Agenda item

 Use of land as a year round holiday park.

The Chairman declared that he would not take part in the debate or vote on this item and therefore the Vice-Chairman was in the Chair for consideration of this application.

 

The Committee considered an application for use of land as a year round holiday park presented by the Senior Planning Officer.

 

Members were shown a location plan, site plan, aerial photo and photographs showing the site entrance from Mills Road, the clubhouse and buildings and views across the site.

 

The main planning issues were highlighted including:-

 

• Principle of development
• Effect on AONB/Heritage Coast
• Effect on residential amenity
• Nature conservation
• Highways

 

The Senior Planning Officer advised that various applications in other locations had been granted previously to cover all months of the year. This was consistent with the winter break scenario as well as increasing local economic benefits during this period. He also highlighted that the Planning Inspector in the appeal for a further lodge on this site had been allowed with no limit on the months of the year that it could be occupied.  It was therefore his view that refusal of this application would be difficult to sustain.

 

The recommendations were outlined and the committee was advised that the application provided a useful opportunity to limit the number of caravans on site to 69 as the existing caravan site licensing allowed a maximum of 130 caravan pitches.

 

The Technical Support Officer read out the public written submissions which are attached to the minutes of this meeting.

 

In response to the points raised during public participation, the Senior Planning Officer advised that appropriate conditions to prevent residential use all year round for this scheme had been widely used elsewhere in Dorset.

 

In response to the request for technical questions, Cllr Nick Ireland queried the original reason for restricting opening to 10 months which had not been outlined in the report and how occupancy would be enforced and checked, including background checks to verify the veracity of written records. He also questioned the sustainability of the location given the lack of a shop, street lighting, pavements or bus and in light of other appeal cases in the Owermoigne, Warmwell and Osmington areas that had been lost due to being unsustainable due to limited services.

 

The Senior Planning Officer advised that there had not been a market for winter breaks at the time of the original permission and that the 10 month limit had been used to avoid permanent residential use, in the absence of any other mechanism to control occupancy at that time.  However, this application included a condition requiring a written schedule of occupiers including names, addresses and dates of occupation.  This was an important tool that would help the Council to exercise control with a check of the written schedule being triggered by a routine enforcement team enquiry or investigated in response to a complaint.

 

Whilst it was accepted that this location was not ideal in terms of available facilities, this was an existing holiday park with a proposal allowing 69 holiday lodges to be occupied for an extra 8 weeks a year without the need for any other operational development.

 

Turning to the debate, some members recognised the economic benefits of the site and that the increase to 12 months sought to allow people to stay at the site during the February half term period.  However, the overriding concern of the committee was in the nebulous condition for monitoring a holiday stay that could not be clearly defined in terms of a time period, the absence of monitoring; the increase in carbon footprint and lack of reference to the impact on climate change in the report.

 

It was proposed by Cllr Bill Pipe and seconded by Cllr Paul Kimber for a minded to decision to approve the application, however, upon being put to a vote, the proposal was lost.

 

The Committee then discussed reasons for a ”minded to” refusal of the application and there followed a short adjournment from 11.16 to 11.30am in order that officers could put together some wording of reasons for refusal that reflected the views of the committee.

 

On reconvening, it was proposed by Cllr Louie O’Leary and seconded by Cllr Nick Ireland.

 

That the committee was minded to refuse the application for the following reasons:-

 

1.     The extended use of the holiday accommodation for an additional 2 months of the year would not represent sustainable development as it would increase the carbon footprint of the development with no evidence having been submitted to indicate to the contrary. The carbon footprint would increase as a result of additional heating, lighting and vehicle movements, particularly as the additional months of use would be during the winter. The proposed development is therefore considered to be contrary to Policy INT1 of the West Dorset, Weymouth and Portland Local Plan (2015).

 

2.    In the absence of a satisfactory completed legal agreement there would be no mechanism to ensure payment of the required ecological contribution (£1,911-30) in order to satisfactorily mitigate for the impacts of the development on the European protected heathlands. In these circumstances the scheme would be contrary to the Dorset Heathlands Planning Framework (2020-2025), Policy ENV2 of the West Dorset, Weymouth and Portland Local Plan 2015 and the NPPF (2019).

 

The Service Manager – Development Management and Enforcement, having considered the representations and the officer’s presentation and having taken into account the views of the committee made the following decision under delegated authority.

 

Decision of the Service Manager:

That the application be refused for the reasons outlined in the appendix to these minutes.