Venue: Siambr y Cyngor, Council Offices, Cae Penarlâg, Dolgellau, LL40 2YB. View directions
Contact: Glynda O'Brien 01341 424301
No. | Item |
---|---|
APOLOGIES To accept any apologies for absence. Minutes: Apologies were received from Councillors Dilwyn Lloyd, Dewi Wyn Roberts (Local Member). |
|
DECLARATION OF PERSONAL INTEREST AND PROTOCOL MATTERS To receive any declaration of personal interest and to note protocol matters. Minutes: (a)
No
declarations of personal interest were received from any members present. (b) The
following members stated that they were local members in relation to the items
noted: ·
Councillor Gruffydd Williams (a member of this Planning Committee), in relation to item 6.3 on the agenda (planning application
C18/0023/42/LL); ·
Councillor Simon Glyn (a member of this Planning Committee), in relation to item 6.6 on the agenda (planning application
C18/0322/46/LL); The Members withdrew
to the other side of the Chamber during the discussion on the applications in
question and did not vote on these matters. |
|
URGENT ITEMS To note any items that are a matter of urgency in the view of the Chairman for consideration. Minutes: There were no urgent items. |
|
The Chairman shall propose that the minutes of the previous meeting of this committee, held on, 4 June 2018, be signed as a true record. Minutes: The Chair signed the minutes of the previous meeting of this Committee, that took place on
4 June 2018, as a true
record. |
|
To submit the report of the Head of Environment Department. LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Louise Hughes Additional documents:
Minutes: Submitted - the Head of the
Environment Department's report stemming from an application to register on the
Public Rights of Way Definitive Map a public footpath in the Community of
Arthog. The Chair noted that a late letter had been received from
Barmouth Town Council complaining that they as a Council had not had an
opportunity to submit observations on the application. In response, the Environment Department
Manager explained that the land in question was within the boundaries of Arthog
Community Council and therefore there was no necessity to contact any other
Community/Town Council on this matter.
The Environment Department Manager expanded on the
application's legal background together with the evidence to support the
application and he focused on the path between A and B on the application
plan. The application had been submitted
based upon and in the context of Section 53 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act
1981. When considering such applications it was necessary to look at the
evidence for and against the application, and in this context based on the act
referred to above together with the Highways Act 1980. Having looked at the evidence to register
on the grounds of use, and specifically as the public had walked the path
unhindered, continuously over a period of more than twenty years, they had to
be certain that the landowners had given a right and permission for the
use. The information for and against
the application was looked at and the key factor was the existence of signage
and what those signs stated. Reference
was made to Section 31(3) of the Act, namely: “Where the owner of
the land over which any such way as aforesaid passes- (a)
Has erected in such manner as to be visible to persons using the way a
notice inconsistent with the dedication of the way as a highway; and (b)
Has maintained the notice after the 1st January 1934, or any later date on
which it was erected, the notice, in the
absence of proof of a contrary intention, is sufficient evidence to negative
the intention to dedicate the way as a highway”. That is, that signage had been erected on the site that was
contrary to the claim that a public right existed. By doing this consideration had to be given to
an ordinary member of the public's understanding of what was on the sign
together with the landowners' aim. Reference was also made to factors that were irrelevant to
the application e.g. was the path pleasant with vistas from it. Therefore, the only matter that could be
considered was if public rights of way existed. Attention was drawn to the path's historical background and
the development of Mawddach Crescent and the surrounding area. In terms of the evidence to support the application, reference was made to a summary of over 100 statements made by individuals who stated that they used the path. Full summaries can be seen in Appendix 4 and 4.2 of the report. In addition to the ... view the full minutes text for item 5. |
|
PLANNING APPLICATIONS To submit the report of the Head of Environment Department. Minutes: The Committee considered the following applications for development. Details of the
applications were expanded upon and questions were answered in relation to the
plans and policy aspects. |
|
Application No: C17/0330/14/LL - Former site Marine Hotel, North Road, Caernarfon PDF 120 KB Erection of 5 dwellings (including 2 affordable dwellings) together with creating a new access into the trunk road. LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Ioan Thomas Link to relevant background documents Additional documents: Minutes: Construction of
five houses (including two affordable houses) together with creating an
entrance to the trunk road (a) The Senior Development Control Officer elaborated on the application's background, and reminded the Committee that the application had been deferred in the March committee in order
to assess the impact of the
development on a tree with a Tree
Preservation Order and located within the rear garden of Ynys Tudur, adjacent
to the application site. As a result, a Trees Survey was submitted by the applicant and
the Survey came to the conclusion that the tree's safety may
be ensured subject to following and undertaking careful building techniques. Of the five units proposed, three would be residential units located at the front of the
site with two detached houses
at the rear.
