Change of use and extension to chapel to create a holiday unit including change of use of agricultural land around chapel to form amenity area and install treatment plant (revised application).
LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Aled
Wyn Jones
Minutes:
Change of use and extend
the chapel to create a holiday unit to include the change of use of
agricultural land surrounding the chapel to create an amenity area and
installation of sewage treatment tank (amended application).
(a) The Senior Development
Control Officer elaborated on the background of the application, noting that the application site was located within the AONB and also within the Llŷn and Bardsey Landscape of Outstanding Historical Interest.
Attention
was drawn to the objections received
during the public consultation period in the context of road safety and
construction work hours.
It was noted that policy TWR 2 stated that
proposals to transform the existing buildings into self-service holiday units
will be approved if they are of high quality in terms of design, setting and
appearance. It was considered that the scale of the proposal was suitable for
the site and the location with only one holiday unit being created. It was noted also that the location was
convenient with access directly from the second class county highway.
It was noted that the design of the extension was
fairly contemporary, however, it was considered that the extension would be
acceptable for the site and that the materials were acceptable.
Following the receipt of an objection from the
Transportation Unit as there was no room for a vehicle to wait off the road
whilst a gate to the site was opened and the layout of the access, an amended
plan was received and the gate was set further into the access track in order
that it was possible for a vehicle to wait for the gate to open off the county
highway. As a result of receiving these details it was noted that further
observations had been received from the Transportation Unit stating that the
proposal to re-locate the gate further into the site was acceptable and
overcame the majority of highway concerns. It is not considered that the
proposal would affect road safety.
It was noted that the proposal was acceptable based
on principle, location, use, density, design, materials, visual amenities,
residential amenities and road safety and complies with relevant local and
national planning policies and guidance.
(b) Taking advantage of the right to speak, the applicant noted the
following main points:-
·
That he
was eager to retain the appearance of the building as a
chapel and to replace the vestry that was not structurally sound with a modern extension with a contrast between the old and new.
·
There would
be no connection to the public sewer;
·
That he
had purchased additional land in order
to enable moving the access to improve visibility;
·
There was parking
provision on the site.
(c) It was proposed
and seconded to approve the application.
During the ensuing
discussion, the following main observations were noted by members:
·
That the application was a perfect opportunity to
safeguard the building;
·
Concern in terms of road safety with cars parking
on the road at the side of the terrace opposite the site. Speeding problems on
this road and it was difficult to pass cars on the road;
·
Number of applications with holiday units that had
received planning permission then turning to be a house. Would it be possible
to impose a condition to restrict the period when the house could be occupied
as a holiday unit as was done with caravan sites?
·
Would it be possible to impose a condition
regarding construction work hours in accordance with the wish of the objectors?
(ch) In response to the above, the officers noted:
·
That speeding problems were a police enforcement
matter;
·
The proposal would not significantly add to traffic movements and the applicant had improved the access by moving the gate in order to enable
cars to turn on the best point of the road. There was no reason to object
to the proposal in terms of road safety;
·
That it was recommended to impose a condition to restrict the unit to
holiday use only. It was explained that following the appeal decision of Ocean Heights Caravan Park the holiday season was the same as holiday units with
evidence showing that visitors contributed
to the economy throughout
the year;
·
It was not reasonable to impose a condition regarding construction work hours in accordance
with the wish of the objectors because of the development's scale. Any nuisance issues
that may arise from the development during the construction period would be considered by the Public Protection Service.
RESOLVED to approve the application.
Conditions:
1. Five years.
2. In accordance with
the plans.
3. Slate
on the roof
4. Agree materials for the external walls of the extension;
5. The
external walls of the
chapel to be in a white colour.
6. Restrict the use of the unit to holiday use only.
7. Removal of permitted development rights for extending the unit and curtilage buildings.
8. Work to be undertaken in accordance with
the recommendations of the protected
species survey.
9. Conduct a photographic survey of the building
10. Access to be constructed in accordance with the revised plan.
Supporting documents: