{"id":134354,"date":"2025-05-26T22:32:12","date_gmt":"2025-05-26T22:32:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/134354\/"},"modified":"2025-05-26T22:32:12","modified_gmt":"2025-05-26T22:32:12","slug":"panic-in-wales-as-locals-fight-back-against-travellers-pitching-up-on-beauty-spot-uk-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/134354\/","title":{"rendered":"Panic in Wales as locals fight back against travellers pitching up on beauty spot | UK | News"},"content":{"rendered":"

National park planners have rejected a proposed new traveller site on the outskirts of a popular Welsh<\/a> village after hundreds of objections. The plan, which has panicked local residents, involved setting up one traveller site<\/a> with one static caravan, one touring caravan, a day\/utility room, and ecological enhancements at Froghall Yard, Moreton Lane, Saundersfoot. It was recommended for refusal at a meeting of Pembrokeshire Coast National Park’s development management committee last week.<\/p>\n

The proposal had previously been postponed for a site visit by members. Almost 300 people signed a petition against the scheme, with the village’s community council also voicing their objection to the site. Around 50 people attended a recent community council meeting where members unanimously voted against the application<\/a> submitted by Dai Evans of Pontypool through agents Hayston Developments and Planning Ltd.<\/p>\n

Saundersfoot Community Council pointed out that the site is agricultural land with no caravan or other use in over 30 years.<\/p>\n

Concerns were also raised that the site \u2013 which has seen two previous planning applications turned down \u2013 is visible from Incline Way above and cannot be concealed.<\/p>\n

The local community council has shared their fears that a proposed development<\/a> in the national park could lead to increased construction.<\/p>\n

At the meeting, local resident Helen Williams questioned why the applicant needed to have a site in Saundersfoot given his residence in Pontypool and highlighted the absence of caravans on-site since 1993.<\/p>\n

Councillor Chris Williams of Saundersfoot, advocating for the officer’s recommendation for refusal, agreed. He said: “I do not think this is the correct location.”<\/p>\n

Dr Rosetta Plumber also joined the opposition, labelling it “an inappropriate application and an inappropriate site”.<\/p>\n

Andrew Vaughan-Harries, representing the applicant, responded to the ruling: “To deliver traveller sites is always a planning challenge but as discussed the essential need more sites is clearly there for the whole of Wales and Pembrokeshire<\/a>.<\/p>\n

“The opportunity of private sites also eases the burden on LPAs to fund traveller sites. We respect that site is in PCNP but there is a policy to still allow traveller sites in their area subtext to criteria being met.<\/p>\n

“The full impact on the ecology and visual impact was not completed by ourselves and applicant due to availability of suitable local surveyors and conflicts of interest.<\/p>\n

“So it’s likely we will resubmit to improve on the scheme and see if all ecology impacts can be mitigated even if it has to be off-site. This site has remnants of previous use and not a virgin greenfield site. I still feel the site can deliver a single traveller poach with up-to-date assessment and redesigning.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"National park planners have rejected a proposed new traveller site on the outskirts of a popular Welsh village…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":134355,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5010],"tags":[748,59053,4884,59052,2579,54310,59055,59051,16,15,1764,59054],"class_list":{"0":"post-134354","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-wales","8":"tag-britain","9":"tag-community-opposition","10":"tag-great-britain","11":"tag-pembrokeshire-coast-national-park","12":"tag-protests","13":"tag-saundersfoot","14":"tag-saundersfoot-traveller-site","15":"tag-traveller-site-proposal","16":"tag-uk","17":"tag-united-kingdom","18":"tag-wales","19":"tag-wales-traveller-site"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/114576514333972658","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/134354","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=134354"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/134354\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/134355"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=134354"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=134354"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=134354"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}