Agenda item

Change of use of land to accommodate 24 No. camping and caravanning pitches including provision of portable toilet/shower facilities, external sinks, drinking water stand pipes and associated parking

The Committee considered a report of the Planning Officer that consisted of the change of use of land to accommodate 24 No. camping and caravanning pitches including provision of portable toilet/shower facilities, external sinks, drinking water standpipes and associated parking (for copy see file of minutes).  

The Planning Officer, Jayne Pallas gave a detailed presentation of the application which included a site location, photographs of the site and a site plan.

Councillor J Cosslett, Local Member addressed the committee in support of the planning application.  He confirmed that the site was kept neat and clean and it was not visible from the main road.  The site had no adverse impact on the landscape and although classified as isolated the site was a short distance from neighbouring properties and Hamsterley Forest.  He noted that there was a need for this type of facility in the area as there was an urgent need for visitor accommodation in general to encourage tourists. 

Councillor Cosslett mentioned that the Government would issue Permitted Development Rights that would come into force on 26 July 2023 that would allow camping on the land for 60 days in any calendar year for up to 50 pitches that did not require planning permission. He stated that the applicant had liaised with St Andrew’s Primary School to allow children to visit for free giving children from deprived backgrounds an opportunity they would not normally have.

Mark Ketley spoke on behalf of the applicant and felt that that policy 8 was supportive of the application to support tourist accommodation.  The increase in the cost of living had seen people not having disposable income for holidays where this offered a cheap alternative. He advised that the applicant had offered free school visits that provided a community benefit for the area for deprived children.

Mr Ketley acknowledged that there had been concern shown from the Environment Agency about the septic tank and the drainage system.  These would be addressed by regular emptying and cleansing as required.  The loss of grazing land would be relieved by a lease agreement for grazing off site on neighbouring farmland.  He added that planning permission had previously been granted for the erection of two chalets (one had already been built) on site that would be used for holiday lets. 

The Principal Planning Officer, Steven Pilkington stated that the permitted development rights would offer camping for 60 days but this would be for tents and not caravans and would not be a permanent arrangement.  The site would still require portacabins and the septic tank issues resolved before going ahead with the proposal.   It was commendable to offer free school visits but there were no mechanisms in planning policy to give any weight to this.  There would also be no weight within planning policy to offsite grazing.

Councillor M McKeon echoed views of the other Members about the Environment Agency concerns around drainage and the septic tank which should be addressed before moving forward.  She felt the site with 24 pitches would be too dense that would create manoeuvrability issues for caravans on the narrow land.  She was mindful of previous sites that had received planning permission but had been badly maintained.

Councillor E Adam wondered if the ecology report for policy 41 for biodiversity net gain had been updated.

The Planning Officer confirmed that information had been shared with ecology and was subject to conditions.

Councillor E Adam recognised that the turning circle and toilet facilities may be problematic and requested further information on what other solutions were to be put in place as it was considered the site would not cope with the proposal.

Mark Ketley responded that the density originally was for 30 pitches and this had been changed to 24 pitches following discussion with the licensing team who had raised 40 points to address to ensure compliance for the license.  The drinking stands, toilet and shower facilities although basic complied with the license.  The site was not intended to be aimed at the luxury end of the market as it was in a rural area and the applicant did not want to cause any unnecessary harm to the countryside.  It was proposed that the site would be at the lower end of the market with a charge of £10 per night.  The applicant had also applied to the camping and caravanning club for approval for a license.  This license was not granted as Durham County Council had wrongly stated there was a live enforcement notice on the site but this was in fact a pending notice.

The Principal Planning Officer clarified that the Camping and Caravanning club could not issue land licenses for sites for caravans.

Councillor E Adam questioned that as it was a small site if the septic tank would be sufficient for the proposed 24 pitches if the Environment Agency had raised concerns. He wanted to how the applicant would manage the disposal of the waste and any chemicals that would be used in the cleansing of the tank. 

Mark Ketley responded that the septic tank had a 1,000 gallon capacity that would be adequate for the site.  It would be emptied as frequently as deemed necessary and the applicant was liaising with three companies regarding the cleansing and emptying process.

Councillor G Richardson believed the 1,000 gallon tank was not very big but if it was cleansed on a regular basis it could be suitable.  He attended the site visit and had observes a very well maintained site.  He noted that grazing would be provided by the farm next door.  As the site was set back from the road, he did not think there would an issue with access or turning.  He wanted to know if there would be any electric hook up points.  He did consider that the charge of £10 per night seemed very low.  He was aware of two planning applications that had been submitted in the area for a similar proposal that may create competition.  Overall he deemed the proposal to be a fine investment.

Councillor V Andrews judged that the foul waste disposal was a significant issue if the Environment Agency had queried it which may lead to polluted water ways in the area.  She deemed it unsuitable for approximately 100 people on the site.

Councillor J Atkinson advised that he had not attended the site visit but had seen photographs of the tidy site.  He liked the idea of free visits for local school children and that it was a cheap tourist accommodation proposal.

Councillor G Richardson was concerned about the waste but there were a number of residents living in the country that had a similar set up and if cleaned weekly it would not be a problem.

Councillor M McKeon agreed that the site was well maintained but speculated as to whether the site would be sustainable if the site was sold.  She thought the site should be less dense and the volume of the septic tank increased. She believed the applicant should take on the recommendations given and resubmit the planning application.  She moved the application.

Councillor S Zair was also concerned about the issue raised by the Environment Agency and the turning circles.  He questioned whether further negotiations could be made to address the issues that had been highlighted.

The Principal Planning Officer responded to Councillor M McKeon and Councillor S Zair that the application had been submitted for a time and information that had been requested had not been supplied by the applicant.

Councillor E Adam stressed that the application should not go against the concerns raised by the Environment Agency.  He suggested that a test market could be carried out to establish whether there would be viability for the small site for camping and caravanning. Councillor E Adams seconded approval of the application.

Councillor N Jones supported the application and if the septic tank was cleaned regularly, he did not see this as an issue.  He believed that the site would promote tourism in County Durham.

Councillor J Cairns recommended the scheme to build local business in the area and felt that the applicant should be given the opportunity to grow his business. 

Upon a vote being taken the was an equality of votes.  The Chair exercised his casting vote and it was

Resolved

That the application be REFUSED subject to the conditions listed in the

report.

Councillor L Maddison left the meeting at 11.27am