skip to main content

Agenda item

A full planning application for change of use of agricultural land to form a caravan site for 32 pitches, construction of a new amenity building and all associate hardstanding, re-surfacing and access

 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Simon Glyn

 

Link to relevant background documents

Decision:

DECISION: To defer in order to conduct a site visit

 

Minutes:

Full application for change of use of agricultural land to create a caravan site for 32 pitches, construction of new building to accommodate showers/toilets, all associated hard standings, resurfacing and access.

 

            Attention was drawn to the late observations form.

 

a)            The Planning Manager highlighted that the site was located outside any development boundary in an open site in the countryside - the site and the nearby area were within the designation of the Llŷn Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty as well as the Llŷn and Bardsey Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest.

 

As this was a site for touring caravans, it was explained that the application had to be considered under policy TWR 5 of the LDP that set out a series of criteria to approve such developments. It was explained that criterion 1 in policy TWR 5 stated that any new touring caravan developments should be of a high quality in terms of design, layout and appearance, and well screened by existing landscape features and / or where the units could be readily assimilated into the landscape in a way which did not significantly harm the visual quality of the landscape.

 

It was considered that the proposed development was located in a site that was relatively level within the landscape within a field that was surrounded by established cloddiau and hedgerows with a series of outbuildings with the dwelling that would keep the site partly hidden from the north. Nevertheless, the site was entirely open towards the coast path.

 

It was acknowledged that it was intended to strengthen the site screening by improving and adding to existing hedgerows and creating a clawdd with indigenous trees along it; however, it was highlighted that the policy required sites to be well screened by existing landscape features and / or where the touring units could be readily assimilated into the landscape. At present, it was considered that the site was not well screened by existing landscape features and it was not considered that the site could be readily assimilated into the landscape. The site was in an open space near the coast and when visiting the local area it was apparent that there were only a few species that grew successfully in this area due to the sea wind.

 

It was considered that the existing and proposed cloddiau would screen the lower sections of the units, but due to the height of vehicles and touring caravans the site would be visible in the broader landscape - unlikely that landscaping would screen the site in its entirety without a substantially harmful impact on the landscape. As a result, a considerable concern was highlighted regarding the success of the landscaping plan and the significant time to establish it - consequently, it was considered that the site's visual impact would be harmful to the landscape during this time and the impact could exist for years.

 

It was reported that various other touring caravan sites in the area were visible from several vantage points over existing cloddiau and hedges and a concern was highlighted that this development could contribute to the cumulative impact of touring caravan developments that were already having a negative impact on the landscape. As a result, it was not considered that the proposal complied with criterion 1 of policy TWR 5.

 

It was noted that the site was within the AONB and the observations of the AONB Unit recognised that the site would be visible from several public vantage points. Members were reminded that the primary objective for designating AONBs was to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the landscape and, therefore, it was crucial that any scheme and setting of any developments favoured the safeguarding of natural beauty.

 

It was reiterated that elements such as general and residential amenities, transport and access were acceptable and, although additional information had been received from the applicant, that the proposal was unacceptable as it would cause a detrimental and substantial impact on the landscape and the visual amenities of the landscape.

 

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

·         The family were local with firm roots in Pen Llŷn - they had been brought up, educated and worked locally.

·         The proposal was a plan for the whole family with the hope of being able to develop an intrinsic, successful and long-term business in Tudweiliog. With numerous benefits to the local economy for shops, public houses, restaurants and holiday destinations and villages in Pen Llŷn and beyond.

·         The application was acceptable and satisfied LDP requirements with the exception of one clause of Planning policy TWR 5 that was associated with the development's impact on the landscape.

·         The applicant was astonished that the planning application had been submitted for over a year and that this was the first reference to the development's impact on the landscape.

·         Although no objection had been received from the AONB Officer as part of the consultation process, it appeared that the Officer had determined that a landscaping plan (which would include a 1.5 metre earth clawdd and a comprehensive indigenous resilient tree planting scheme) could not succeed due to its proximity to the coast. Despite this, there was no opinion from a specialist consultant to reinforce the Officer's opinion on the success of the planting scheme.

·         The Local Planning Authority's concern about the ability to successfully landscape the site was accepted. Should these concerns have been shared during the planning process, there would have been an opportunity to try to mitigate and resolve the impact sooner.

·         A suggestion to propose a landscaping planning condition in the hope that it would meet and reinforce the landscape impacts of the development. The purpose of the condition was to provide a specialist report in order to highlight how to establish tree growth and which indigenous species were the most resilient in a coastal area. The report would submit accurate information to draw up a comprehensive planting scheme to landscape the visible boundary.

·         It was proposed to add a second clause to the condition relating to the submission of an after-care scheme to review growth over a ten-year period, where any dead tree would be replanted with a new tree.

·         It was strongly asked whether or not the proposal was reasonable and resolved the concerns of the Officer or the Planning Department about the prominence of the site within the landscape.

·         The situation facing rural communities in Gwynedd - especially the Pen Llŷn coast, was fraught and critical with local housing stock of all types and designs being quickly snapped up by suppliers who needed holiday homes - Air BnB. The ability for people to work from home also encouraged an influx and communities were increasingly becoming Anglicised in language and nature.

·         There were minor impacts on the landscape in the short-term here. It was considered that a small caravanning facility offered a much better option for visitors to be able to visit our areas and enjoy the fantastic landscape, and then return to their communities at the end of their holiday.

·         With a lack of provision over the last few years, much more of the local housing stock being bought was seen. By ensuring a provision for the increasing demand for high quality holiday units, it was hoped that the reliance on AirB&B units and similar ones would reduce.

 

c)            Taking advantage of the right to speak, the Local Member made the following points:

·         Methods of diversification in the field of agriculture had to be considered in this day and age.

·         Six out of seven criteria complied with TWR 5 and visible impact needed to be considered.

·         Only three houses were within this rural area - the proposal would not have a visual impact on them - the applicant's brother lived in one of the nearby houses.

·         It was possible to have indigenous hedging seeds for the coastal area.

·         There was an intention to undertake landscaping work prior to the opening of the caravan site - welcomed the responsible attitude of the applicant in doing this.

·         The initiative prepared for future generations - opportunities had to be given to local people.

·         The area was very rural - important to safeguard and protect for the future - the initiative proposed this by offering a provision for visitors that come to enjoy the wild nature.

 

d)            It was proposed and seconded to approve the application, contrary to the recommendation.

 

Reasons:

·         the proposal offered economic and social benefits

·         the landscaping/planting schemes were acceptable and overcame the visual impact

 

In response to the reasons for refusal, the Assistant Head of Department noted that similar applications had been refused due to the impact on views - the proposal was in a visible open site from public viewpoints, an application to develop greenfield within the AONB and contrary to policies. How could it be justified that the proposal met statutory requirements?

 

He suggested, either to defer the decision and undertake a site visit or, in accordance with the Procedural Rules of this committee, to refer the application to a cooling off period and to bring a further report before the committee highlighting the risks associated with approving the application.

 

e)            A proposal to undertake a site visit was made and seconded.

 

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

·         Nobody would be in favour of the application if the applicant were an outsider.

·         Encouraged visitors to stay in caravans who would then purchase houses locally.

·         Visiting the site would offer a solution.

 

RESOLVED to defer in order to conduct a site visit

 

 

 

Supporting documents: