Agenda item

Revised application to extend existing static caravan site, increase numbers from 31 to 35, relocate 3 static caravans and creation of a new playing field.

 

LOCAL MEMBER:    Councillor Simon Glyn

 

 

Link to relevant background documents

Revised application to extend existing static caravan site to increase numbers from 31 to 35, relocate 3 static caravans and creation of a new play area

 

(a)     The Senior Development Control Officer noted that neither the applicant nor his agent had submitted an enquiry regarding what was possible on the site in question following the withdrawal of the previous application, despite the fact that officers had expressed fundamental policy concerns regarding the proposal. The officer expanded on the application's background, noting that it was to extend an existing static caravan site to increase the numbers from 31 to 35 together with relocating three static caravans and to create a new play area.  The proposal would also include additional landscaping on the western and southern boundaries of the extended part of the site.

 

Reference was made to the relevant planning policies together with the responses to the consultation process as noted in the report.

 

In terms of the main material planning considerations, the main policy to consider was TWR 3 and this stated that it may permit small extensions to the site's surface and /or re-locating units from prominent locations to less prominent locations.  One of the criteria was that the improvements do not lead to an increase in the number of static caravans on sites within the AONB or in the Special Landscape Areas.   The application was to increase the number of units on the site by adding four units.   The proposal did not therefore comply with the requirements of Policy TWR 3 in terms of sites within the Special Landscape Area.  By re-locating three static caravans to the existing play area, this meant that the hedge on the southern side of the play area site would be lost in order to create a new road and would make the site of the play area far more open and visibly sensitive than it currently was.  Extending the site would, therefore, make this site more prominent in the landscape and where public footpaths run very close to the application site.  It was, therefore, not considered that the proposal in its current form would improve the site's setting in the surrounding landscape which was a designated Special Landscape Area.

 

In the context of visual amenities, extending the existing site would make it more prominent in the landscape and although the application indicated an intention to carry out landscaping along the western and southern boundaries it would take time to mature.  

 

Observations on the application were received from the Transportation Unit stating their concerns about the entrance and that the proposal would increase the use of an already sub-standard entrance.  Such an increase without improvements to the entrance would be unacceptable. 

 

As policy TWR 3 does not permit an increase in the number of static caravans at existing sites within the Special Landscape Area, and it was not considered that extending the site would improve its setting in the surrounding landscape, together with road safety concerns it was recommended to refuse the application.

 

(b)     The Local Member noted the following points: 

 

·         That the situation was not totally clear and permission was received in 1962 to keep the site legal.

·         A letter had been received from the Council explaining the type of design that should be on the entrance and the owners had complied with this.

·         It was recognised that it was necessary to improve the access.

·         They were asking to increase the number of caravans as the Licensing Enforcement Officer had visited and he was concerned that the caravans were too close together.   It was explained that at one time when the caravans were smaller in size the design of the site was acceptable, however, over the years as they had replaced the caravans with new and more modern ones that appeared to have a larger surface area, therefore there was less space between them. It was emphasised that this was not unique to this site.

·         That the owners were willing to comply and the only place to relocate the caravans was the football pitch on the site and that they had no other option. 

·         In order to do this they had to invest e.g. sewerage 

·         It was felt that three caravans created a more prominent situation and placing seven on the land in question would be less prominent, subject to the hedgerows maturing. 

·         It was suggested that the Planning Committee defer the application to receive further response from the applicant and to conduct a site inspection visit. 

 

(c)     In response, the Planning Manager explained that the applicant's agent was aware of the concerns and the most important consideration was that the application did not comply with Policy TWR3.    It might be possible to overcome the road safety concern, however, it would not be possible to overcome concerns regarding an increase of four caravans.   The officer was of the view that a site inspection visit would be of no benefit as this would not overcome concerns regarding policy TWR3. Currently two appeals for similar cases had been submitted and a determination was currently awaited.   The Planning Committee's attention was drawn to the fact that if the Committee approved the application then the application would have to be referred to a cooling-off period.    

 

(ch)   It was proposed, seconded and voted upon to refuse the application.

 

(d)     A Member noted how important it was to discuss the relocation of the caravans with the site owners in terms of health and safety.  

 

            Resolved:       To refuse for the following reasons: 

 

1.         The proposal involved increasing the number of static caravans on an existing static caravan site within a Special Landscape Area.  Policy TWR 3 of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan does not allow an increase in the number of static caravans or chalet units on existing sites within a Special Landscape Area.  The proposal was, therefore, contrary to Policy TWR 3 of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan (July 2017).

 

2.       It was considered that extending the site would not improve its setting in the surrounding landscape and it would neither maintain, improve nor restore the recognised character of the Special Landscape Area.  The proposal was, therefore, considered to be contrary to Policy TWR 3 and AMG 2 of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan (July 2017).

 

3.       The proposed development would create a substantial increase in traffic using a sub-standard entrance, and would be substantially detrimental to road safety.  The proposal was, therefore, contrary to Policy TRA 4 of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan (July 2017).