Locals in actor Martin Clunes‘ Dorset town have accused the star of being ‘entitled’ and having a ‘misplaced sense of status’ as they back the new-age family at the heart of his local planning row.
The 61-year-old Doc Martin star from Beaminster, Dorset, is objecting to the application by Theo Langton and Ruth McGill to establish the site where they have lived for 25 years, as a permanent Traveller base so they can remain indefinitely.
When Clunes and his TV producer wife, Philippa Braithwaite, 58, bought 130-acre Higher Meerhay Farm from Mr Langton’s mother for £3million in 2007, the couple had already moved out of her home and onto the land years before. But commenting to MailOnline previously, Clunes said it would be a ‘terrible shame’ if his view was ‘spoilt’ by the site.
Mr Langton and Ms McGill, who say they travel regularly to fairs and markets, have since raised two young children in the woods whilst coping without the most basic of amenities.
It has now been revealed by The Times that contrary to the wealthy couple, the majority of the community are in ‘full support’ of the couple’s application.
Criticising Martin Clunes’ opposition to the plan, one local said the area does not need ‘more people who feel entitled due to wealth and a misplaced sense of status’ after the actor said it would be a ‘shame’ if his view was ‘spoilt’
Theo Langton and Ruth McGill have raised two children on their site in the woods, and locals say they have completely transformed their previous conceptions of the Traveller community
Mr Langton and Ms McGill have lived in a caravan on the site, which is 300 yards from the Clunes’ home, for a quarter of a century, and in that time they have expanded their living space to account for their growing family.
Head of Wantsley farm B&B Charlotte Booth said the couple have ‘proved themselves as friends and valuable community members time and time again and changed my narrow-minded approach to Travellers entirely.’
She added the area needs ‘more people of their calibre’ and does not need ‘more people who feel entitled due to wealth and a misplaced sense of status.’
Her husband Tim told the paper that the couple’s young children are now too old to be living in such a small caravan and the application should be approved.
He said: ‘Theo and Ruth have brought them up beautifully and they are a testament to the idiocy of pre-conceived ideas about who and what Travellers are. The Beaminster community is woefully bereft of any diversity, and for the Langtons to be targeted by the privileged and wealthy is an embarrassing travesty.’
And local youth club director Paula Tuff added the family are ‘valued’ members of the community, slamming the Clunes for considering ‘making a family homeless’ during the cost of living crisis.
Clunes is claiming the couple are not ‘nomads’ and the proposals for a permanent site would set a ‘harmful precedent’.
It comes after the decision on whether to approve the plans for a permanent Travellers’ site was postponed earlier this month after the actor’s solicitors made last-minute objections.
Mr Langton and Ms McGill were handed a five-year temporary permit to live on the land in 2015 while they sought out a local Traveller site – but that has now expired, with council bosses noting the lack of suitable Traveller facilities in the area.
Clunes is claiming the couple are not ‘nomads’ and the proposals for a permanent site on the land currently occupied (pictured) would set a ‘harmful precedent’
Mr Langton and Ms McGill have lived on the site for 25 years, but opponents claim their ‘mobile’ home cannot actually be moved
The site is 300 yards from the Clunes’ property and is hidden by trees, but the actor has said it would be a ‘shame’ if his view was ‘spoilt’. He is joined in his objections by several other neighbours.
This follows Mr Clunes’ lawyers claiming there is ‘no evidence’ that either Mr Langton or Ms McGill is a Traveller within the meaning of planning policy.
They say the proposals would intensify the existing Travellers’ site and have an impact on an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).
They also object to the lack of amenities on the site, such as electricity, water and sewage.
Planning officers at Dorset Council had recommended to councillors on the area planning committee that the application should be granted at its meeting tomorrow.
But now the decision has been postponed, with the matter unlikely to be listed for consideration for at least another month.
A spokeswoman for the council said the reason for the delay was a ‘technical planning issue’ that had to be considered.
In his report, council officer Bob Burden cited the general lack of sites for ‘gypsies, Travellers and travelling showpeople’ in Dorset as a major reason for why it should go ahead.
He said the demand for such pitches has increased in recent years and insisted the development would not harm the natural beauty of the area.
His report stated: ‘Given the ongoing policy and research background of lack of available site options, coupled with the minimal visual impact on the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, it is considered that the use of this site as a permanent base for this Traveller family is acceptable.
‘It is considered that the scheme is also acceptable in residential amenity terms.
‘The development would also be acceptable in terms of highway safety issues.’
Mr Clunes gave a short comment on the planning row when MailOnline visited his luxury mansion earlier this month.
The Clunes first bought a Grade II listed former vicarage in the village of Powerstock, near Bridport, in 2001 before moving in 2007 into their current home, above
Martin Clunes has made a last-ditch attempt to stop his new-age hippie neighbours building a traveller site below his hilltop manor house by claiming the couple are not real travellers
He said: ‘We are very lucky to have this beautiful view. It would be a terrible shame if it was spoilt. We love living here.’
In a letter submitted to the council by Clunes’ solicitors, Kitson Trotman, the couple argue the applicants do not fit within the definition of ‘Travellers’ and that approving the plans for the permanent site would set a ‘harmful precedent’.
The solicitors state: ‘There is no evidence in the application before the council that either applicant is currently a Traveller within the meaning of planning policy.
‘All that is said in the officer report is that “The majority of the applicants travelling is to show and sell items at a variety of fairs gatherings and or festivals, often going from one to the next”.
‘This is totally inadequate as no details are given of dates, frequency, locations, or otherwise.
‘Many persons who live in permanent accommodation carry out the same or similar activities each year for a living, hobby or pastime, including travelling regularly to agricultural and equestrian shows and events or concerts, fairs and festivals too, and cannot possibly be classed as Travellers.
‘This is not a “nomadic habit of life”, which is entirely different.
‘Without clear evidence the council would be acting unlawfully to class the applicants as Travellers. Mode of clothing or hairstyle, or the form, type and location of residence is not relevant.
‘The definition is clear and narrow. Given the policy consequences it must be applied strictly.’
Source: | This article originally belongs to Dailymail.co.uk