Agenda item

To consider an application for the Operational development required in association with use of land as a caravan and motorhome club certified location / exempted caravan site comprising formation of a vehicular access, internal access tracks and hardstanding areas, drinking water tap, electricity hook up points, chemical toilet waste disposal facility with rinsing tap, wildlife pond and landscaping (partly retrospective) at Land Adjacent to Farmers Arms, Waen, Llanelwy, LL17 0DY (copy attached)

 

 

An application was submitted for the Operational development required in association with use of land as a caravan and motorhome club certified location/exempted caravan site comprising formation of a vehicular access, internal access tracks and hardstanding areas, drinking water tap, electricity hook up points, chemical toilet waste disposal facility with rinsing tap, wildlife pond and landscaping (partly retrospective) at Land Adjacent to Farmers Arms, Waen, Llanelwy.

 

Written statement provided by Mr Peacock (Against) –

 

My wife and I have lived at Bwthyn Arthur, Waen Goleugoed, since 2013 and our home was directly adjacent to the development site.

The main attraction in purchasing our home was the rural location with our home surrounded by agricultural land.

 

The proposed site had never been anything other than a small field; it had never been a garden/beer garden or picnic/dining area and it was outside the curtilage of the Farmers Arms itself.

 

Over the years we have lived here, the site had occasionally been cropped but generally left in a natural state.

 

Both national and local planning policies dictate that development in open countryside must be strictly controlled. This had been upheld by the planning inspectorate many times.

 

The applicants have not provided any evidence that the works carried out were justified or required.

 

The documents submitted by the applicants confirm that the proposed certificated location does not require the hardstanding track and pitches, embankments and electrical hook-up points, only a fresh water supply and facilities for waste.

 

The application and correspondence confirms the applicants have chosen to ignore the requirements of NRW who specifically state “Wastewater from chemical toilets must not be discharged to the environment or into private treatment systems.” with this being in bold and underlined.

 

The applicants claim that they will tell visitors to use biodegradable products but NRW’s response does not state “The applicants can make a judgement as to what visitors have in their chemical toilets”.

 

Putting such chemicals into a private treatment system will kill the bacteria, which clean the waste, resulting in untreated sewage entering the environment.

I would question how the applicants, with their history of running cafes, propose to test the chemicals held in the toilets of any visiting vehicles?

 

Having had only two requirements, water and waste, the applicants have chosen to disregard the legislation for one of them.

 

The additional works carried out at the site have made the former paddock unrecognisable; not the low impact site for which the Caravan and Motorhome Club were able to grant a certificate.

 

Approximately 400 square meters (20% of the site) of land was dug out, filled with hard core and overlaid with road placings (recycled road surface, tarmacadam) which were then rolled/compacted.

 

Some of this area had subsequently been turned over, meaning that recycled road plantings have effectively been buried on the site.

Other areas have been banked, and planted with non-native trees, shrubs and some flower beds.

 

The layout of the site now means that three of the five pitches, on which caravans may be parked, were within approximately twenty feet of our garden and thus the development works to which the retrospective planning application relates will have a direct impact on both the visual amenity and residential amenity of our property.

 

The application contains many incorrect statements and omissions: The site was not on the B5429 (which was over a mile from the site, Rhuallt to Tremeirchion) but the C52 which was a narrow minor road with no centre white line

 

Vehicles entering and leaving the site will dangerously be on the wrong side of the road between two bends

 

The visibility splays stated were not achievable, particularly towards the A55, again dangerous

 

The required SuDs report had not been carried out. There have been no ecological, environmental or protected species surveys.

 

Fourteen local households were against the application, representing sixteen properties, being over half the properties in Waen Goleugoed as were the Community Council.

 

Whilst the applicants will no doubt claim that they have spent considerable sums on the development, Councillors were respectfully reminded that the applicants chose to develop the site without planning permission and chose to conclude development after receiving an enforcement warning notice. I would therefore ask you to reject the application and have the field restored to its former state in line with national and local planning policies.

 

Please don’t let the countryside be lost one field at a time.

 

Written statement provided by Elaine and Peter Malloy (For) –

 

Good morning Ladies and Gentlemen.

No doubt you will have already reviewed all the correspondence relating to our application that was available on the planning portal.

 

You will also be aware that we have always sought, and complied with, expert advice and opinions, whilst preparing our application. We have endeavoured to, implement fully, the recommendations of the relevant, professional authorities. With that in mind we do not intend to dwell upon such technicalities.

 

We do however, welcome this opportunity to speak about our sympathetic developments of The Farmers Arms and our passion for this historic and striking building within our community and the surrounding landscape.

 

We bought the Farmers Arms almost 3 years ago believing it was possible to regenerate a business that had failed to make a profit for some years. We spent 18 months renovating and remodelling the property, aiming to retain the original vista and character of the building and grounds.