The site was located
within the development boundary of Caernarfon in the
Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local
Development Plan (LDP) but
it was not allocated for any specific use. Reference was made to the relevant
policies in the report along with
the responses to the statutory
consultation process. It was noted that
the information submitted to the Committee in March had not changed and that
the deferral dealt with biodiversity matters, namely concern regarding the
impact on a tree with a Tree Preservation Order. Based on these concerns the
trees expert was requested to be on site during the construction work to ensure
that the land work is supervised within an area to safeguard the tree's
roots. The Trees Officer confirmed that
a condition should be included in any planning permission to state that the
applicant would have to follow mitigation measures noted in the Trees Survey to
avoid harm to the tree. The recommendation
remained the same as discussed in the March Committee, namely to approve in
accordance with relevant conditions. RESOLVED: To delegate the
right to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the application, subject to the
applicant completing a legal agreement under Section 106 in order to ensure
that two affordable houses out of a total of five are affordable houses
initially and in perpetuity and to relevant conditions relating to: 1. Five years. 2. In accordance with the revised plans. 3. Natural slate. 4. Agree the
houses' external materials. 5. Withdrawal of
permitted development rights regarding the location of windows. 6. Withdrawal of
permitted development rights for extensions. 7. Condition to
protect a tree with a tree preservation order. 8. Transportation
Unit and Welsh Government highways conditions. 9. Welsh Water
condition regarding protecting the combined sewer. |
|
Application No: C17/1172/19/LL - Plas y Bryn Nursing Home, Bontnewydd, Caernarfon PDF 140 KB Change of use of former nursing home to
create 4 self contained holiday units, construction
of separate buildings to be used as a swimming pool. LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Peter Garlick Link
to relevant background documents Additional documents: Minutes: Change of use of a former residential nursing home
to create four self-contained holiday units, erect a separate building to be
used as a swimming pool together with extensions and alterations to the
existing building. (a) The Development Control Manager
explained that due to the concerns that had arisen regarding the application, the Committee was requested to defer this application
in order to undertake an inspection
site visit on the day of the next Planning Committee
meeting. RESOLVED: To
defer the application and conduct a site inspection visit as suggested above. |
|
Application No: C18/0023/42/LL - Tynpwll Cottage, Lon-ty'n-pwll, Nefyn, Pwllheli PDF 98 KB Demolish existing storage unit and construction of 2 holiday units (revised application). LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Gruffydd Williams Additional documents: Minutes: Demolish
existing storage unit and build two holiday units (amended application) (a) The
Senior Development Control Officer expanded on the application’s background and
noted that the site was located in the countryside and within the Llŷn and
Bardsey Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest. Access was gained to the site along an
unclassified road which had access to a class 2 road approximately 85 metres
south of the site. Reference
was made to the responses to the consultation process together with the
relevant planning policies within the report. It was noted that policy TWR 2 of the Local Development Plan supported
the development of new permanent holiday accommodation provided they are of a
high quality in terms of design, setting and appearance. The policy also enables new build
accommodation, if the development is located within a development boundary, or
makes use of a suitable previously developed site. There was an existing holiday unit at Ty'n
Pwll Cottage and the proposal in question would therefore extend the existing
holiday accommodation establishment. It
was therefore considered that the development was acceptable in terms of the
principle of building new accommodation units. It was explained that the application was a
resubmission of a previously refused application, as it was considered that the
scale of the proposal in question was excessive for the site and did not
reflect its surroundings. In terms of the number of units and design, it was
considered that the proposal in question was an improvement on the previous
application. The
Transportation Unit had no objection in terms of transport and access matters. Having
assessed the proposal against the relevant policies and considered all the
responses and observations, it was considered that the use, design and proposed
materials were acceptable and that they would not impair the amenities,
character or appearance of the site, nor the surrounding area. The planning officers’ recommendation was to
approve the application and to include a condition to restrict the use to
holiday accommodation only and to maintain a register of users. (a)
The
local member noted that he did not support the application for the following
reasons: ·
that
there was no shortage or demand for more holiday accommodation ·
that
demolishing the hay shed and constructing two units in its place would set a
precedent for similar future applications
·
approval
should not be given for the conversion of such farm buildings (b)
A
Member supported the above observations and stated further that there were
plenty of holiday homes and gave an example of four houses that had been sold
recently in the village of Edern as holiday homes. There was also concern about the tendency
to re-name and Anglicise house names.
