A PROSECUTION launched against a homeowner who failed to comply with National Park enforcement action, has left him nearly £3,000 out of pocket.

Pembrokeshire Coast National Park officers served an enforcement notice last March due the unauthorised erection of two pole-mounted CCTV cameras and a 2.7metre high metal fence at Overhaven House, Blockett Lane, Little Haven.

Members of the park’s development management committee heard last June that this enforcement notice had not been complied with nor appealed within the relevant timescales and permission was granted to start prosecution proceedings.

A report for Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Development Management Committee members, before their June 7 meeting, says: “The case was heard at the Haverfordwest magistrates court on May 4 in which the defendant [Mark David Chapman] pleaded guilty for the non-compliance of the Enforcement Notice issued on March 23, 2022.

“At the same court hearing, charges had also been brought against the defendant by the National Park Authority concerning the unauthorised display of numerous advertisement signs in contravention of [regulations].

“The defendant also pleaded guilty to 11 charges relating to the unauthorised signage. The defendant pleaded not guilty to a further two charges relating to unauthorised signage, which were dropped. All unauthorised signage had by then been removed and the height of the fence reduced.

“The court imposed a six-month conditional discharge on the defendant and was ordered to pay the full prosecution costs of £2,783.37 to the National Park Authority and a surcharge of £26.”

The report before members adds: “Whilst the Enforcement Notice relating to the CCTV cameras and fence has not been complied with, the defendant has reduced the height of the fence and intimated that it is his intention to appeal against an earlier planning application for retention of the CCTV cameras and the fence at the reduced height which was refused on February 9.”

The report says no written confirmation has yet been received whether an appeal for that decision has been made to PEDW (Planning and Environment Decisions Wales).

“In the absence of a valid appeal being made to PEDW within the allowed timescale, officers will write to the offender reminding him that the Enforcement Notice remains in force and requiring him to remove the CCTV cameras and fence within a short timescale (i.e. 28 days) or face further prosecution in the magistrates court for failing to comply with the Enforcement Notice,” the report adds.

Committee members are recommended to note the contents of the report.

A ONE PLANET Development in north Pembrokeshire – prepared with ‘military precision’ was unanimously backed by Pembrokeshire planners present.

Applicants Simon Hillam – a former British Army warrant officer – and nurse Clare Gray sought permission for a One Planet Development on three fields at Y Gaer Pencraig, Llangolman.

One Planet Developments allow people to live off the land in the open countryside in a self-sufficient and eco-friendly way.

The application, which included the siting of a residential unit, yurt, produce shed, solar shed, goat shed, toilet, shower unit, storage containers and polytunnel and the creation of ponds, was recommended for conditional approval by Pembrokeshire planners at their May meeting.

Planners heard the couple, who currently live in nearby Hermon, already ran a successful business from the site called ‘Blossoms and Berries,’ which specialises in producing high-quality flower bouquets and fruit for sale at local farmers’ markets, making just over £12,000 a year.

Members also heard the site includes Pencraig-Fawr Camp, a scheduled monument of national importance, believed to date to the Iron Age.

Local council Mynachlogddu Community Council had commented: “Councillors remain sceptical of development. Pembrokeshire County Council must urge the applicant to respect the iron age fort which is part of the site and to adhere to the strict rules governing the development of one planet.”

Eight letters of support, and four in opposition to the development were also received.

Applicant Simon Hillen told planners he and his wife were “passionate growers,” who wanted to make a positive contribution to the area, conceding: “a One Planet Development lifestyle is not for the soft-hearted.”

Speaking against the proposal, neighbour Michael Ritchie, felt the application – in an area of “unspoilt countryside” was neither appropriate to the area or the One Planet policy.

He also raised concerns of the proximity to Pencraig-Fawr Camp, and felt the village was already “inundated with One Planet Developments”.

Councillor Brian Hall, who moved approval, said the application was very different to earlier One Planet submissions, which often were difficult to support, adding: “I have no hesitation in going with the recommendation and wish them all the success.”

He was seconded by Councillor Mark Carter, who said: “It seems a business to me that is going to go forward.”

Fellow planner Councillor Rhys Jordan said it was “really pleasing to see such attention to detail,” describing the application as “effectively military precision in the way this has been carried out”.

Councillor Tony Wilcox also compared the application with previous examples: “Over the years we’ve had some real doozies, but I’m fully confident this one will be successful.”

One member of the planning committee, Councillor Michael Williams, who has previously been critical of the One Planet Development scheme had withdrawn from the debate, citing a “prejudicial interest”.

Cllr Williams has previously – at the February meeting of the county council’s Cabinet – called for a Wales-wide moratorium on all such future developments.

IN A PUBLIC meeting held at Pembroke Town Hall on Monday 22 May, representatives of Pembroke Town Council met with members of the public to discuss the planning application for Phase 2 of the South Quay development.

Chaired by the Mayor of Pembroke, those present at the meeting were unanimous in their opinion that this stage of the development was not in keeping with the historic character of the town. It was agreed that the proposal to locate a “Social Services” hub in a prominent quayside location was totally inappropriate and would not benefit the regeneration of the town.

There were various concerns and criticisms about the overall location of the “Hub”, as well the proposed height, the materials to be used and the fact that the new building could detract from and adversely dominate the existing historic focal points such as the Churches or the Castle.

A member of the public, Mr Richard Naylor, had concerns that “The proposal is a gross over-development of the constrained building site, resulting in a dense layout of accommodation with little natural light or ventilation. The over-height buildings are out of scale with the existing Royal George and the listed 7 Northgate Street.”

The Town Council had previously rejected the plans for a Social Services Hub, acknowledging that whilst this facility was needed – other existing sites were better suited – such as East End School and Riverside.

Cllr Linda Asman, said that that the Historic town of Pembroke was designated a Conservation Area in 1972, and, quoting from relevant documentation stated: “Where development or re-development is necessary, this should be carried out where possible, by adapting the existing buildings, in a manner that is in keeping with the scale and character of the area.”

The meeting also received written responses to the planning application from the Trustees of Pembroke Castle and The Pembroke Civic Trust – both echoing the comments and concerns of the Town Council. Pembroke Castle’s Trustees have particular concerns over the modern design aspects of the buildings in relation to the historic setting.

Cllr Jonathan Grimes, expressed his ongoing concerns for this stage of the project. “Pembroke is crying out for regeneration and whilst we welcome the eventual completion of Phase 1, the placement of a social services hub in such a prominent area is totally unacceptable.” He went on to say: “South Quay needs to be utilised as a recreational public space – somewhere that will attract visitors and ultimately increase footfall into other areas of the town.”

It was resolved that Pembroke Town Council as representatives of their community, have a different vision for this development. Their objections have been totally ignored and they will be responding to the planning application, along with Pembroke Castle, The Civic Trust and members of the public.

These strong objections state that this stage of the development is not appropriate and does not satisfy the aims of Levelling Up.