Councilors have rejected plans to install four glamping pods at Side Farm in Cotton, Staffordshire Moorlands, following concerns about road access, landscape impact, and environmental effects.
The decision was made by Staffordshire Moorlands District Council’s planning committee, which voted to refuse the application in line with officers’ recommendations.
The proposal, submitted by Megan and James Bottomley, sought permission to create four glamping units on a disused field at their farm.
The couple said the small-scale, family-run development aimed to diversify the farm’s income and contribute to the rural visitor economy. Each pod would have included a double bedroom, a living room and kitchen area, a shower room, and an outdoor hot tub.
Planning officers advised against approval, citing the site’s isolated position and the absence of sufficient information on potential ecological impact. Objections were also raised by Cotton Parish Council, the Staffordshire Wildlife Trust, the Churnet Valley Conservation Society, and more than 30 residents.
Opponents pointed to the narrow, mile-long access lane used by both walkers and vehicles, saying the road was unsuitable for additional traffic and that the project would be out of keeping with the surrounding countryside.
The Wildlife Trust maintained a holding objection, stating there was “insufficient information to gauge the ecological impact of the development.” Concerns were also raised about potential water pollution from hot tub drainage.
Sixteen letters of support were submitted, many from West Yorkshire residents, including members of the applicants’ family and previous visitors.
Supporters argued that the project would provide a boost to local tourism and that the access lane was not unsafe.
During the committee meeting, Megan Bottomley addressed councilors, emphasizing the scheme’s alignment with local policies promoting sustainable rural tourism. “It is a family-run scheme, modest in scale and designed to provide quite nature-based stays that support the rural economy,” she said.
“We have listened carefully to the concerns raised and have already expressed to the planning officer we are prepared to make significant changes to the proposal, including replacing the hot tubs with outdoor baths, which removes any concern about chemicals or water use. If it is still not acceptable, we could remove the tubs entirely.”
She added that the proposal aligned with the Churnet Valley masterplan’s goals of supporting small-scale farm diversification and rural tourism initiatives.
However, local resident Isla Ball, who opposed the development, said the site was unsuitable. “We all value the countryside and it’s wonderful to see people enjoying our beautiful area,” she told StokeonTrentLive.
“But we, alongside 33 other local residents, have strong reservations about this particular location for commercial holiday accommodations. The only way to the site is via a one-mile private track, which is very narrow with poor visibility and very few passing places. The entire track is a well-used designated footpath.”
Committee members, who visited the site before the meeting, noted difficulties with access when their bus had to reverse to allow another vehicle to pass.
They ultimately voted to refuse the application, citing the remote location, incompatibility with the surrounding area, and lack of ecological information.
For business owners in the outdoor hospitality industry, the decision underscores the growing scrutiny on rural glamping developments, particularly regarding access safety, environmental impact, and landscape character.
As more farms explore diversification into tourism, navigating these planning considerations early in the process remains critical to achieving approval.