Housing estates in the village had holiday homes and it was asked how
many of these houses had registered as holiday units for business tax. (c)
It
was proposed and seconded to refuse the application on the grounds of an excess
of holiday homes. (dd) In response, the Planning Manager explained that officers could ... view the full minutes text for item 6.3 |
|
Application No: C18/0098/39/LL - Ynys Fawr Beach Hut, Porth Mawr, Abersoch, Pwllheli PDF 105 KB Demolish existing beach hut and construct new hut. LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Dewi Wyn Roberts Additional documents: Minutes: Demolition of an existing beach hut and construct a
new one (a) The Senior Development Control
Officer noted that late observations had been received from the Local Member
who stated his concern regarding the size of the structure and the hut was on a
beach within the AONB. The member felt
that such developments were damaging to the appearance of the beach and did not
fit and was an over-development. (a)
The officer elaborated on the
application's background and noted that it was an application to replace the
existing Ynys Fawr beach hut with a new, larger hut on Borth Fawr beach,
Abersoch. The existing hut was located behind a row of
beach huts that stand on the beach.
Following the concerns of relevant officers regarding the height of the
proposed hut an amended plan was received indicating a reduction in the hut's
height. The hut stands on a rural
coastal site within the AONB, near a Heritage Coast and within the Coastal
Change Management Area. Reference
was made to the relevant policies and the responses to the consultation process
within the report. In
terms of the main material planning considerations, concern was expressed
stemming from the public consultation based on the size and height of the
hut. Although the proposal involved replacing the
hut with a larger hut, the proposal was not considered to be unreasonable in
terms of scale, height and mass and was not an over development as it largely
followed the same size pattern as other huts in the vicinity. As the design of the proposal was suitable
for a beach hut and its setting, appearance, scale, height, and the treatment
of the proposal's elevations were fairly similar to the rest of the huts in the
row, it was considered that the proposal was acceptable and respected the
context of the site and its place in the AONB landscape. Having
assessed all the considerations, it was considered that the proposed beach hut
was acceptable in terms of size, design and materials, and the officers'
recommendation was to approve the application with relevant conditions that
included no occasional living or sleeping use.
(b)
It was proposed, seconded and voted to approve the
application. RESOLVED: To approve subject to conditions: 1.
Commence within five
years. 2. In accordance with the
plans 3. The hut will be of a
blue BS 18 E 53 colour, unless otherwise agreed beforehand with the Local
Planning Authority. 4. No occasional living or
sleeping use. |
|
Application No: C18/0235/45/LL - 25, Stryd Moch, Pwllheli PDF 112 KB Change of use of shop (A1 use class) to cafe (A3 use class) LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Dylan Bullard Additional documents: Minutes: Change of use of
shop (A1 use class) to cafe (A3 use class). (a) The
Development Control Officer elaborated on the background of the application,
noting that it was for the change of use of a shop (A1) to a café (A3) with a
Welsh theme to display local crafts and produce and Welsh music. It was noted
that it was not proposed to undertake any external alterations, however it was
intended to install an extractor on the gable-end of the building. It was explained
that the previous use of the unit was as an Ethel Austin shop, which had shut a
number of years ago, and since then planning permission has been granted to
convert it into two separate shops with a dance studio above. The building was
situated within the main shopping area and the designated Town Centre of the Pwllheli Urban Service Centre and within a C1 flooding
zone. Reference was made
to the responses to the consultations within the report. It was noted that no
new information had been received since then.
Observations had been received from the public on the applications and these
were noted in the report. Since being
granted permission to convert the building into two shops in 2014, it was
explained that the shop in question had not been occupied, but the adjacent
shop operated as a William Hill bookmaker. Previously, the Ethel Austin shop
occupied the whole property, before the chain went into administration in 2010,
and was briefly occupied by the Life and Style retail business until 2011.
Given that the shop had been empty for a prolonged period, it was considered
that there were justified grounds for the change the use in order to bring the
shop back into use and to remove the dead frontage in such a prominent and
central location within the town. The proposed use as a café would be an
attraction in the town centre, and it was not considered that the change of use
would have a detrimental impact on the function of the main shopping area nor
the town centre. It was proposed to
install an extractor on the building and the observations of the Public
Protection Unit were awaited on this, and following the receipt of favourable
observations, it was considered that the change of use was acceptable, and
would not have a detrimental impact on the amenities of any nearby
residents. Due to the scale
of the application and its location as well as its existing features, it was
considered that the proposal complied with the relevant local and national
policies. Therefore, it was recommended
to delegate powers to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the application, subject
to the receipt of favourable observations from the Public Protection Unit on
the suitability of the proposed extraction system/flue and to conditions listed
at the end of the report. (b) It was proposed and seconded to approve the
application. RESOLVED: To delegate powers to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the application ... view the full minutes text for item 6.5 |
|
Application No: C18/0322/46/LL - Ty'n Llan Caravan Park, Tudweiliog, Pwllheli PDF 98 KB Revised application to extend existing static caravan site, increase numbers from 31 to 35, relocate 3 static caravans and creation of a new playing field. LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Simon Glyn Additional documents: Minutes: Revised application to extend existing static caravan site to increase
numbers from 31 to 35, relocate 3 static caravans and creation of a new play
area (a) The Senior Development Control Officer noted that neither the applicant nor
his agent had submitted an enquiry regarding what was possible on the site in
question following the withdrawal of the previous application, despite the fact
that officers had expressed fundamental policy concerns regarding the proposal.
