Arlesey gipsy site planning application refused
- Credit: Archant
An application to more than treble the size of a gipsy site has been rejected.
Planning officers from Central Bedfordshire Council (CBC) yesterday (Thursday) declined a planning application to build an additional 14 caravan pitches on the Twin Acres site on Hitchin Road, Arlesey.
They felt that the size of the development, which currently had six caravans on, would damage the appearance of the site and the lack of adequate footpaths in the area would make it dangerous for pedestrians.
The decision was welcomed by members of Arlesey Town Council and Arlesey councillor for CBC Ian Dalgarno, who have always opposed the site’s expansion.
Cllr Dalgarno said: “I’m really pleased this application has been turned down. I, along with members of the town council, have always opposed its expansion. Central Bedfordshire Council planning officers have listened to the concerns of the town council and local residents over this site and taken the correct decision.”
In addition to welcoming the decision, Arlesey Town Council now also want any work that was carried out on the site pre-emptively to be removed.
Nick Daniels, chairman of the town council, said: “It’s good news. The whole of the town council and residents will be delighted with this decision. It is a rare success for the town.
- 1 A-level results 2022: Schools in Stevenage and North Herts share successes
- 2 Man 'assaulted' and hit by chair in Baldock service station
- 3 Calling all gamers! New eSports centre coming to Stevenage
- 4 Leisure centre turns up the heat with new sauna and steam rooms
- 5 Body found in wooded area of Stevenage
- 6 Which Thameslink trains are running during the RMT strike?
- 7 Residents show 'strong support' for TK Maxx relocation plans
- 8 Four Vauxhall cars stolen in North Herts
- 9 Man allegedly assaulted and robbed woman in Stevenage park
- 10 'My mum was eligible for Covid-19 drugs - so why didn't she get them?'
“We have been lucky the ward councillors have supported us and that the planning officers agreed with us and rejected the application.
“We wish that any works carried out on the site before the application was decided be removed and the site be put back to how it was before this application.
“There was an enforcement order in place on the site which was postponed pending the decision and now that it has been rejected we believe that this should be enforced.”