A fresh bid for a 110 caravan expansion on farmland for Preston Park in Manston has been submitted to Thanet council following refusal of previous plans last July.
Site owners Kent Leisure Parks Ltd want change of use of adjacent agricultural land to accommodate 110 caravans and associated parking, bin stores, hardscaping and landscaping.
There are currently 202 statics on site although the park is licensed for up to 236.
Kent Leisure Parks say the 110 caravan expansion will be phased “in a series of five phases, according to the demand generated for the units and implemented over the course of a number of years.”
Screen planting for the entire site will be carried out prior to the occupation of the first phase.
Last July members of Thanet council’s planning committee rejected the scheme over concerns of the impact on the countryside and the loss of Grade 2 agricultural land as well as worries about over-development, congestion on Preston Road and Spratling Street and the risk to pedestrians and cyclists from increased traffic.
The new application is similar to the previous one but is accompanied by a Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) pledge and the layout of the extended caravan park has been slightly altered, with visitor parking spaces being more evenly spread out across the site.
Eight objections have been lodged against the proposal with concerns including traffic congestion, increased pollution and noise, loss of agricultural land and insufficient drainage capacity.
Manston Parish Council says it strongly objects for reasons including the extension representing a 54% increase in the size of the existing business, overdevelopment impact on local amenities, additional traffic and parking issues and management of waste disposal and general litter.
Kent Leisure Parks say caravans have increased in size over the years and over 30 pitches have previously been lost.
“As such it is necessary to replace these pitches and also to address the direction of continued future demand for larger units, which will result in the further loss of smaller pitches in the longer term. The proposed caravan units will be little different to those existing on site, apart from being larger than the older units, and newer.
“Existing and proposed holiday units are an extremely popular form of accommodation, as they provide for affordable, family holidays, all year round, especially given the nature and extent of insulation and facilities the modern units provide.
“In addition, the pandemic has highlighted the need to be able to satisfy demand arising from those wishing to holiday away from cities and urban settlements, particularly to coastal locations, but still within reasonable proximity to services and amenities.
“Visitors to the site could offer support for the village facilities – public house and shop and that the expansion will generate full and part time jobs relating to construction during the implementation stages.”
Kent Leisure Parks said the expansion, which would have soft landscaping screens and a wildflower meadow landscape buffer, would lead to four full-time and two part-time additional staff alongside the existing six full-time and two part-time roles and will bring money into the rural economy.
However, planning officers are recommending refusal saying “the loss of agricultural land is unjustified.”
A report to councillors says: “The proposed development would provide up to 110 caravans for tourism use and would in turn provide visitors that help to sustain key community facilities, achieving economic benefits.
“The development would also provide social benefits through the provision of up to 110 caravans for tourism that range in size and provide cultural exchange between guests and hosts and could preserve local festivals and events by attracting tourists.
“The site has limited ecological value as farmland and the provision of additional perimeter planting and wildflower meadow and landscaping within the site weighs slightly in favour in the planning balance; however, the loss of agricultural land is unjustified and concern is raised with the visual harm to the countryside and landscape character area.
“The application was previously refused on these grounds, which has not been overcome through this revised application, and therefore the harm is considered to have significant weight in the decision making process.
“The application fails to demonstrate that the introduction of 110 caravans and associated infrastructure on the site will not cause significant harm to the countryside and Landscape Character Area, or demonstrate that the loss of agricultural land is acceptable. It is, therefore, considered the development should be refused.”
In 2002 a planning application was submitted for an extension to the eastern side of the main caravan park to accommodate 64 static caravans but planning consent was refused on the grounds including an undesirable over-intensification of the existing commercial use of the site.
The application will be discussed by councillors on the planning committee on Wednesday (March 19).
