Agenda item

To extend the caravan park's holiday season from 8 to 12 months to be open throughout the year for holiday use

 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Gareth Williams

 

Link to relevant background documents

To approve

 

Conditions:

1.    Holiday use and a register to be kept.

 

To extend the caravan park's holiday season from 8 to 12 months to be open throughout the year for holiday use

 

            Attention was drawn to the late observations form.

 

a)    The Senior Development Control Manager elaborated on the application's background, and noted that this was an application to extend the occupancy period on the static caravan holiday site so that there was a 12 month holiday season. It was reported that there was planning permission for 40 static caravans on the land and the existing permission restricted the occupancy of the caravans to between 1 March and 31 October in any year. 

 

It was highlighted that a Design and Access Assessment had been submitted to explain the application's background and in response to the call by the existing caravan owners to remain on the site over Christmas, New Year and February half term.  It was added that extending the holiday season was also a means to upgrade the site.

 

Reference was made to policy TWR 4 that supported proposals to extend the holiday season of existing static caravan and chalet sites provided it could be demonstrated that the accommodation was being used exclusively for holiday purposes and did not become the occupant’s main or sole place of residence.  It should also be ensured that the accommodation was suitable for occupation during the winter, that the extended season would not increase the consequences of an extreme flooding event and would not have a detrimental impact on the local environment.

 

It was considered that the application, with appropriate conditions to ensure that the static caravans were used for holiday purposes only and to maintain a register, was acceptable on policy grounds.  

 

b)    Taking advantage of the right to speak, the applicant noted the following points:

·         That all the static caravans were in private ownership and some of the 'plots' had been in the occupancy of the same family since the 1970s.  

·         It was proposed to extend the season for the 40 static caravans to be open throughout the year for holiday purposes only. The application was in response to customers' requests to use the caravan for shorter periods throughout the year.

·         Extending the season would improve the standard of tourist accommodation facilities

·         In response to the concern regarding the pressure on the Local Health Service, the contract with the occupiers confirmed 2 conditions that would get to grips with the problem 

                                                  i.    The caravans were for holiday use only. Our owners cannot live permanently on the site.  As part of the annual contract, the owner had to provide proof of their main address, as a result of this the owners had been registered with their appropriate local health service.

                                                 ii.    The caravan site had already adopted an owners only park model; it meant that all the static caravans were in private ownership and as part of the agreement only the owners and their close families could use the caravan.  This meant that less use was made of the caravans than if they operated as a mixed caravan site where caravans are let.  

·           It was known as a quiet, family caravan site. Their customers came here on holiday for peace and tranquillity

·           Lighting fireworks was against the rules of the caravan site. The caravan site was located on a livestock farm with most of the caravanners owning a dog

·           There would be no physical development on the site that may be a threat to the habitat of bats or any animals or similar wildlife 

·           That the road to the site was maintained 

·           A bilingual policy had been adopted for the Park with a willingness to use the Welsh language at all times. The 'residents only' sign was a temporary sign as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

 

c)     The Chair read the Local Member's written observations:

 

·         The applicants did not request permission to add more caravans to the 40 they already have on the land.

·         The application had been opposed by Cyngor Cymuned Botwnnog due to the circumstances with Covid.  They feel that the Local Health Service is already under strain and accepting more people from outside the area into the Botwnnog area would place more pressure on the service.

·         As a Councillor for the Botwnnog Ward, I am very eager to support the planning application.

·         I feel the Members of Cyngor Cymuned Botwnnog are worrying unnecessarily.    Under current circumstances all the caravan sites in Pen Llŷn are closed. The fact that this caravan site could be open for an additional four months and would place more strain on the surgery would not exist at all due to covid. 

·         The man reason for supporting the application was the fact that the owners of the site were a Welsh speaking family who had been born and brought up in Botwnnog.  It was a pleasure to see local people succeeding.

·         I have always lived in the Botwnnog area - I have come to know many of the caravan owners at Gelliwig.  Many of them are Welsh speakers or with relations in Pen Llŷn. I often see them shopping locally, socialising regularly at the Tŷ Newydd Sarn public house and supporting local businesses and the economy rather than carrying their provisions here from towns.

·         It was pleasing to see the children coming into the village to play with the little children in Botwnnog.

·         One major problem in Pen Llŷn is the fact that local young people cannot buy the houses that are on the market as their wages are not high enough.    I much prefer to see happy caravanners in the Botwnnog area - people that are not interested in buying our scarce houses!

·         If the application is successful, we wish to see a condition that the caravanners have no right at all to identify their caravan as their main residence - this would be totally unacceptable as they could live here all the time and certainly then there would be a strain on the surgery.  Neither would they pay Council tax.

·         I see no reason for not supporting and approving this application and I wish them every success in their application

 

ch) It was proposed and seconded to approve the application

           

d)    During the ensuing discussion, the following observations were made by members:

·      This was a caravan park that was managed responsibly  

·     The caravan site was now part of the landscape

·     Welcomed the applicant's measure for caravan owners / visitors to submit evidence that they had registered with a doctor at their main address - this was a consideration for every caravan site to adopt

·     It would be difficult to justify refusal - TWR4 supported such applications

 

dd) In response to a question regarding the requirements of the Supplementary Planning Guidance: Holiday Accommodation (2011) to use relevant conditions to ensure use (maintaining a register) and to the suggestion that Council officers needed to visit the site to look at the register, it was noted that the requirement to maintain a register was an enforcement tool that gave permission to investigate use.  In response to a further comment that the applicant could be asked to send a copy of the register to Council officers, it was noted that this was possible, however, the usual process was to maintain a register on the premises. The Solicitor added that the process was in accordance with the Council's enforcement policy.

 

A comment was made although in support of the application, that there was a need to review the principle of allowing extensions to the holiday season for static caravan sites.  It was considered that the system was a burden on services and local resources.

 

In response to a question regarding the rationale for submitting the application to committee bearing in mind that there was no basis to refuse the application, it was noted that policy TWR4 supported proposals to extend the holiday season for established sites and it would be difficult to present evidence that would justify refusal. In accordance with the Gwynedd Planning Delegation Scheme 'any planning application for developments on a site that is 0.5 hectares or more in size' will be submitted to the Planning Committee for determination.

 

RESOLVED: To approve the application

 

Conditions:

 

1.         Holiday use and a register to be maintained.