Appeal to retain holiday accommodation at Staffordshire farm dismissed

An appeal to retain holiday accommodation at a Staffordshire farm has been dismissed after the applicant failed to sign a legal agreement. Bank House Farm in Stowe-by-Chartley has been operational since 2021 and has a chalet, amenity area and a dedicated parking area.

East Staffordshire Borough Council refused the plans in April this year. The council said the plans were unsustainable as the development is outside the settlement boundary and secondly it would impact the Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation.

The application proposed the retention of the existing holiday accommodation, on Blythe Bridge Bank, which is used by tourists overnight. The single chalet is capable of accommodating two adults at a time.

The proposal was supported by two local businesses, a local shop and pub in Uttoxeter, which stated they benefited from visitors staying at the chalet and from orders placed by the applicant. No objections to the plans were received by the council.

The planning statement submitted by the applicant Mark Trunkfield “The proposed development has made limited physical alterations to the application site and has been in situ for 5-years, as such would not result in any harm to the character of the site or the surrounding countryside, and is therefore appropriate for the rural character of the area.”

During the appeal the inspector said that financial contributions were necessary to protect the Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation. Although the applicant had indicated a willingness to pay, he failed to sign the legal agreement.

Inspector K Stephens said that the small scale accommodation would be suitable for the location. They added that the development would not represent encroachment into the countryside and acknowledged that some visitors would be reliant on cars but the development would have benefits to the wider local economy.

However, without the signed unilateral undertaking (UU) the inspector concluded that the development could have a significant adverse effect on the conservation area. The submitted legal agreement was incomplete, unsigned and undated.

In the ruling the inspector said: “In this instance I have found that an adverse impact on the integrity of the Cannock Chase SAC cannot be ruled out. This would conflict with Framework policy N6:1.a.i, which states in such instances that planning permission should be refused. Hence, due to the lack of the signed UU the benefits of the proposal would be substantially outweighed by the adverse effects in this case.”