Extension to touring caravan site to include extension of land and increase numbers from 8 to 22 touring units together with construction of new amenity building
LOCAL MEMBER:
COUNCILLOR SIMON GLYN
Link
to relevant background documents
Minutes:
Extension to touring caravan site to include
extension of land and increase numbers from 8 to 22 touring units together with
construction of new amenity block.
a)
The Development Control
Manager elaborated on the background of the application, noting that this was
an application to undertake improvements to an existing touring caravan site
together with expanding the site to the fields located to the west and north west of the existing site. The improvements included:
It was noted that the site was located in the
countryside and within the Landscape Conservation Area and the Landscape of
Outstanding Historic Interest. The site was located behind the Penclawdd and Sŵn y Wylan properties located near a class 2 county road (the
B4417) between Tudweiliog and Penygroeslon.
There was a single track vehicular access to the site.
It was
highlighted that although some aspects of the proposal were acceptable as a
means of upgrading the site, the Council was not satisfied that the proposal in
its entirety, especially the significant increase for a sub-standard entrance,
was acceptable. It was noted that as the land on either side of the entrance
was not in the applicant's ownership, it was not possible to impose conditions
to make improvements to that entrance (it can be seen from the site's history
that an effort to do so had failed with the previous application
C12/0438/46/LL). Therefore, it was considered that there was no choice but to
recommend refusing the application on the grounds of road safety, in light of
the increasing use of a sub-standard entrance and which could not be made
adequate to meet the requirements of highways and Policy CH33 of the GUDP.
Attention
was drawn to the additional observations that had been received.
b)
The local member (who was
a member of this Planning Committee) noted the following observations:
·
That he agreed with the content of the report
·
That the application complied with all planning
aspects with the intention of improving standards and creating facilities - the
problem was the entrance
·
Would it be possible to impose strict conditions to
control use of the entrance - propose that there was responsibility of the
owner to be present as caravans arrived and departed
·
A mirror had been
installed on the hedge to improve visibility
·
Encourage discussions with highways and planning
enforcement
·
Accept that the entrance was not ideal, but if
accepting eight was acceptable would it be possible to control the situation to
seek more.
·
A suggestion that it was
possible to control the 'in and out' direction to the site
·
The enterprise was the
livelihood of a young family
c)
In response to the observation, the Development
Control Manager highlighted that local concerns had noted accidents on the
narrow road. It was also noted that it would be impossible to control the
'direction' and 'presence' condition and that the highways concerns were valid.
ch) In response to the observation involving
the entrance, the Senior Development Control Engineer noted that an acceptable
turning was required for the site. The intention was to treble the number of
touring caravans which would lead to more movements which in turn would cause
more problems.
d)
It was proposed and
seconded to refuse the application.
dd)
During the ensuing
discussion, the following points were noted by individual members:
·
That the entrance was
sub-standard
·
Road safety needed to be
considered - we must behave responsibly
·
Did allowing eight
caravans warrant undertaking significant improvements?
·
A suggestion was made to reduce the number to 15
caravans
·
A suggestion to hold
further discussions with the applicant
e)
In response to the above observations, the
Solicitor noted that the application submitted had to be considered and that
the best answer was for the application to reach an understanding with the land
owner. A suggestion was made to advise discussions
f)
An amendment to the
proposal was proposed and seconded and for a site visit to be arranged.
RESOLVED to arrange a site visit.
Supporting documents: