Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED That Cabinet do not progress further with the ‘Pembs Stop’ Scheme.
RESOLVED That the policy be approved.
The following declarations of interest were made in respect of Agenda Item No. 5 - Introduction of Overnight Stops for Motorhomes/Camper Vans in Off Street Parking Places (Car Parks) 'Pembs Stop' Trial Scheme: Councillor Bethan Price declared three personal interests by virtue of the fact that her partner owned a campsite, she was a board member of Visit Pembrokeshire and she was a member of the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority. Councillor Di Clements declared two personal interests by virtue of the fact that she was a board member of Visit Pembrokeshire and a member of the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority. Councillor Alan Dennison declared a personal interest by virtue of the fact that he owned a motorhome. Councillor Michele Wiggins declared a personal interest by virtue of the fact that she was a member of the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority. Councillor Tony Wilcox declared a personal interest by virtue of the fact that he was a member of the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority. Councillor Mike James declared a personal interest by virtue of the fact that he was a member of the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority. Councillor Vanessa Thomas declared a personal interest by virtue of the fact that she was a member of the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority.
There was no public correspondence.
The Committee considered a report by the Head of Democratic Services on the Committee Referral – Alternative Housing Methods. The Chair outlined the key points of the report and welcomed questions from Members. Put on forward work programme
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED That Cabinet do not progress further with the ‘Pembs Stop’ Scheme.
The Committee considered a report by the Head of Infrastructure and Environment on the Introduction of Overnight Stops for Motorhomes/Camper Vans in Off Street Parking Places (Car Parks) 'Pembs Stop' Trial Scheme. The Chair welcomed Councillor Rhys Sinnett, the relevant Cabinet Member with responsibility for Resident Services, the Head of Infrastructure and Environment and the Public Realm Manager who outlined the key points of the report and welcomed questions from Members. The Committee debated the contents of the report and the key points were highlighted as follows: The Chair read out a letter from Emma Thornton, CEO of Visit Pembrokeshire. The letter raised concerns with the Council car parks competing with assigned caravan park businesses and taking their business. These parks also already had facilities to accommodate visitors e.g. WiFi, toilets, sewage disposal facilities and fire safety measures. It continued that this could lead to an excess of waste disposal. The letter stated that the economic environment was turbulent from the previous year and data collected suggested that this would continue in to the next year. Comparable data for the scheme was taken from Gwynedd Council who implemented a similar scheme during the Covid-19 pandemic when domestic tourism was highest; Emma Thornton’s letter stated that it was unfair to compare this data. The letter concluded that the scheme should be reconsidered and that it was disappointing that Visit Pembrokeshire, the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority (PCNPA) were not consulted with for this scheme. Councillor Clements thanked all the members of the public who contacted her regarding this scheme and that it warranted further scrutiny. She concurred with Emma Thornton’s concerns with the lack of consultation with anyone other than the local member for Narberth. With regards to the scheme by Gwynedd Council, Councillor Clements noted that Pembrokeshire looked at doing a similar scheme in March 2022 but this was scrapped because there were already 14,000 caravan sites in Pembrokeshire with planning permission and taxpayer’s money would be used to compete with these businesses. A lot of additional costs would be needed for the Council to set these sites up and the rural Pembrokeshire roads would not cope with large vehicles. She noted that sustainable tourism and CO2 emissions needed to be monitored too. Councillor Clements continued that a communication plan for the 2022 proposal was planned between Visit Pembrokeshire and the Council to make the websites stated that campervans/motorhomes were welcome. The Council part funded Visit Pembrokeshire and during the pandemic, Pembrokeshire was inundated with tourists which caused community tensions. The business case was queried by Councillor Clements and whether this included all the associated costs e.g. planning, licencing, foul water disposal, enforcement etc. She questioned whether the unintended consequences for businesses had been sought as well as the environmental implications. Councillor Clements concluded that businesses and campervan sites had been millions invested in to them and a pop-up campervan site would damage these investments. With regards to consultation, the Head of Infrastructure and Environment highlighted that he needed to get the authority to carryout consultations for the trial scheme. He apologised if this was wrong and it was not a way to avoid consultation or upset other partners. A consultation was planned after the approval for a trial had been approved. The car parks planned to be part of the trial scheme were easily accessible for campervans. The Head of Infrastructure and Environment continued that the conversations had with the local member for Narberth was around car parking management and not the scheme. To pay for parking at the sites, the Public Realm Manager stated that this would be done via the existing pay machines so no additional infrastructure would be needed. Additional money would be needed for signage and communication but this was planned through the website. Overnight enforcement was already carried out by the Council and the Public Realm Manager noted that over 500 penalty charging notices were issues last year to unauthorised campervans parking in Council carparks. Officers would go round the car parks every day to monitor litter and cleanliness. The Public Realm Manager continued that additional infrastructure should not be needed due to the easy access of the car parks. CAMPRA and British Parking Association state that good housekeeping means that furniture and awnings should not be left outside the campervans. He highlighted that this was for an overnight stop and not set to replace campervan sites. Since its approval at Cabinet, Councillor Marc Tierney noted that high street businesses in Narberth and Narberth Town Council had expressed mixed responses on the scheme to him. Narberth had a thriving high street with nearly all buildings occupied and he continued that the town car park was over capacity. He was against the car park being part of the scheme until the parking issue was resolved. Councillor Tierney noted that it made more sense to have the trial car parks nearer the ferry ports i.e. Goodwick. Powys had this scheme in place since 2018 so this could be a learning opportunity for the Council. He requested that Narberth be removed from the trial scheme. Mr Steve Haywood understood the concerns raised by the Committee but highlighted that campervan owners did not want to travel far and would prioritise going to campervan sites. Brexit had led to more campervan owners going on holiday in the UK due to the 90 travel restriction. Members of CAMPRA were excited to hear about the trial as 74% of surveyed members said that they used overnight stops like the ones proposed. When campervan owners travelled to South Wales, Mr Haywood stated that they stay for up to two months touring which would include staying at campsites. If campervan owners stayed near a town then they would spend money there but they would not so this if they stayed on a campsite. He continued that 96% of those surveyed said that they would pay for an overnight stop. If there were more overnight stops, Mr Haywood said that people would use them and then this could be regulated. Travelling to campsites would increase emissions and congestion. He disputed that campervan owners would generate more rubbish then parked cars, especially as most homes had bins. A lot of caravan sites took up space on their sites with camping pods and glamping which made it more difficult for them to park there. CAMPRA carried out a search on available pitching sites in Pembrokeshire with two criteria’s; that it had to be open all year round and be on hard ground. Mr Haywood stated that within a 15 mile radius there were seven campsites, two were close to Narberth and the nearest one to Tenby was nearly five miles away. All sites had an electrical hook-up but none had basic overnight parking. Councillor Dennison recalled that he stayed on a campervan site in Narberth and it costed £40 a night which was expensive to visit the town. He concurred that this scheme should go ahead near ferry ports as it worked very well in Dover for anyone who wanted to get the Eurostar. There were some empty car parks where the trial could be carried out in Milford Haven ad he concluded that he was in favour of the trial but they should only be on the outskirts of towns. A large car park in Councillor Michael Williams’ constituency was planned for the trial and he stated that there was a lot of regulations that the Council would need to meet for these sites. He expressed concerns with the cleaning plan for this site as services were stretched already. He noted that it could be acceptable in Fishguard and Pembroke Dock where ferries were boarded. Councillor Viv Stoddart concurred with the comments made in Emma Thornton’s letter and she objected in principle to the Council competing with private businesses. The trial was proposed to run for 18 months from July 2024 which would cover two high seasons. She stated that small businesses in the tourism industry were fragile and could be knocked out. If there was a need then campervan owners should use the sites operating. She concluded that this should go back to Cabinet for reconsideration. With regards to the Tenby car park planned for the trial, the Public Realm Manager clarified that it was planned due to how quiet Tenby was in the off season and to accommodate festivals. Narberth was a brief conversation but he noted that there was a demand for this in Fishguard and Pembroke was considered. The Public Realm Manager’s team were often contacted by campervan owners and clubs asking for overnight stops that they could use and this was why the trial scheme was planned. The scheme would not start in the summer of 2024 and if passed, it would not start until late 2024. He concluded that 12 months would not be enough time to gather information. Councillor Pat Davies was in favour of the trial going ahead because in her constituency (Goodwick), the car parks were underused and would be good for those who wanted to catch the ferry. Lorries already used the car parks for this purpose. The local member for Goodwick was in favour of the scheme too. When he was part of the young farmers group, Councillor Aled Thomas said that sleeping bays needed to be two metres apart from each other because of the fire regulations. He understood why it the consultation did not come first but disagreed with it. Councillor Thomas stated that the Council should not be competing with local businesses and he was not sure how it would be policed and suggested that the scheme be scrapped. Councillor Sinnett noted that this scheme was to offer choices to campervan owners and this scheme should help with the development of the local economy by increasing footfall. As stated previously, this scheme was unofficially happening in Goodwick so this scheme would help bring in an income. He suggested that the scheme could go forward but without Narberth and Tenby and instead Milford Haven. The Head of Infrastructure and Environment stated that this scheme was a way to manage traffic and not compete with private businesses. A consultation would take place with a traffic variation order if the scheme went ahead. [Councillor Tony Wilcox left the meeting at this juncture at 15:15] There were campsites in Councillor Vanessa Thomas’ constituency that relied heavily on business from the nearby campsites and they would not travel to rural pubs if they were staying in a town. The hospitality industry and campsite owners had contacted her with their concerns with the scheme. She concluded that she was against it. Councillor Dennison reiterated that he would stay in campsites primarily and agreed that the scheme in Tenby should be scrapped but it should go ahead in Goodwick and Milford Haven as this would bring people into the area. He noted that the Council has ‘competed’ with businesses before with Scolton Manor as a wedding venue. Councillor Stoddart said that the consultation should be done before implementing the trial and it was not the Council’s business to undermine small businesses. She concluded that she was against the Council’s business at Scolton Manor. [Councillor Michele Wiggins left the meeting at this juncture at 15:22] With regards to waste disposal, Councillor Clements stated that Mr Haywood’s comments implied that more waste disposal facilities would be needed at campsites if the scheme progressed. She stated that £40 a night was reasonable if rubbish disposal and clean water was provided and that officers comments implied that they struggled with enforcement and the scheme would add to this and some people would try to camp at all Council car parks. She continued that if planning permission was granted, others could open up their spaces to host campervan sites and take business away from existing sites. She concluded that campervans were welcome in Pembrokeshire but they should stay at registered sites. A Motion was Moved by Councillor Di Clements To the effect - That Cabinet do not progress further with the ‘Pembs Stop’ Scheme. Seconded by Councillor Aled Thomas. Active enforcement was undertaken by the Public Realm Manager’s team on campervans parking illegally. He confirmed that a planning applications would be needed at the car parks for a change of use but he was unable to comment on private land. The Chair noted that in his old constituency, he had a car park where campervans often parked illegally and enforcement would regularly be called. It would be easier for people getting on and off the ferries if they could park near the dock and was in favour of the scheme going ahead in these places and Milford Haven. Mr Steve Haywood stated that 92% of campervan owners spent £50 a night in where they were located and the towns they would stay in would not get this business. Some campervan pitches were not suitable in the wet weather if they had no hard ground. 30 other councils had done this trial and one in Devon turned five site permeant following this. The vote, undertaken by way of a roll-call, was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion – Councillors Aled Thomas, Di Clements, Vanessa Thomas, Maureen Bowen, Mike James, Michael Williams, Bethan Price and Viv Stoddart [8] Against the Motion – Councillors Joshua Beynon, Pat Davies and Alan Dennison [3] There were no abstentions. RESOLVED That Cabinet do not progress further with the ‘Pembs Stop’ Scheme.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED That the policy be approved.
