Plans for ten log cabins at Flintshire holiday park refused due to ‘overdevelopment’ concerns

Plans to build 10 log cabins at a holiday park in Flintshire have been refused.

An application was made to Flintshire Council in January to upgrade facilities at Ynyshir Farm Holiday Park in the village of Picton, near Llanasa.

A previous application to create 17 lodges at the same site was rejected by council officials towards the end of last year because of concerns it would represent “overdevelopment”.

Agents acting on behalf of Paul Edwards, who owns the park, said the proposed scheme would inject £500,000 a year into the local economy.

They said: “Ynyshir Farm Campsite is an existing touring holiday park located at Picton, Llanasa, near Holywell
“The area is a renowned holiday area and tourism destination.

“The scheme proposed would generate into the local economy of approximately £500,000 per annum for a 30-week season.

“The proposal will further increase a high-quality facility and the cabins would significantly help raise the standards offered in the region.

Llanasa Community Council objected to the latest application, in documents published this week, the council said:

“Local residents believe the area is being over-developed for tourist activities. If successful, the conservation village of Picton will be surrounded by campsites affecting the lives of the people resident throughout the year.”

If the application was successful, “the conservation village of Picton will be surrounded by campsites affecting the lives of the people resident throughout the year.”

They also questioned whether the development “should be situated so near to a local primary school.”

Three letters of objection were also received by Flintshire planners the main points of which were around the detrimental impact of landscape, increased traffic and impact on living conditions of occupiers of nearby properties through loss of privacy.

In his report Flintshire Council’s Chief Officer, Planning, Environment & Economy, Andrew Farrow said:

“The proposal would represent overdevelopment of the site by virtue of its scale, design and layout which would have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the site and wider landscape and does not secure the integrity of a public sewer crossing the site.”

“This does not represent positive place-making or embrace the objectives of good design as the development fails to respond to the existing site and surrounding context, in terms of how and at what appropriate density any additional development to that previously consented can be successfully integrated into the landscape.”