PEMBROKESHIRE County Council is once again preparing for the annual Tenby Pedestrianisation scheme.

The scheme is due to start on Monday 1st July and finish on Friday 13th September and run between 11am – 5.30pm each day.

The scheme will again see the Walled Town divided into three ‘zones,’ each of which will have varying degrees of vehicle access.

Full details of the scheme and the online application form will be available from Wednesday 1st May and can be found on the Council’s website.

Residents and business within the Walled Town are encouraged to complete the application process as soon as possible after the documents go live.

This will ensure that there is sufficient time for the application to be processed and additional checks made should further information be required.

Permits will be issued approximately 7-10 days before the scheme start date.

Please note that paper application forms and guidance notes will no longer be delivered to residents and businesses within the Walled Town and requests for permits will be required to be submitted online.

In order to ensure the ongoing success of the scheme permit holders are encouraged to continue to plan journeys outside of the scheme hours of 11am – 5.30pm as far as is practical.

Email [email protected] for further information.

A SCHEME for 12 new lodges at a Pembrokeshire holiday park which was recommended for refusal – in part due to its effect on the nearby town’s historic castle – has been withdrawn, county planners heard.

James Powell, of Brookside & Castlewood Holiday Park, Narberth had sought permission for 12 self-catering lodges, and associated works, as an extension of the existing park, on the outskirts of the town.

The application was recommended for refusal by Pembrokeshire County Council’s planning committee meeting of April 23, in part due to concerns about the impact on the town’s historic castle.

Narberth castle is mentioned in the Welsh literary classic the Mabinogion as the place where Rhiannon, mother of hero Pryderi, was imprisoned when her newborn child is abducted, and she is accused of infanticide.

Heneb (formerly Dyfed Archaeological Trust) had objected, considering the impact on the castle and conservation area have been “underplayed,” and the council’s Historic Buildings & Conservation Officer says the impact on the castle and conservation area would be ‘Very High’ and ‘High’ respectively.

Natural Resources Wales had also raised “significant concerns” on proposed foul water disposal.

It was recommended for refusal on the grounds it would “have negative social impacts in terms of access for people with disabilities; and negative environmental impacts in terms of landscape character and appearance, historic assets, and the Afon Cleddau SAC”.

Members of the planning commit heard the application had been withdrawn ahead of the meeting.

A CALL to remove an agricultural worker-only condition from a south Pembrokeshire couple’s home has been given the go-ahead by county planners.

In an application considered by Pembrokeshire County council’s planning committee at its April 23 meeting, John Williams of Woodside, Martletwy had applied for the residency condition to be lifted, which members were recommended to approve.

Mr Williams and his wife Catherine have lived at the property since December 1986, the dwelling granted outline planning permission in April 1985.

This was subject to an agricultural occupancy condition, in association with nearby Baglan Farm, which was previously owned and managed by Mr Williams’ parents, now both deceased.

A complication had developed after Mr Williams, a former farm worker, had been later employed in other trades, leaving the couple in breach of that condition for more than a decade.

Back in February, planners agreed to a certificate of lawfulness, entailing proof of occupancy over a period in excess of 10 years, overcoming the breach, which allowed the couple to stay at their home of many years.

Since that successful certificate, an application for the formal removal of the condition was submitted to the April committee, a report for planners stating: “The [certificate] was granted as it had been demonstrated on the balance of probability that the required timescale of at least 10 years had elapsed.

“As such, this application relies on the argument that the condition does not now meet the tests prescribed [for planning conditions] as it is no longer enforceable and should be removed.

“The certificate is unfettered and is a material consideration of substantial weight given the benefits it provides would be transferable to any subsequent occupiers.

“Accordingly, the condition is not enforceable as long as the subject dwelling remains occupied by the existing or any subsequent occupiers that do not meet the requirements of the condition that this application seeks to remove.

“It is possible for the property to be occupied in breach of the condition by any non-qualifying person in perpetuity.  Whilst it is theoretically possible that a future purchaser might comply with the occupancy condition, meaning that the certificate would fall away, the consequences of such an action would result in a loss of upwards of 30 per cent of the value of the property.

“The very low likelihood of this course of action is such that the fall-back position associated with the certificate is a material consideration sufficient to outweigh the conflict with planning policy.”

Planners unanimously backed the condition being removed.