The future use of a green belt site hangs in the balance following an appeal against the refusal to allow a traveller pitch on the plot.

For nearly a decade Maxine Lee has owned Eagle Farm in Wilmington, Dartford, which she currently uses as stables to house 10 horses.

The traveller family own a scrap metal business and take part in horse fairs.

As is traditional to their Romani Gypsy culture they have lived in caravans their entire lives and currently reside on a separate site in Horton Kirby.

They had permission for four mobile homes on that plot, but 19 years on and with their children now adults, four generations are living there in nine mobile homes.

The land is overcrowded and contains more mobile homes than they have permission for.

As such the family now want to pitch four mobile homes on their Wilmington plot, with four remaining at Horton Kirby.

'Green belt harm is going to happen anywhere and everywhere.'

A planning application was submitted in 2019 for the change of use of their Eagle Farm land, which is in the Metropolitan Green Belt, to become a gypsy and traveller site with vehicle access.

But the bid rejected in April this year as being an "inappropriate development within the green belt, resulting in harm to the openness", as well as "harm to the visual amenity of the rural area".

In town planning, the green belt designation is a planning tool created to control urban growth and to serve as a buffer between towns and countryside.

Dartford council policy states the protection of the green belt should be taken into account when identifying sites to allocate as traveller pitches.

The Lee family has appealed the rejection, on the grounds that the local authority has both a local, and national duty to allocate a five year supply of gypsy and traveller sites to satisfy unmet need in the borough.

An appeal against the decision to refuse planning permission was held last Thursday.

During the hearing, it was heard that Dartford lies in the Metropolitan Green Belt and that all existing Traveller sites in the borough are located in the green belt.

As such the family argues the basis on which the appeal was refused is unreasonable.

Dr Angus Murdoch, who represented the appellant Maxine Lee, said: "The local authority has not allocated a single pitch for travellers - not just in the past five years, or this decade, but in this millennia. They have had since 1994 and have chosen not to do that.

"All traveller sites in Dartford are in the green belt, including those that the council themselves wish to propose in the emerging local plan. Green belt harm is going to occur anywhere and everywhere."

He added that four caravans for four families was the smallest site they could have in the green belt to accommodate them.

And because there are no permanent buildings proposed, he continued that there "will still be an openness in a volumetric and spatial manner".

The appeal case also states that the site is within walking distance of a school and so is ideal for children, who are approaching school-age, to be integrated into wider society.

A number of other personal reasons, along with the small scale of the development, are also being taken into consideration.

Wilmington, Sutton-at-Hone and Hawley ward councillor Derek Hunnisett attended the hearing, and said he considered the proposed development to be a moderate to significant encroachment on the openness of the green belt.

The Tory cllr said: "Maxine and her family look after the land very well, and I've never heard any complaints from residents, so it's not personal at all.

"But I've lived in Wilmington for 15 years, and residents are noticing the green belt spaces going away.

"It's an incremental damage to the community, and this would be one more step in the erosion of the openness, and open space, in the community."

Neil Whittaker, from IVY Legal acting on behalf of the council, said: "It is going from an open paddock to four significantly large mobile homes, and four parking spaces, plus any domestic paraphernalia.

"There will be a significant harm in terms of openness.

"The visual harm is significant because it's an incongruous addition to the landscape."

He added that the land acts as a buffer between Wilmington and the countryside, and is a gateway to the green belt. Any added development would encroach further into the countryside, it is claimed.

Mr Whittaker said that this would not simply be a "minor harm" to the green belt.

He also raised concerns about the potential to expand the site in future and its implications for light pollution and noise.

Dr Murdoch accepted the proposal would encroach into the countryside.

But he said it would be a minor harm owing to its size and they have not proposed any built homes or additional utility buildings, and do not intend to.

The vegetation on the site is scrubby, like hawthorn, and the grass is relatively flat and grazed by horses.

The north, east, and west sides of the land are also enclosed by development, so only the south side of the land has a direct relationship with the countryside, he said.

Dr Murdoch added that this gives the land a visually enclosed character, as there are no wide public views.

Access to the site was also raised.

There is currently vehicle access from High Road – between a property which the family also own and rent out to relatives - and South View Road.

This would need to be resurfaced and made slightly wider, and there are concerns that this work would impact the local residents.

There is also a public footpath that runs along the north edge of the site, and residents have raised concerns that the increased use of the access may endanger people using the footpath, in particular children.

Resident Sheila Mayes, who lives in South View Road, said that she can see the site from her bedroom window.

She said that although she sees vehicles driving down the access, there is a gate to slow the traffic down and a lot of children play out on the road and footpath, and may not expect cars to be passing through.

The proposed site would include five parking spaces - four residential and one for visitors.

Mr Whittaker and Mrs Mayes argue this would increase the traffic passing in and out of the access road.

However, the family said each household owns only one car, and they would not need to make journeys to take children to and from school, as it is within walking distance, so traffic would be kept to a minimum.

The cottages on South View Road to the north and Orchard Way to the east will be most affected by the visual changes.

The first floor windows in South View Road overlook the site, and their front doors open out onto the footpath.

Both sides agreed that the visual harm to the properties was not enough to render them unattractive to live in but the impact would be "major moderate".

The family's team also brought in landscape architect Philip Russell-Vick, who suggested a condition of approval that the family improve the existing greenery to make it consistent with the woodland, rather than the scrubby hawthorn currently present.

He proposed that any trees that need to be removed should be replaced with indigenous woodland planting.

This way, over a period of time the green belt will be enhanced, and so the development could be seen as an opportunity to improve the landscape, he claimed.

The Eagle Farm appeal has been heard by Inspector David Wyborn but a decision is yet to be made.

A Planning Inspectorate spokesman said that the Appeal Decision would be issued in due course but was unable to provide a timescale.