AN APPEAL has been lodged with Welsh Government planning inspectors after Powys councillors rejected a proposal to extend a caravan park near Llanfair Caereinion earlier this year,

Back in March the Powys County Council Planning Committee rejected an application by Sheehan Holdings Ltd to change the use of a field to be able to accommodate 20 caravans.

In doing this the committee went against planning officer’s advice to approve the scheme.

Sheehan Holdings wanted to extend Fir View Holiday Park at Tan y Ffridd which is located off the A495 between Pontrobert and Llangyniew.

At the meeting councillors focussed their concerns on a proposed emergency evacuation route through Mathrafal wood to the rear of the site.

Get in touch

Share your views on this story by sending a letter to the editor. To get in touch email news@countytimes.co.uk, or fill in the form on this section of our website.

They believed that the route is prone to flooding and pointed out that it’s not actually owned by Sheehan Holdings.

This track which is used for forestry purposes is part of the Welsh Government estate.

The visual impact was also brought up with some councillors believing it would be a “blot on the landscape.”

The appeal has been lodged by Charmaine Sheehan of Sheehan Holdings and an argument for inspectors to award costs against the council has also been submitted to PEDW (Planning and Environment Decisions Wales).

In their case against the council’s decision planning agents McCartneys Planning and Survey said: “The area of the access onto the A495 public highway is in a flood zone as identified by Natural Resources Wales (NRW).

“Flood risk was duly given consideration.”

OTHER NEWS:

The point out that the same “flood evacuation route” proposed with the application had been fine in previous expansion plans at the site, which have been approved by the council.

McCartneys said: “The site itself would be situated entirely out of the identified flood risk areas and NRW hold no records of flooding on the site.

“NRW confirmed they raised no objection to the development in terms of flood risk.

“The council emergency planning officer was also consulted and raised no objection to the proposed development proceeding in line with the proposed flood evacuation plan.”

They also say that evidence was submitted to show that the evacuation route is “passable” and in “good condition” as well as notice being served on the landowner who did not object to the plans.

McCartneys said: “It is important to note that the planning officer was satisfied that correct procedure had been followed.”

Two years ago, planning permission was granted for 54 static caravans, which took the number at the holiday park up to 228.