Members of Saundersfoot Community Council have unanimously voted to object to a planning application for the creation of a new ‘traveller site’ in the seaside village.

The application (reference: NP/24/0638/FUL) for the creation of one traveller site incorporating one static caravan, one touring caravan, day/utility room and ecological enhancements (partly retrospective) on land at Froghall Yard, Moreton Lane has been submitted to the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority by applicant Dai Evans through agents Hayston Developments & Planning Ltd.

Around 50 members of the public attended a meeting held on March 6 at the Regency Hall raising objections to the proposal.

A petition of 297 signatures has also be submitted to PCNPA’s planning committee objecting to the application.

Community Councillors have now made the following observations which have been passed onto PCNPA recommending refusal for the plans:

Inappropriate location /conflicting with National Park purpose - ‘The site is agricultural land with no caravan or other use in over 30 years. This previously unspoilt location is an important part of the landscape setting of the village.

‘Development would conflict with the statutory purposes of National Parks: conserving and enhancing the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area. The site is overlooked from Incline Way above and cannot be adequately screened.

‘Two previous planning applications have been rejected on the site. PCNPA should be consistent with previous decisions. This is agricultural land, outside the settlement boundary and would conflict with the Local Development Plan.

‘Also, the site is in too close proximity to the stream with potential pollution risks to the blue flag beach. Concerns were expressed over sewage system capacity.’

Damage to Biodiversity and Wildlife - ‘Councillors were frustrated that extensive clearance work has already taken place on site. Removing multiple mature trees and apparently disturbing a badger habitat.

‘There has been no ecological/biodiversity study of the site in the condition it was prior to the Applicant starting work without permission.’

The statement from Saundersfoot Community Council objecting to the proposals went onto say: ‘Permission here would be gross overdevelopment setting a precedent for development literally anywhere throughout the National Park, including the additional land owned by the applicant adjacent to the application site.

‘The applicant has no local connection to the Saundersfoot area. The applicant lives in Pontypool and claims no connection to the area. There is no rationale as to why the applicant chose a site approximately 100 miles away from their home.’

Concerns over access were also raised by community councillors, in that the site is via a minor road/bridleway and insufficient for safe vehicular access.

A collective of residents living nearby the application site, recently told the Observer: “The prospect of a gypsy/traveller site where no development is permitted and the potential to site multiple static caravans where none are allowed will fundamentally change the nature of this area of National Park in a county where we already have traveller site provision.”

The application will be considered by PCNPA’s development management committee at a later date.