The officer expanded on the application's background, noting that it was to
extend an existing static caravan site to increase the numbers from 31 to 35
together with relocating three static caravans and to create a new play
area. The proposal would also include
additional landscaping on the western and southern boundaries of the extended
part of the site. Reference was made to the
relevant planning policies together with the responses to the consultation
process as noted in the report. In terms of the main material
planning considerations, the main policy to consider was TWR 3 and this stated
that it may permit small extensions to the site's surface and /or re-locating
units from prominent locations to less prominent locations. One of the criteria was that the improvements
do not lead to an increase in the number of static caravans on sites within the
AONB or in the Special Landscape Areas.
The application was to increase the number of units on the site by
adding four units. The proposal did not
therefore comply with the requirements of Policy TWR 3 in terms of sites within
the Special Landscape Area. By
re-locating three static caravans to the existing play area, this meant that
the hedge on the southern side of the play area site would be lost in order to
create a new road and would make the site of the play area far more open and
visibly sensitive than it currently was.
Extending the site would, therefore, make this site more prominent in
the landscape and where public footpaths run very close to the application
site. It was, therefore, not considered
that the proposal in its current form would improve the site's setting in the
surrounding landscape which was a designated Special Landscape Area. In the context of visual
amenities, extending the existing site would make it more prominent in the
landscape and although the application indicated an intention to carry out
landscaping along the western and southern boundaries it would take time to
mature. Observations on the
application were received from the Transportation Unit stating their concerns
about the entrance and that the proposal would increase the use of an already
sub-standard entrance. Such an increase
without improvements to the entrance would be unacceptable. As policy TWR 3 does not permit an increase in the number of static caravans at existing sites within the Special Landscape Area, and it was not considered that extending the site would improve its setting in the surrounding landscape, together with road safety concerns it was recommended to refuse the application. ... view the full minutes text for item 6.6 |
|
Application No: C18/0365/11/AM - Maes Berea, Bangor PDF 132 KB Outline application with all matters reserved for the
provision of 9 dwellings with integrated garages. LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Gareth A. Roberts Additional documents: Minutes: An outline application with all matters reserved to erect nine new houses
with integrated garages (a)
The
Development Control Manager elaborated on the background of the application and
noted that the indicative plans had been submitted these suggested the size,
setting and likely elevations of the proposed development that includes three
rows of three, three-storey houses with three bedrooms each. Seven of the units would be for the open market and
two would be offered as affordable houses. The
site was located within the Bangor city development boundary which had not been
specifically designated for any specific use.
It was explained that the land level rose to the front which abutted the
existing access road towards the Maes Berea estate to the south and west. The existing estate was established and
comprised approximately 55 houses that were a mixture of two and three-storey
houses. Attention
was drawn to the relevant planning policies and the responses to the
consultation process noted in the report.
Letters of
objection to the proposal had been received and were noted in the report. It was noted that
the principle of the proposal was acceptable and it was a logical extension of
the existing estate and the indicative plans conveyed and reflected what had
already been approved and built within the rest of the estate. Two out of the
eight units were offered as affordable houses.
Additional observations had been received from the Joint Planning Policy
Unit which stated the need for housing identified by Tai Teg in 2018. The statistics suggested that one to three
bedroomed houses were more likely to address the current and anticipated future
demand in terms of market housing and affordable housing. It was noted that the
required evidence to support the recommendation to refuse the application on
the grounds of a mixture of houses had not been received, bearing in mind that
the proposal was preparing two affordable units as part of the proposal. The Transportation
Unit had no objection to the proposal. Due to the scale
of the application and its location as well as its existing natural features,
it was considered that the proposal complied with the relevant local and
national policies. Therefore it was
recommended to delegate powers to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the
application subject to the completion of a 106 Agreement to ensure that two of
the nine houses subject of this application are affordable, and to relevant
planning conditions. (b) It was proposed and seconded to approve the
application. (c) Attention was drawn that Tai Teg had noted
on the additional observations form of the need for 180 two-bedroom units
against 124 three-bedroom units, it was therefore asked why there was not a
better mixture of housing on the site in question. (ch) In response, the Planning Manager referred to the comments of the Joint Planning Policy Unit on the additional observations form and the fact that officers were not confident that they currently had the necessary evidence to support the recommendation ... view the full minutes text for item 6.7 |