ON Saturday, March 30, Peter Kraus undertook a 15.6-mile walk from Front Street in Pembroke Dock to Carew Castle to support veterans struggling with mental health issues and PTSD.

Originally believing the route to be 10 miles, Kraus faced a greater challenge than anticipated. He organized the walk through the Combat Stress Site, aiming to raise £1000. “They look after us and keep us safe,” Kraus told The Herald, expressing his effort as a gesture of gratitude towards the veterans.

A CALL to keep a wedding venue tipi where guests are greeted by alpacas has been turned down by Pembrokeshire planners.

Mr R Lloyd and Ms C Davies sought permission for the retention of a seasonal wedding events venue with the siting of a tipi and formation of ancillary parking area on land next to Redberth Gardens, Redberth, near Tenby.

Members of Pembrokeshire County Council’s planning committee, meeting on April 23, were recommended to refuse the retrospective application for the ‘Serenity Garden’ tipi venue, erected in August 2023.

Serenity Garden, on its website, says the tipi offers a “very special wedding venue, set in the heart of the Pembrokeshire countryside,” with “friendly resident alpacas, teddy bear sheep, goats, ducks and Vietnamese pot-bellied pigs” greeting guests.

A planning statement supporting the application says it is anticipated that there would be approximately 15 wedding events during the season.

Concerns about the application have been raised by nearby St Florence Community Council, along with seven objections from the public, on issues including the potential impact on local residents, no site notice, added traffic, no local benefits, security concerns, and claims that bookings and deposits are already being taken for events.

A report for planners said: “Whilst the tipi is described as a temporary structure, it would have a level of permanence in that it would be erected in early April and remain on site until the end of October to minimise the effort of dismantling it after each planned event.”

It concludes: “The proposal represents an unjustified form of development in a countryside location. In addition, the application fails to include sufficient information to demonstrate that the suitable drainage infrastructure can be incorporated into the site, that noise levels would not have a detrimental impact on local amenity and that biodiversity would be protected and enhanced.”

Speaking at the April meeting, Agent Richard Banks said the tipi was not a permanent structure and there were no permanent homes near the site, those nearby being holiday cottages.

Referring to the retrospective nature of the application, he said the applicants were “guilty of being confused by permitted development rights” of 14 days, the intent to have 14 weddings, the application correcting that misinterpretation.

Objector Matt Sutton said the leaseholders of the holiday lets’ quiet enjoyment of their properties would be “significantly affected,” with fears music and corporate events would be held at the site.

He described the application as “riding roughshod over neighbours’ rights”.

Cllr Rhys Jordan, who later stressed the committee was “not anti-business,” moved the scheme be rejected.

Cllr Jordan stressed the need for applicants to work with planners.

“This committee is not anti-business, it’s a shame we’re in a position here where we could be having to refuse an application.

“Engage with us; that’s going to cost greatly to the applicant, this committee certainly isn’t anti-business and anti-growth.”

The application was refused by 13 votes, with one abstention.

A NEAR-£10m Pembrokeshire residential development of 52 homes has been backed by planners despite concerns it will provide just four affordable homes.

In an application before Pembrokeshire County Council’s April planning committee, Wakefield Pembrokeshire Ltd sought permission for the development, which includes four one-bed affordable housing units, on land near Pilgrims Way, Roch.

Committee members were recommended to approve the council’s head of planning be delegated to approve the application, subject to the completion of a Section 106 planning obligation, making community financial contributions.

18 objections to the scheme were received, raising concerns including an “inadequate” affordable housing level, it being a high density development for a rural area, a loss of green space, the size of some of the homes, and pressures on existing services and facilities, and fears it may lead to an increase in second homes.

Nolton & Roch Community Land Trust (N&RCLT) has raised its concerns about a lack of affordable homes at the development, calling for a 20 per cent affordable homes element, as recommended by policy.

An officer report for members, recommending conditional approval, concluded: “It is apparent that the proposed development is not fully policy compliant, insofar as it cannot deliver the indicative 20 per cent affordable housing sought [by policy].

“However, a substantial positive social impact will arise through the provision of housing, including four one-bed affordable housing units, in meeting identified needs for both market and affordable housing.

“Financial obligations identified to mitigate adverse impacts arising from the proposed development cannot be met in full. However, [policy] acknowledges that in such circumstances contributions may be prioritised on the basis of the individual circumstances of each case.”

Speaking at the meeting, agent Gethin Beynon said the project had a “significant economic value” of around £10m, and the local applicant had “a sense of stewardship to the local community,” offering affordable housing and community infrastructure towards highways and education.

He said that changes to the affordable homes provision would make the scheme unviable following “dramatic changes” in labour costs post-Covid.

Dave Smith of Nolton & Roch Community Land Trust said, on the issue of affordable housing, there was a local need for more two and three-bed properties, adding: “More than a third of dwellings are already second homes, holiday lets or empty properties; villages and communities are being hollowed out.”

Moving approval, Cllr Mark Carter said the scheme was good but “could be better for the community” with more and larger affordable homes.

Cllr Jordan Ryan expressed his concern at the small number of affordable units, and was told that, while officers shared disappointment at the number, it was based on two independent viability assessments.

The application was backed by nine votes to four.