Rosebush Appeal Dismissed

An appeal against a national park refusal of what was described as a pioneering development of affordable homes and workshops in Pembrokeshire has been dismissed.

Back in March 2021, Pembrokeshire Coast National Park planners refused an application for the development of six affordable homes and associated workshops in Pantmaenog Forest near Rosebush, which the applicants called ‘a wasted opportunity’.

The planned £2.3 million project was a mixed-use development, of affordable homes with workshops, a community facility and a sawmill, planned with a live/work focus, around the growing and processing of timber-based products within the forest.

The scheme – which was recommended for refusal – was billed by the developers as ‘a new model of living and developing businesses in the same location’.

The plans were submitted by Jill Holding, on behalf of Coed Preseli, which owns and manages the 300-hectare forest.

The scheme, if approved, would have seen houses built sustainably by Down to Earth, an award-winning social enterprise based in Swansea.

Down to Earth would have also delivered training and education in construction during the build process, as well as forestry training within Pantmaenog upon the completion of the construction of the project.

The development was recommended for refusal for three reasons: its position in the open countryside, the proximity of the housing to the industrial production areas and insufficient assessment of the visual impacts of the development on the surrounding historic landscape.

Prior to refusal, Mark McKenna, co-founder of Down to Earth said that if the plans were turned down by the planning committee it would be looked back on as a wasted opportunity.

He said that three planning consultants had looked at the application prior to submission and that he believed it was within policy.

He added: “We are confident that everyone will look back at this as a real lost opportunity, even the planning officers, 20 years’ time or even two years’ time people will say why did we let this go the way it went? They will look at choices that we made with bemusement. This is one of them.”

Following an appeal, Inspector A L McCooey made a recommendation that appeal be dismissed, which was supported, members of the national park’s planning committee will hear at their April 19 meeting.

He said the proposal would be contrary to the development plan and national planning policy and would have an adverse impact on the special features and character and appearance of the National Park.