The Committee considered a report by the Director of Social Services & Housing on the Choice Homes Allocations Policy review. The Chair welcomed Councillor Michelle Bateman, the relevant Cabinet Member with responsibility for Housing Operations and Regulatory Services and the Head of Housing and Public Protection Services who outlined the key points of the report and welcomed questions from Members. The Committee debated the contents of the report and the key points were highlighted as follows: [Councillor Di Clements left the meeting at this juncture at 15:40] With regards to the prisoner rehabilitation, Councillor Dennison queried why Pembrokeshire would help with this. He also queried whether two bedroom houses would be restricted to some people. In terms of the offender management aspect of the Allocations Policy, the Service Manager – Housing clarified that the team had been involved with the white paper for changes to the Housing Act which would be implemented before 2027. The changes state that in order to rehabilitate, ex-offenders should not move back into the area where they committed their crimes. On an ‘all Wales’ approach flexibility would be required to accept prisoners and this will become legislation. After reviewing the housing stock, the Head of Housing & Public Protection stated that 40% of the Council’s and their housing partner’s stock was two bedroom, 18% was one bedroom but this increased to 23-31% with ATEB. 70% of the overall housing stock was two or three bedrooms and they were planning to buy a block of one bedroom flats; this was so new housing developments would be more ten one bedroom houses. Councillor Bateman added that there was a ‘one up one down’ system in place so people in one bedroom properties could apply for a two bedroom property or two bedroom to three. This would work for couples expecting children or children getting older. People in bigger properties could downsize properties too. This was possible through the mutual exchange scheme. In response to a question from Councillor Dennison on witnesses in protection, the Service Manager – Housing confirmed that they were approached to house people in witness protection but they never worked out because the needs of these people e.g. mental health support was unavailable in Pembrokeshire. Following a question from Councillor Thomas on the housing bids being unsuccessful, the Service Manager – Housing noted that post-Covid, the housing team were turning over 5% of its stock. There were hundreds of bids made on some properties and some week lots of properties would be advertised but some weeks there would be a couple. By carrying out roadshows and reviewing the housing register, they were trying to get things to move quicker. With regards to the five year rule, Councillor Thomas queried if some people on the housing register would no longer be eligible. He also asked if people already in Council houses would still be able to put themselves on the housing register like they could currently. Housing partners had not been undertaking the annual reviews of their housing register so the Council were removing these partners. The Service Manager – Housing continued that this should reduce the housing register numbers significantly. As it stands, people could not re-join the housing register if they had been rehoused within 12 months unless they could provide evidence that they could not stay there. However, she said that they could take part in the ‘one up one down’ system so constituents could still move around in one area. The Head of Housing & Public Protection added that those previously in the ‘bronze’ category may no longer be eligible for the register as they were home loaners. They were working through the impact assessment as there were concerns that the private market was no buoyant enough. She continued that to resolve this, they were working towards a more robust private rented sector to take up those who might not qualify for social housing over a 12-18 month period. [Councillor Michael Williams left the meeting at this juncture at 16:07] Councillor Thomas noted the discrepancy with applying for asset properties through the Council and ATEB. He expressed concerns with the rural connections stopping people moving back into Johnston and new people joining the housing register being prioritised over others. The review with the Council’s housing partners brought dividends to the point where it was agreed that the Council would deliver with all applications to go on to the housing register. The Head of Housing & Public Protection continued that it was partially shared with ATEB before. The Council was being sure that they and housing partners defined ‘accessible’ homes the same. She concluded that she was happy for the ratio of properties available for letting under the Rural Communities Policy to go to ‘1 in 5’. Councillor Bateman stated that the new policy should highlight who was in genuine need of social housing and assess the demand in line with future developments. The rural and urban policies were difficult to implement but they were keen to allow freedom of movement and maintain the Welsh speaking community in North Pembrokeshire. There