skip to main content

Agenda item

Outline application with some reserved matters for constructing 14 dwellings together with the construction of an access and estate road, provision of allotments and associated access and parking.

 

Local Member:  Councillor Sian Gwenllian

 

Minutes:

An outline application with some reserved matters for constructing 14 dwellings together with the construction of an access and estate road, provision of allotments and associated access and parking.

 

(a)      The Development Control Senior Officer elaborated on the background of the application and noted that this was an outline application to construct 14 houses, create a vehicular access and estate road along with provision of allotments and associated access and parking with some reserved matters to be included within a detailed application (should this outline application be approved). The only matter that formed part of this outline application was the proposed access and the reserved matters relating to landscaping, elevations, layout and scale.

 

The main elements of the application were noted, namely:

 

·         The provision of houses to include eight bungalows, four dormer houses and two two-storey houses and with a semi-detached layout with four of the houses proposed as affordable houses  

·         Creating five allotments and associated parking spaces on the lower part of the site

·         Creating a new access – to serve the houses there would be a need to create a new access from the unclassified county road (Beach Road). To be able to create the access and secure standard visibility and create a new footpath, the clawdd that separated the site from the county road would have to be demolished along the site’s northern boundary.  

 

The relevant policies were elaborated upon and considering the context of the local policies and guidelines, it was clear that the proposal was not acceptable in principle and it was contrary to local policies and guidelines along with the advice included in the Welsh Government’s documents relating to location, visual amenities, and impact on sites of archaeological importance, biodiversity and wildlife.

 

Considering all the assessments, it was the planning officers’ recommendation to refuse the application because it was unacceptable on the grounds of the principle of developing houses in the location in question, impact on the listed ancient monument, impact on visual amenities, impact on road safety and loss of a ‘clawdd’ and a hedge.

 

(b)       Taking advantage of the right to speak, the applicant’s Agent noted the following main points:

 

·         An appeal was made to the Committee to defer making a determination on the application  

·         The application site was adjacent to the development boundary of Felinheli as outlined in the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan.

·         The application proposed 14 houses, four of which were affordable which equated to 30% of the total  

·         There was a wide range of facilities and services in Felinheli and it was considered that these were sufficient to support the growth in the population that would be derived from the proposed development

·          64.3% of the population of the Felinheli Ward spoke Welsh compared with 65.4% in Gwynedd.

·         The variety of houses that were proposed was likely to attract single people, older families and families with children and the development could have a positive effect on the local primary school by increasing the number of pupils

·         The number of incomers in the Felinheli Ward had increased from 191 to 280 – 46.6% between 1991 and 2001, which compared with the increase in Gwynedd of 47.5%

·         There was only a decrease of 2.6 Welsh speakers between 2001 – 2011 which meant that the incomers were not non-Welsh speakers.         

·         The proposal was very attractive in terms of attracting people to live there because of the facilities available in Felinheli as well as its proximity to Bangor and Caernarfon

·         With Bangor and Caernarfon being important employment centres, the development would facilitate the proximity of people to local services and places of employment  

·         The percentage of holiday homes was fairly low in Felinheli compared with the County percentage which meant that the possibility of using the proposed housing to this end was fairly low.

 

 (c)    The following points were made by the local member (not a member of this Planning Committee):               

           

·         Felinheli Community Council had expressed its objection to the proposed development for several reasons, including that the site was outside the development boundary as noted in the report of the planning officers

·         As this was an outline application which was before the committee, there was uncertainty what type of houses were intended on the site and, therefore, an appeal was made to the Committee not to defer the application and refuse it because there was no demand for open market housing in Felinheli at present

·         Some developments which had already been completed and/or had planning permissions to construct them in the future in Felinheli were listed

·         The proposed development would create an increase in traffic and create traffic jams in the centre of the village and there would be a need to widen the road to create a footway to make the site safe.

·         Reference was made to flooding problems along with biodiversity issues 

·         As a consequence of the lack of local need for housing, this could lead in turn to an impact on the Welsh language because Felinheli was one of the communities where there was a reduction of approximately 8% in Welsh speakers since the last Census and, therefore, the language assessment submitted by the developer cannot be accepted.

 

(ch)   In response to the above observations, the Senior Planning Service Manager noted that there was no justification in deferring the application mainly because the site was outside to the development boundary together with environmental concerns.

 

(d)     It was proposed and seconded to refuse the application in accordance with the planning officers’ recommendation.

 

(dd)   In response to an enquiry by a Member, it was explained that the opinion of the Joint Planning Policy Unit in point 5.16 had been made as a result of an assessment submitted and this did not mean that the Unit supported the application but rather that the information addressed issues in terms of relevant planning considerations involving language and community issues.   

 

Resolved: To refuse for the following reasons:-

 

1.            The proposal is unacceptable in principle and it is contrary to the requirements of Policies C1, CH7 and CH9 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance on Affordable Housing and Building New Houses in the Countryside, Technical Advice Note 2 which deals with Affordable Housing, Technical Advice Note on Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities, along with Planning Policy Wales Chapter 9 on Housing as it would mean constructing new houses in open countryside without justification.

 

2.            The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policies B23 and C1 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan, Supplementary Planning Guidance on Building New Houses in the Countryside, Gwynedd Design Guidance, and Technical Advice Note 12 on Design, along with Planning Policy Wales, Chapter 9 on Housing, as the proposal would mean creating an incompatible feature in a sensitive landscape.  

 

3.            The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy B7 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan, Planning Policy Wales, Chapter 6 and Welsh Office Circular 60/96 as the proposal will have a severe detrimental effect on the setting and integrity of the registered ancient monument known as the Dinas Promontory Fort.

 

4.            The proposal to demolish the existing ‘clawdd’ and hedge is contrary to the requirements of Policies A1 and B21 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan, Technical Advice Note 5 on Planning and Nature Conservation and Planning Policy Wales, Chapter 5 on Protecting and Enhancing the Natural Heritage and the Coast, as no ecological assessment has been submitted with the application which would enable the Local Planning Authority to assess in detail the ecological impacts of the important development which greatly contributes to the character of the amenities of the area.

 

5.            The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policies A1 and CH33 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan, Technical Advice Note 18 on Transport and Planning Policy Wales, Chapter 8 on Transport as there is insufficient information based on a traffic assessment submitted with the application which shows that the local roads network is able to cope with the increase in traffic that will be derived from the development.  

 

Supporting documents: