Plans for a traveler on farmland were canceled after a wave of objections from residents.
The five proposed static homes at Heartlands Farm near Penley, about 3 miles northeast of Ellesmere, were scrapped due to citizen considerations about access and flooding at the site, which lately houses a solid and is used to house horses.
The applicant, Kathryn Roberts, had applied for permission to adopt a combined use for horse breeding and the use of a residential caravan lot “for an extended Gypsy family”. The plan included a permanent service building, four small application blocks, and paved areas.
An supporting document on behalf of the applicant stated that the site would assist Shropshire Council in meeting its obligations in relation to traveller accommodation.
“Unlike residential caravans generally, gypsy caravan sites are an exception in the countryside and Government policy is generally supportive,” it said.
“A certain degree of visual impact will have to be accepted and if you want to provide a sufficient number of sites for Roma, a certain level of visual damage will have to be acceptable. “
“There is clearly an unmet need for gypsy and traveller sites in Shropshire, a lack of alternative sites, and the council cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable land.”
However, the request raised numerous objections from citizens on a number of grounds, including the site’s position in relation to historic flooding and the suitability of the area’s infrastructure for development.
Welshampton and the parish council of Lyneal were also opposed, the progression would “dominate” the village of Hampton Wood.
A letter from real estate representative Fisher German, written on behalf of an organization of 10 residents, said the proposed progression would seem “very significant” and “incongruous. “
“The crux of the objection is that it’s positioning itself in the open field in an unsustainable location,” said Nial Cassenden on behalf of the company.
“The site is isolated and has no nearby access to everyday services and facilities. The site would be described as a relatively large development compared to the character of the surrounding area and the proposal will dominant the local area to an unacceptable degree.”
The request generated 39 public comments, of which 36 objections and 3 in favor of the project.
The application was withdrawn on December 20.