Issue - meetings

            That the decision of the Inspector to allow this appeal be noted.

The Chief Officer (Planning & Environment) advised that the application had been refused under delegated powers and the appeal, which had been dealt with by way of an informal hearing, had been allowed. 

                        The Inspector had found that the proposed development would amount to inappropriate development in the countryside and within the green barrier but he had given significant weight to the personal circumstances of the applicant and felt that these outweighed the requirement to protect the green barrier.  The Chief Officer raised concern that a temporary permission had not been granted. 

                        Councillor Chris Bithell expressed significant concern and commented on a number of applications from residents to develop in the area which had all been refused.  He referred to paragraphs 6.07 and 6.08 where it was reported that the proposal failed to comply with Policy GEN4 and therefore permission should not be granted.  However, the Inspector had then considered the personal circumstances of the applicant and had granted permission.  He raised significant concern that Flintshire and Wrexham had provided a large number of Gypsy and Traveller sites when other Local Authorities in North Wales had not made any provision.  Councillor Gareth Roberts shared the concerns and felt that the original decision to refuse the application had been correct.  Councillor Mike Peers felt that this was new site provision through the back door and suggested that it would be useful for Planning Strategy Group to consider this appeal in detail.  The inspector appeared to have recognised the importance of the green barrier but, in his conclusion in paragraph 6.21, had found that the need for additional gypsy pitches within the area and the personal circumstances of the appellant had amounted to very exceptional circumstances.  Councillor Peers queried whether the same conclusion would have been reached if the application had been from the general public and if not, he felt that the decision should be challenged. 

                        Councillor Carol Ellis queried why a temporary permission had not been granted and suggested that the decision set a precedent.  The Chief Officer shared the concerns of Councillor Ellis and explained that the site at Dollar Park had only been granted temporary permission so he did not understand why this was different.  In referring to other applications that had been refused planning permission in the area, he said that the only difference in the applications was that the applicant was a Gypsy/Traveller.  The Planning Strategy Manager spoke of the duty on all Local Authorities to provide Gypsy/Traveller pitches.  He commented on work to be undertaken on a Gypsy/Traveller assessment which was a requirement for all Councils to carry out by February 2016.  This would provide information on where the provision of pitches needed to be and how this was to be addressed.           

RESOLVED:

            That the decision of the Inspector to allow this appeal be noted.