Traveller site planning permission: policy, need and layout

Traveller site planning permission is decided under a separate national policy document, not under the housing chapters of the Framework. Planning Policy for Traveller Sites sets the tests, and the most consequential of them is whether the local planning authority can demonstrate an up-to-date five-year supply of deliverable pitches. Where it cannot, that failure is a material consideration of substantial weight when temporary permission is considered, and a well-evidenced application can succeed on a site that would otherwise be refused.

Everything else, the layout, the drainage, the access, is ordinary development management. The policy framework is what makes these applications different.

The national policy and how it is structured

Planning Policy for Traveller Sites sits alongside the National Planning Policy Framework and is read with it. Its policies cover plan-making, the five-year supply of pitches, sites in the Green Belt, and the determination of applications.

For an applicant, three parts matter. The policy requiring authorities to identify and maintain a supply of deliverable sites, against which the authority's actual position can be tested. The policy on determining applications, which lists the considerations including the existing level of provision and need, the availability of alternative accommodation, and other personal circumstances. And the policy on the Green Belt, which treats traveller sites there as inappropriate development.

The Green Belt position is strict. National policy indicates that, subject to the best interests of any child, personal circumstances and unmet need are unlikely to clearly outweigh harm to the Green Belt so as to establish very special circumstances. That is not an absolute bar, and appeals have succeeded, but a Green Belt application needs a materially stronger case than a comparable site outside it.

Meeting the planning definition and evidencing it

Policy applies to applicants who meet the definition in the policy's annex, which is framed around a nomadic habit of life whatever a person's race or origin, with provision for those who have ceased to travel for reasons including health, education or old age.

The treatment of people who have ceased travelling permanently has been litigated and the wording has been revised, so check the current published version of the policy rather than relying on an older copy or a secondary account of it.

Evidence of the definition is a practical matter, and applications fail on it. What inspectors look for is a documented travelling history: dated records of movements, work undertaken in different areas, school registrations across authorities, medical records showing treatment in different places, and a statement from the applicant explaining the pattern and any reason travelling has reduced.

Where the applicant does not meet the definition, the application falls to be determined under general housing and caravan policy instead. That is not fatal, but it changes the policy case entirely, and it is better to identify at the outset than to discover at appeal.

Need, unmet need and the supply of pitches

The authority's own evidence base is where the strongest arguments come from, because it is published and it is the authority's own.

Start with the gypsy and traveller accommodation assessment. It states the identified need in pitches over the plan period, and it will usually be several years old. Compare that with the permissions granted and sites delivered since, which the authority's monitoring report records.

Three findings commonly follow, and each carries weight.

• The assessment is out of date, which weakens any assertion that need is being met.
• Identified need exceeds pitches delivered, with the shortfall quantifiable from the authority's own documents.
• No allocated sites have come forward, so the plan-led route to provision is not functioning.

Where the authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable sites, national policy treats that as a material consideration of substantial weight in favour of granting temporary permission. Set it out explicitly, with the authority's own figures cited and dated, rather than asserting a general shortage.

A Planning Statement is the document that carries this analysis, and it has to be specific. Quoting the authority's assessment by name, date and page is what separates a successful application from a general plea.

Site layout, amenity blocks and utilities

Layout is assessed against the ordinary tests of amenity and living conditions, with the addition of the model standards for caravan sites and the authority's own criteria-based policy.

A workable pitch layout provides for a static caravan and a touring caravan, parking for a vehicle and any trailer, an amenity building containing a bathroom and kitchen, external amenity space, and space for drying and storage. Separation distances between caravans, fire points and access for emergency vehicles follow the model standards.

Remember that planning permission is not the only consent. A site licence under the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 is separately required for most sites, and the licence conditions follow the model standards. Design the layout so the two consents are compatible, because a layout that gains permission but cannot be licensed is useless.

Flood risk and the vulnerability classification

This is where applications are lost on technical grounds, and the reason is a classification point.

Caravans, mobile homes and park homes intended for permanent residential use are classified as highly vulnerable in the flood risk vulnerability classification. Highly vulnerable development is not appropriate in Flood Zone 3, and in Flood Zone 2 it requires the exception test to be passed as well as the sequential test.

National policy for traveller sites also directs authorities away from granting permission in areas at high risk of flooding. Together those points mean a site in Flood Zone 3 is close to unarguable, however strong the need case.

Check the flood zone before anything else. Where the site is in Zone 2, a Flood Risk Assessment with a sequential and exception test is required, and the sequential test has to consider reasonably available alternative sites in a lower zone, which on a need-led application means engaging with the authority's own site search.

Surface water matters too. A site with substantial hardstanding needs a drainage approach, and the lead local flood authority will want discharge restricted and treated.

Access, highway safety and sustainability

Highway objections are the most common refusal reason after policy and flood risk, and they are usually about visibility and turning rather than capacity.

Provide visibility splays measured and drawn to the speed of the road, with evidence of actual speeds where the limit overstates them. Show the swept path for a vehicle towing a touring caravan entering and leaving in forward gear. Show internal turning so that vehicles do not reverse onto the highway.

Sustainability of location is assessed by reference to access to services rather than to public transport alone. Set out distances to a primary school, a GP surgery, a shop and a bus stop, measured along the actual walking route. A Transport Statement is usually proportionate for a small site, with trip generation evidence for the number of pitches proposed.

Where the site is rural and the use is seasonal rather than permanent, a different regime may be in play, and the position on using a field for temporary occupation is worth checking before assuming a full application is needed.

Temporary and personal permissions

Three forms of time-limited or restricted permission appear regularly.

A temporary permission, commonly for three or five years, is the usual outcome where the five-year supply is absent but the site is not suitable in the long term. It gives the authority time to make provision and the applicant somewhere lawful meanwhile.

A personal permission restricts occupation to a named person and their household, and expires when they cease to occupy. National guidance treats personal conditions as exceptional, but traveller site applications are one of the recognised circumstances where they are used.

An occupancy condition restricts use to persons meeting the policy definition, which is narrower than a personal condition and more common.

Each is a different outcome, and the application should say which is sought and why. Asking for permanent permission and receiving a three-year temporary one is a common result; asking for a temporary permission you can live with, with reasons, is sometimes the better strategy.

Two further considerations sit behind all of this. The authority is subject to the public sector equality duty under the Equality Act 2010, and the best interests of any children on the site are a material consideration that has to be addressed with evidence rather than asserted. Where children are involved, include their ages, schooling arrangements and any health needs, with supporting documents.

One honest uncertainty: the weight given to unmet need varies considerably between inspectors and between authorities, and outcomes on similar sites differ. Appeal decisions are indicative of how inspectors have approached the issue rather than binding, so read several recent ones for the authority concerned before settling the strategy.

Enter your postcode on PlanScope to see which of the 66 reports a pitch application on your site is likely to need.

This is general guidance, not legal advice; check the position with your local planning authority or a qualified professional before relying on it. PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.