unsustainable and unsafe.
Runnymede Borough Council’s planning committee had been recommended to approve the eight pitch site in Hurst Lane, near Virginia Water to help to hit unmet targets.
Officers warned the January committee the applicants could appeal any decision that went against them given the lack of identified housing sites in Runnymede – and that has meant the borough has lost every Gypsy and Traveller case when challenged through the courts over the last five years.
Councillors at the committee rejected the notion that there was an overwhelming need to ignore greenbelt and sustainability issues and rejected the application.
The proposals, which had received 30 letters of objection, were to change the use of a strip of land opposite Padd Farm to a residential caravan site with space for eight pitches that would each include a static caravan, touring caravan and parking for two vehicles.
Officers told the meeting: “The council remains committed to meeting the needs of Gypsy and Traveller pitches across the borough.
“There is currently an unmet need to Gypsy and Traveller pitches across the borough and the council has no five-year housing land supply for Gypsy and Traveller sites.”
Councillor Elaine Gill (Runnymede Independent Residents: Thorpe) said the issue of unmet need remained and that Runnymede could not provide enough need for the Gypsies and Travellers but that did not mean every patch of land should be given over.
She said: “That is quite disheartening for me as a Councillor and quite disheartening for the objectors who are here and have lived down the lane for many many years.
“There are going to be other ribbon gardens that are going to lend themselves to this use, and what bothers me is the accumulation and I do not think that Hurst Lane is sustainable.
“This to me is the rub of where we are, and yet again I feel quite sad about that.
She added that the council had always worked so hard but the goal posts – Government-set housing targets- keep being moved.
She added: “Since I’ve come back on planning last May, every meeting I have attended is to give approval for a Gypsy and Traveller site and I’m just feeling that as a councillor very very overwhelmed and that I’m not serving my other residents as I should be.”
Cllr Karin Rowsell (Liberal Democrat: Virginia Water) said that while she too was happy to approve previous Gypsy and Traveller applications she did not feel this was on a sustainable site and should therefore be rejected.
Cllr Jonathan Hulley (Conservative: Virginia Water) told the meeting the application would harm the remaining greenbelt. He said that, while meeting an unmet need, it would leave the new residents in an unsustainable location.
He added: “Let’s look at the site, there’s an absence of pavements in and around the site, it’s unsustainable and unsafe, in my view there is a lack of street lighting.
“The nearest bus stop is 1.5 miles away along a rural road, the nearest GP is 1.8 miles away.
“Local schools are inaccessible by foot, the lane is susceptible to flooding, let’s not forget that this is in a flood zone 2. And is subject to surface water flooding.”
Before rejecting the application the council’s head of planning warned the meeting the borough’s lack of Gypsy and Traveller sites left it wide-open to costly legally challenges.
He said: “As you say, the nub of it is ‘unmet need’ has been leading to planning appeals and those planning appeals have been inevitably approved.
“We have not won a planning appeal against a Gypsy and Traveller site in the last five years and when I speak to my colleagues at other Surrey authorities we are not unique, that is happening across the county.
He added: “It is very important that we meet the needs of all groups of the community and until we do we find ourselves the way we do.”