 

The reality was the world had changed substantially from when the 18thCentury Inn was built. Quite rightly, people no longer drive to the country for drinks. We knew that, to survive, we would need to attract people not only to visit, but to stay with us. Our potential customers would enjoy countryside walks. People who also appreciate a meal in front of a log fire and, who could then have a drink with us as residents.

 

Of course, we were somewhat limited by the number of guests that we can accommodate within the hotel. Being approved by the Caravan and Motorhome club (CMHC) as an exempt, privately certificated location, solely for their members, for a short stay, it seemed reasonable to accommodate an increased number of guests to benefit from our hospitality. The CMHC told us to expect no more than 2 or 3 caravans or campervans, staying for a short time. We were allowed a maximum of 5, to stay, in our garden area. However, as with our resident guests, they should be able to take advantage of our facilities without the need to drive elsewhere. This will help our Inn become a viable business.

 

In anticipation we have prepared a beautiful environment to accommodate such guests. We have greatly enhanced a previously overgrown neglected part of our grounds, creating a wildlife haven. We’ve including a shallow pond, wildflowers, willow and fruit trees, all aiding drainage.

 

Of course, if we were to cater for visitors staying within our grounds it was necessary to provide additional services to cater for their needs. Any visitors to this amazing part of Wales should return to their homes, having had a positive experience. We have embraced quality standards to provide drinking water and somewhere to empty toilet waste. We have also provided a safe and reliable electricity supply and the ability to drive in and out of the garden without getting stuck in the mud.

 

This was the point where we seek your approval, as committee members.

 

In making provision for a permeable, granular material, access track that aids drainage, assist mobility and prevent mud deposits on the highway, we require planning approval.

 

The use of our grounds to accommodate caravans has already been clarified as a legal use of our land. This planning application was about us seeking permission to retain the access track in our camping garden. We have no permanent hard standings and the track itself, already had grass growing through it.

 

Despite some genuine concerns about numbers of visitors staying with us, their use of the public footpaths or devaluation of properties, neighbours who have visited and inspected what we have tried to achieve, were supportive of our endeavours. You will be aware that we only use local tradesmen, employ local students, and encourage our guests to visit other local businesses.

 

The Denbighshire Destination Management plan advocates using what you have been given to ‘’develop a thriving visitor economy in Denbighshire which celebrates the unique strengths of the county, supports jobs, generates business opportunities and improves the range and qualities of amenities available for visitors and residents whilst safeguarding the environment’’.

 

This was our vision which was supported by customers’ reviews. This application was not about winners or losers. This was about diversification in an, ever changing world, without compromising our integrity.

 

General Debate –

 

Councillor Christine Marston (local member) informed the committee that the proposed area for the application was in a rural location, the proposed development lay outside the curtilage of the farmers arms. The member highlighted that the application was completely retrospective and not partly retrospective as the report indicated. The impact on the visual amenities of local residents were not affected by the ground works however they would be impeded by the caravans which would be using the site. Another impact the development would have on local residents would be due to the noise pollution which would be produced. Concerns were also highlighted about the lack of ecological survey which had not been carried out at the site prior to any of the development. The SUDS scheme which had not been agreed was also outlined as a concern, alongside the surface water flooding which was occurring due to the development of the hard surfacing at the site.

 

Councillor Marston added that there were also major concerns with the management of the chemical waste at the site as there would be no way to monitor the disposal of the waste. There also was a Scottish power electrical transformer on the site which posed a safety concern. Lastly the local member added that there had not been a certificate granted by the National Caravan Club (NCC)

 

Proposal – Councillor Christine Marston proposed the application be refused contrary to officer recommendations, seconded by Councillor Brian Jones.

The reasons for refusal would be discussed thoroughly prior to the vote.

 

Officers responded to queries, confirming that the use of land as a ‘Certified Location’ caravan site would fall within permitted development rights and therefore the change of use of land does not form part of the application. Members were also advised that the application had been submitted following enforcement action in respect of the operational development that did require planning permission, and were associated with the use of the land.

 

Councillor Marston’s proposal was clarified by Officers. Officers made it clear that it was only the impact of the operational development that could be considered in this case. That there was a fallback position on the site meaning it could operate as a caravan site (under the certification process) and provide lesser facilities to its occupants by removing the operational development. The Councillor proposed the reasons for refusal as follows –

 

·         Residential Amenities – visual impact of the work carried out on the site.

·         The Ecological impact – the management of the waste and to ensure it was disposed of properly.

·         Safety – Scottish Power’s main transformer on the site could be a danger to the site users.

 

VOTE –

For – 3

Refuse – 14

Abstain – 0

 

RESOLVED that the application be REFUSED contrary to officer recommendations within the report.