was a small percentage for the acquisition programme and the Head of Housing & Public Protection continued that last year 48 properties were purchased and less than 1/3 had tenants in situ. Any purchases of properties with tenants in place were bought with the condition that the tenants could move to properties that would suit their needs better. With regards to the mentioned discrepancy between the Council and ATEB, the Service Manager – Housing said that they needed to bring adapted houses back in with policy. In rural communities, it was common for people to naturally want to stay in the areas that they were from. She concluded that the new build programme needed to cover the whole of Pembrokeshire. Councillor Davies thanked the housing team for the new policy. She expressed her concerns with the removal of the Urban Connection Policy as they had the same concerns raised in the Rural Connection Policy i.e. second homes and Welsh speaking communities. There were two big housing developments being constructed in Fishguard and some people objected to this because it was social housing. She would tell residents that these developments were there to meet the needs of the area. With regards to the connection polices, Councillor Bateman said that removing this tended to lead to openness with moving and removed restrictions but most people actively chose to stay in areas they were from. Councillor Davies requested that the policy states that homes should be built to match the local needs. The Head of Housing & Public Protection added that people on the register could self-select where they would be placed. The Service Manager – Housing praised the work done by her team on the policy and she highlighted the importance of early engagement. In her constituency, Councillor Maureen Bowen noted that there was a housing stock void. Decorators who went in to resolve issues did a good job when she highlighted the issues within housing. However, she had one constituent who took part in the swap and was very upset because the house was filthy and needed to be fumigated. The person who moved into her property would be able to destroy her old Council house so, Councillor Bowen queried if this was investigated with swaps. She thanked the housing team for the new policy. The Service Manager – Housing stated that process had been improved so joint visits took place between housing and maintenance to ensure properties were up to standard. Most exchanges happened over the weekend as rent was collected on Mondays. She concluded that they were planning on improving identifying issues with homes and improve them. They were planning on sending councillor contact information, if they consented, to new tenants in areas so councillors could flag up issues to the housing team. When houses became available in more urban areas, Councillor Mike James noted that people would leave the rural areas to move there and then this caused rural school numbers to decline. Additionally, there was not much land to build more housing developments. Councillors James and Price praised the work of the officers on the new policy. Councillor Price noted that when houses were available in St David’s they went very quickly and people waited for a long time to get these houses. Residents waiting often asked how they others got the houses. The Service Manager – Housing noted that the local communities needed to be engaged more with housing allocations. Information on successful bidders was available on the website but Councillor Bateman did note that this was not the easiest to find so this could be easier for those waiting to find. With the new policy, she noted that they needed to make sure residents fully understood it. Councillor Thomas expressed caution with specific allocation as they could be accused of backhanders. The transparency of the process needed to be clear for residents. Councillor Bateman continued that this should be done with members being too involved. The Service Manager – Housing added that the type of process used for allocate needed to be visible too. The struggle with staff retention and recruitment led to a void in the housing stock. The Head of Housing & Public Protection said that she will look into how this could be reduced without overburdening staff. She agreed work needed to be done on the website to make it more accessible and service users could test it for constructive feedback. Councillor James concurred that members should not be involved with pre-allocation and he noted that he received a lot of email on housing stock voids. Councillor Dennison concurred with Councillor James and he requested that members receive a case study of someone progressing from ‘bronze’ to ‘gold’. The Recommendation was Moved by Councillor Joshua Beynon; Seconded by Councillor Aled Thomas. The vote, undertaken by way of a roll-call, was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion – Councillors Joshua Beynon, Aled Thomas, Pat Davies, Vanessa Thomas, Maureen Bowen, Mike James, Alan Dennison, Viv Stoddart and Bethan Price [9] There were no votes against or abstentions. RESOLVED That the policy be approved.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.