| 1. | Although the primary reason for the use of Condition 4 within planning permission 06/20/0422/F is to ensure a window of opportunity remains available for maintenance and renovations of holiday chalets and lodges or caravans, it is nonetheless considered necessary to retain a period of vacancy in occupation and retain control over the use of the units as a means to provide holiday accommodation. It is considered that removing Condition 4 would allow year-round occupation of the chalets and lodges or caravans, and undermine the expectation that these units should be used for the purposes of holiday accommodation only.
Notwithstanding the retained requirement of Condition 5 of the permission, it is considered that if Condition 4 were to be removed the units would be able to be occupied year-round, once built. That being the case, it is considered unpracticable and unfeasible to rely on the provisions of Condition 3 of the permission as the sole means of exercising control over the holiday units' occupation. As no other means of controlling the use have been proposed by the applicant, it is considered that removing Condition 4 would create an unacceptable risk of the 88no. accommodation units being used for a substantial period of time more akin to permanent residential occupancy.
If the 88no. holiday accommodation units were used for permanent residence, whether or not as an occupant's primary place of residence, the development would have a negative effect on the local visitor economy, and would erode the stock of visitor holiday accommodation in the area, and be contrary to the requirement to protect new accommodation in line with the same provisions to be given to existing Holiday Accommodation Areas in the Borough.
As the proposal does not fall within the specific circumstances for allowing holiday accommodation in this location to be changed to alternative uses, the proposal would lead to a detrimental material change of use of a significant number of accommodation units within a defined Holiday Accommodation Area and would fail to safeguard the stock of holiday accommodation across the Borough. The proposal is therefore considered contrary to policies CS6(g) and CS8 of the adopted Core Strategy (2015), and policy L1 of the adopted Local Plan Part 2 (2021), and would also represent a significant loss of the intended area to be retained for tourism use within the allocated site defined by policy HY1 of the Local Plan Part 2. As no material considerations have been presented which are considered sufficient to outweigh this conflict with the development plan, it is considered that the application should be refused. |
