Dear Ms Smith
Re: APP/B3030/W/19/3225352 – Land north of Crossways, Main Street, Bathley, Newark on Trent, Nottinghamshire, NG23 6DL
We write in regards to the above-mentioned appeal and on behalf of Bathley Parish Council who wish to raise objection to the proposed change of use of the land to use as a residential caravan site
including 2no. caravans, laying out of hardstanding, construction of access and erection of ancillary utility building.
Reasons for Refusal
The application, which this appeal is the subject of, was refused under reference number 18/02219/FUL on 28 January 2019 for the reasons stated below:
In the opinion of the District Council, the access to the site cannot accommodate additional volumes of traffic which is not considered to provide a safe ingress or egress for vehicles. Furthermore, the proposal does not offer reasonable and practical ways of accessing the site other than by private car/van, and is therefore contrary to the principles of Spatial Policy 7 of the Core Strategy in that it fails to provide safe, convenient and attractive accesses for all, including the elderly and disabled, and others with restricted mobility, and does not provide links to any existing network of footways, bridleways and cycleways. The proposal is not appropriate for the highway network in terms of the volume and nature of traffic generated, and is likely to adversely affect the convenience and free flow of traffic using the highway. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to the aims of Policy DM5 of the DPD, Spatial Policy 7 and Core Policy 5 of the Core Strategy and the NPPF.
Statement of Case
Per Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compensation Act 2004, the Council determined the application in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicates
otherwise.
As can be seen in the above reasons for refusal, the application was refused on the grounds of incompliance with Policy DM5 of the Allocations & Development Management Development Plan
Document (DPD), Spatial Policy 7 and Core Policy 6 of the Core Strategy (CS) and the NPPF.
Access and Accessibility
During the application consultation process comments were received from Nottinghamshire County Council’s Highway Department which concluded that “the location of the development is such that it can only be accessed via a minor narrow country lane, away from any village centre”. The single track lane is narrow, achieving a width of about 3.3m and only widening to a sufficient extent to allow two vehicles to pass one another close to the junction with Caunton Close, which is approximately 50m to the south of the proposed access.
Swept path diagrams accompanied the appellant’s Statement of Case, and claims to demonstrate that a luxury 4×4 vehicle with a twin axle towing caravan can enter and egress the site safely, using
the existing highway without overrunning the adjacent verge. Whilst the proposed access may be designed with a 4.5m width, the width of the narrow country lane (3.3m) is such that were two
opposing vehicles to meet at least one would be forced onto the verge, particularly if one or both of the vehicles were towing caravans.
This, therefore, clearly demonstrates that the road dimensions are not appropriate for accommodating the additional usage that would be incurred by the proposed use of the land.
Indeed, this issue is referred to in Nottinghamshire County Council Highway Department’s comment for the application wherein it is stated that “the proposal is not appropriate for the highway network in terms of the volume and nature of traffic generated, and is likely to adversely affect the convenience and free flow of traffic using the highway”.
As such, the proposal does not comply with the requirements of Criterion 1 of DPD Policy DM5, which deems that “provision should be made for safe and inclusive access to new development”.
Sustainability
Bathley is the nearest settlement to the appeal site, the centre of which is approximately 1km to south, and which is considered to be an ‘Other Village in Newark & Sherwood’. This is the lowest
ranking in the Settlement Hierarchy as stated in CS Spatial Policy 1. There are extremely limited bus services which serve the settlement, with the nearest bus stops to the appeal site being located in the centre of Bathley, offering few and infrequent service into and out of Newark. Other than a public house located approximately 1km to the south of the appeal site there are no services nor facilities within 2km (including healthcare, education, retail and transport) with the nearest primary school being located in North Maskham some 2.5km to the east. The appeal site is located in the open countryside.
As such, the appeal site is clearly detached from key services and facilities, therefore requiring use of the private vehicle as the only mode of transport feasibly available to the occupants of the
proposal. The proposal is, therefore, in opposition to the aspirations of the NPPF and in particular Section 9 of the Framework which seeks to promote sustainable transport through the planning
system by actively managing patterns of growth and capitalising on opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport use.
The principles and aspirations of CS Spatial Policy 7 are to encourage and support development proposals which promote non-car modes as a means of access to services and facilities whilst
providing safe, convenient and attractive accesses for all, including the elderly and disabled, and others with restricted mobility. The majority of key services and facilities are located well outside of comfortable walking distance, and as there are no nearby and regular public transport services in the locality, private vehicular modes of transport will be required by the occupants of the proposal for all trips generated.
As is stated in the Nottinghamshire County Council Highway Department comment for the application, “the proposal does not offer reasonable and practical ways of accessing the site other
than by private car/van, and is therefore contrary to the principles of Spatial Policy 7 of the LDF Core Strategy in that it fails to provide safe, convenient and attractive accesses for all, including the
elderly and disabled, and others with restricted mobility, and does not provide links to any existing network of footways, bridleways and cycleways”.
In conclusion, the proposal fails to provide a safe and convenient access to the highway network as the country lane used to access the proposal is considered unsuitable for additional vehicular access and is not wide enough to ensure safe transit for caravan users, which the proposed scheme would inherently generate. Access to key services and facilities is poor from the appeal site, and can only realistically be achieved by routine private vehicle trips, which is in opposition to the aspirations of CS Spatial Policy 7 as well as Section 9 of the NPPF.
Other Issues
The proposal is contrary to the aspirations contained in CS Core Policy 4 to focus the additional provision of pitches in and around the Newark Urban Area. The site is clearly separate from the
wider urban area enveloping Newark, and has poor accessibility to the services and facilities located in the town by any other means apart from the private vehicle. Further to this, the site is sufficiently separated from the existing built form of Bathley that it is in the open countryside. Therefore, the proposal should be assessed against the requirements of CS Spatial Policy 3 ‘Rural Areas’ and DPD Policy DM8 ‘Development in the Open Countryside’.
The proposal is located approximately half a mile from the edge of the built form of Bathley, which itself has a highly limited amount of services and facilities. It is also poorly related, both by proximity and by accessibility by public transport, to the Newark Urban Area, any nearby Service Centres and Principal Villages.
Whilst it is acknowledged that there is a need for additional pitch provision in the District, this proposal is clearly contrary to the direction of travel as stated in CS Core Policy 4, as is referred to
above, which directs the focus for additional provision to in and around the Newark Urban Area.
In response to a comment raised in the Appellant’s Statement of Case, where it was stated that “there is no relevant previous planning history” information was obtained from the Council by Bathley Parish Council which established that the appeal site has, in fact, been the subject of two applications. Firstly, an application to “erect smallholding with bungalow” was approved on 26th April 1961 (application reference: E/32/27) and secondly an application for a “horticultural business” was refused on the parcel of land which this appeal is the subject of on 31st July 1979 (application reference 3279661).
Summary
For the reasons stated above, we consider it prudent that the Planning Inspectorate concord with the decision made by the Council regarding the original application, and refuse the appeal.
Yours sincerely
Ian Long (MRTPI)
Planner
Tel: 01509 278 664 / 07514 970 011