Traveller family must leave Mobberley site as appeal dismissed

Michael Maloney bought the land off Broadoak Lane several years ago as an investment and, following an arson attack at their former home in Essex, moved his family to the site in August 2020.

Later that year Mr Maloney applied to Cheshire East Council for retrospective planning permission for Traveller pitches on the site, but that was rejected.

After being handed a suspended prison sentence for ignoring an injunction barring him from developing the land, a three-day public inquiry was held at the beginning of March, with the Maloney family appealing the council’s decision.

Despite giving evidence at the inquiry and telling planning inspector Roy Merrett the family had nowhere else to go, the appeal has been dismissed.

Mr Merrett said in his report: "Both the existing and proposed development of the site would amount to inappropriate development, which in both forms results in significant harm to the openness of the green belt.

"The development would also result in harm to the living conditions of the site occupiers in terms of the effect of transport noise within external and internal parts of the site.

In terms of the personal circumstances of the families, Mr Merrett said that Romany Gypsies and Irish Travellers are ethnic minorities and have the protected characteristic of race.

He said: "The background to the appellant’s arrival at the site was driven by very difficult personal circumstances which involved feuds between and within families.

"This must have been a traumatic experience and it is understandable the family has no desire to return to that site.

"There is evidence of need for pitches to accommodate some, but not all, of the families either present on or proposing to occupy the site."

An aerial view of the site just off Broadoak Lane in Mobberley

Mr Merrett also considered whether he could grant temporary planning permission at the site for a period of one to three years, but ultimately decided this would not be an appropriate outcome.

“The grant of temporary permission cannot be justified even by the additional weight of the appellant’s personal circumstances,” he stated.

In extending the notice period for the family to leave the site, from nine to 12 months, Mr Merrett said: “I need to balance the public interest in the notice being complied with expeditiously against the private interests bound up in the development.

“In this regard I am keen to ensure that the extended family are given the most reasonable opportunity to find an alternative solution, in the context of the harm identified.

“I consider extending the compliance period to twelve months, with an additional two-month period of the remediation of residual works would amount to the optimum position.”

Charlotte Leach, Mobberley Ward councillor, said she was thrilled the appeal had been rejected.

She said: “This decision has come far earlier than we were expecting given that the inquiry was only held earlier this month and means that the time period set out in the enforcement now kicks in.

“The inspector has amended the notice period for the appellant to vacate the site from nine to 12 months which in real terms gives us the same outcome we would have got if we had waited the full three months for a decision.

“There is also an additional two months for site restoration.

“I recognise that for many people, this won’t feel soon enough but this is the best outcome we could have expected, and our barrister has advised that in his view this is a really robust decision.

“This decision gives the local community some certainty that Mr Maloney has very much reached the end of the road with his unauthorised development.

“I obviously cannot speculate about what Mr Maloney intends to do or when he intends to leave, but I am hopeful that he recognises that there is no long-term future for this site.

“It has certainly been a long journey to get to this point, but I am confident that we are nearly at the finish line here in ensuring the site can be returned to its original condition.

“It also sends a clear message that as a community we will not accept someone riding roughshod over our planning laws and treating us with contempt.”