Permission has been granted for a new gypsy traveller site near a Kent village despite claims it’s already “full”.

Maidstone council voted to approve officer recommendations for the site’s approval in Ulcombe, near Headcorn farm last Thursday.

It comes despite claims the village is already “full” and has one of the highest traveller populations in the country.

The area is allocated as a gypsy traveller site in the authority’s local plan and an application was for a change of use of the land to allow a static mobile home, a touring caravan and a day room.

No members of the public wrote in to object to the bid, but a statement was read by a council officer on behalf of Ulcombe Parish Council, which queried whether the applicants were, by definition, gypsy travellers.

“The report you have been given in support of this application is misleading,” the statement said.

“Maidstone [council] is not properly assessing the evidence in support of an applicant’s assertion that he has a nomadic habit of life – which is now the main criteria to prove an applicant is a gypsy or traveller.

“Maidstone has reiterated the old criteria, that being a gypsy means having gypsy heritage or having a desire to lead a travelling lifestyle, this is no longer the test.”

The parish council argued there was no proof the applicants do in fact live a “nomadic habit of life”.

However, a council officer responded that “officers are satisfied that the existing occupants are of gypsy heritage”, and a planning condition is recommended to ensure the site should not be used by any other persons.

Planning consultant Simon McKay attended the meeting to speak in support of the pitch.

“All I got from the parish council objection was ‘we have consistently objected’,” he said.

“It’s a genuine application for a genuine family member who wants his own pitch now, we don’t think we’re being greedy in terms of the size of the site we’re producing.”

Headcorn’s representative on the council, Cllr Ziggy Trzebinski (Con), raised concerns about the site.

“Whilst I accept the council must provide appropriate sites for the community, I wouldn’t support this particular application,” he told the meeting.

“I would go as far as to say that until the current consultation on DPD [the development plan document] is completed all applications for sites in the Headcorn ward in particular should be put on hold, though I don’t suppose that’s going to happen.”

On April 17 Maidstone council’s public consultation on the DPD for gypsies, travellers and travelling showpeople finished. The results are yet to be released.

The document did not identify or change any sites allocated for traveller sites in MBC’s local plan, but sought views from the public on how potential traveller sites are identified.

‘I would point out Headcorn ward has one of the highest per capita proportions of the travelling community in the country’

Cllr Trzebinski added: “I would point out Headcorn ward has one of the highest per capita proportions of the travelling community in the country.

“It’s not good for the borough or Headcorn itself; the traveller community needs to be spread evenly across all of the borough, so there’s not one area that becomes dominated in proportions of population by one type of resident.”

In October last year an inquiry was held into a controversial gypsy site at The Meadows, in Headcorn.

That site was subject to council enforcement notices in 2018, which have since been appealed and countered by residents with numerous retrospective planning applications.

Cllr Trzebinski suggested the sites should be located elsewhere in the borough.

“We cannot take any more people in the Headcorn ward, we are full, the doctors’ surgeries, everywhere is full, and it’s about time some of the other areas in the borough took their turn,” he said.

Speaking after the meeting Cllr Trzebinksi told the Local Democracy Reporting Service: "We should have purpose-built sites to allow the travelling community to come as and well they please, and to have good standard facilities when they are here.”

But Cllr Tony Harwood (Lib Dem) argued that the site wouldn’t have much impact on the area.

“This [site] was allocated for a reason, and one of the reasons is it is so well landscaped and you cannot see it from anywhere frankly,” he said.

He added: “It’s quite a big plot, it’s well screened, so what harm does it do?”

MBC’s planning committee voted to approve the new pitch at a meeting on April 20, with 12 votes in favour, none against, and one abstention.