Planners reject caravan homeless initiative at Hargate Hill

Derbyshire planners have blocked a caravan site scheme at an equestrian centre which has been providing a base for tenants struggling to find homes.

The tenants could now end up on the streets, according to one of the occupants.

High Peak Borough Council’s Development Committee refused the retrospective planning application for the current hard-standing and caravan site at Hargate Hill Equestrian Centre in Glossop, for 14 caravans at a meeting on May 18, on the grounds of its visual impact on the landscape and insufficient amenities following an enforcement complaint. 

Tenant Carl King, who lives at the site, told the meeting at Buxton Methodist Church: “To have to go through all of this is overwhelming to me. If you do not grant permission I will end up homeless. Where will I go? What will I do? It’s shocking that the council cannot do anything about it because I was born in Hadfield. It’s not fair. 

“If you do not grant permission the council are not going to do anything for me so I will end up on the streets begging and I won’t be able to do anything without an address.” 

He added there are currently ten people living at the site in a similar position and he says there are facilities to wash, to clean clothes and the site provides a roof over their heads. 

Ben Haywood, the council’s Head of Development Services, told the meeting the caravan site has an impact on the landscape because it is on higher ground in the national park, that there is an insufficient standard of amenities and a lack of communal facilities, and that it fails to meet an ‘unmet need’ because it is not strictly a housing development.           

The application was originally brought before the committee at the request of Cllr Pauline Bell, over her concerns about Green Belt development and environmental impacts.           

Cllr Bell stated: “The applicant claims that these will house local people on the housing waiting list. Yet when I contacted the Executive Member for Housing, High Peak Borough Council had no knowledge of Hargate Hill and haven’t had any discussions with them.         

“It also seems very strange that the application states there is no need for any sewage systems or other amenities, for 14 dwellings. The application has not been well thought through.”  

Cllr Bell added: “This should be a major application with due consideration to the condition of the dwellings, the amenities, the effects on the environment and the Green Belt.”        

She also argued there should have been a much wider consultation with the scheme including the residents of Hargate Hill Lane, Glossop Road, High Lane, and Simmondley.        

The council received six objections with concerns the area is not able to accommodate residential development due to inadequate infrastructure, that the scheme involves a loss of green spaces, a change in character and limited public transport links, and that homeless people should be homed in houses in communities with facilities, waste and sewage systems.        

Charlesworth Parish Council also objected to the scheme with concerns for the Green Belt and the need for amenities for residents including water, sewerage, electricity and catering and access to other social amenities in terms of education, public transport, shopping, employment and health.        

The council’s environmental health officer highlighted a list of requirements to secure a caravan licence including the proximity of caravans to each other, water supply and water closets and drainage and waste collection.         

But applicant Jenna Tyldesley, of the Equestrian Centre, argued each caravan is equipped with a toilet or shower and its own water supply and electricity, and they use one of five septic, package treatment tanks serving the Equestrian Centre, and there is a wet room with a toilet, sink and shower in one of the existing buildings serving the centre with a laundry room.         

The council considered an argument that the occupants are individuals or households, mainly on High Peak Borough Council’s housing waiting list, or otherwise homeless, and who do not have access to permanent homes.  

However, the council’s housing services objected to the scheme on the grounds that there has been no consultation, engagement or discussion with the council’s housing services in relation to the proposed use of this site to accommodate individuals or households.        

The council stated its housing services have not been involved in identifying this site, assessing its suitability, or shaping the proposal in any way and it is factually inaccurate and misleading to state that the intended occupants would be individuals or households drawn from the council’s housing register or homelessness services.        

It added that any accommodation used by the council to discharge its homelessness duties must also meet statutory suitability requirements and it does not consider a site comprising 14 caravans to be suitable accommodation for the purposes of meeting statutory homelessness duties.  

A council spokesperson stated: “This form of accommodation would not meet High Peak Borough Council’s suitability standards and would not be used by the council to discharge prevention, relief, or main housing duties.  

“Accordingly, High Peak Borough Council would not make referrals to this site for households who are homeless or threatened with homelessness, nor for households on the housing register.       

“The proposal does not align with the council’s housing strategy, homelessness duties, or suitability requirements and incorrectly implies council involvement and endorsement where none exists.”       

But the council received 11 letters of support for the scheme stating the site will have little impact on the countryside and traffic, represents a ‘lifeline’ with positive impacts for employed tenants who do not earn enough to occupy a house and if the application is refused, they will become homeless and jobless.  

A letter of support from the National Annex Planning Consultancy stated caravans for residential occupation, when managed as ancillary or associated accommodation, support flexible living arrangements including multi-generational households, and offer a sustainable response to local housing and care needs without necessitating large-scale new development.        

And Derbyshire County Council’s highways authority concluded the scheme would not pose an unacceptable impact on highway safety or a severe impact on congestion and therefore there are no justifiable grounds on which an objection could be maintained concerning highways.       

The site lies in the countryside and although it is considered to be constrained by Green Belt, according to the council, it has been previously developed as a hard-standing and therefore falls into a Grey Belt category which can permit certain developments. 

However, the council argued the application constitutes an inappropriate development because there are no ‘very special circumstances’ that would outweigh any harm to the Green Belt. 

It also stated the scheme does not amount to a ‘suitable or appropriate’ type of accommodation in relation to the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities, and the Housing Act 1996 as amended by the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017. 

The council argued the accommodation will result in unacceptable standards of amenity for occupants with regards to space standards, the limited amount of private amenity space, and the lack of communal facilities, according to Local Plan policies. 

It also stated 14 touring caravans with associated vehicles and ‘domestic paraphernalia’ would introduce a visually incongruous cluster of development, which when viewed from footpaths on higher ground would result in adverse visual impacts to the rural landscape including the setting of the Peak District National Park. 

And the council argued the scheme still fails to comply with the relevant policies because it does not meet a ‘demonstrable unmet need’ because it is not strictly a housing development. 

Cllr Alan Barrow told the meeting the application needs to meet the right standards but it fails on a number of matters so all the committee can do is agree with the council planning officers’ recommendations to refuse the scheme. 

The committee voted to refuse Ms Tyldesley’s retrospective planning application for the change of use of land at the Equestrian Centre for the siting of caravans for residential occupation with associated development. 

Tenant Mr King stressed that he had been homeless three years ago until he was allowed to stay at the site.  

But Committee Chairperson, Cllr Robert McKeown, said: “We all feel for you but all we can do is deal with what is in front of us which is an application that all the experts have been through.” 

Following the meeting, Mr King said with an address at the site you can get a job and can be registered on the council’s social housing waiting list but without somewhere to stay homeless people just get lost in the system. He added that if he loses his tenancy because the caravan site can no longer continue he will end up sleeping in a tent outside the council’s offices. 

Ms Tyldesley, who aims to appeal against the council’s decision, said the caravan site has been running for four years with no complaints helping homeless people waiting to get homes and social housing. 

She added: “If the council told us what we need to do, we will do it – whatever they want. If they would just let us know what they want and work with us they could help keep ten homeless people off the streets.”