A development proposal for Broad Haven Holiday Park near Haverfordwest has been refused by Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority following an officer recommendation that raised concerns about landscape impact, biodiversity, and site suitability.
The application, submitted through agent Gerald Blain Associates, sought permission to relocate an existing boat storage area, vehicle shed, and children’s play area within the park, alongside plans to rewild adjacent fields. The proposal did not include an increase in the number of caravan pitches. It was supported by The Havens Community Council.
According to The Pembrokeshire Herald, the proposal involved extending elements of the existing static caravan site into neighboring undeveloped woodland.
The report stated: “The proposal relates to the extension of an existing static caravan holiday site into adjacent undeveloped woodland to accommodate the relocation of boat storage, a vehicle shed, and a children’s play area, together with associated ecological mitigation measures. No increased pitch numbers are proposed.”
The report also noted that the development site had already experienced partial clearance, including the removal of approximately 1,000 square meters of woodland prior to a decision being made. Concerns were raised about the potential visual impact of the relocated facilities, particularly given the site’s proximity to the coast.
The officer report stated: “The existing site is already intervisible with the coast, and the proposed relocation of boat storage would likely increase its visibility rather than reduce it. Without supporting evidence in the form of a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) or Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) demonstrating that the development would be visually contained, the proposal appears contrary to the guidance contained within the SPG and the objectives of Policy 41.”
The report concluded that the proposal would negatively affect the character of the area, stating: “As a result, the proposed development is considered to detract from the special qualities of the National Park in this location and would be detrimental to the quality and character of the landscape character area in which the site sits, and as such does not comply [with policies].”
In addition to landscape concerns, the application was refused due to its location on previously undeveloped land within a designated flood zone and a lack of sufficient information regarding potential impacts on biodiversity.
While no specific decision date was cited in the application summary, the refusal follows the standard planning review process by the national park authority, which evaluates proposals against established environmental and land-use policies.
For operators and developers in the outdoor hospitality sector, the decision highlights the importance of early-stage environmental and visual impact assessments when planning modifications within protected landscapes.
Submitting comprehensive documentation, including LVIA and biodiversity studies, may help mitigate risks during the planning process. The case also underscores increasing scrutiny around land use in coastal and national park settings, particularly where development may affect visibility, ecological balance, or previously undisturbed land.
Businesses considering site alterations in similar jurisdictions may benefit from proactive engagement with planning authorities and community stakeholders to address potential concerns before formal submission.