Issue - meetings

Change of Use Planning Application to site 12 Holiday Lodges on land at Y Ffor, Pwllheli. 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Richard Glyn Roberts

Link to relevant background documents

DECISION: To Refuse

Reasons 

1.     The site of the cabins and associated works, due to their number, location, design, setting and appearance in the landscape, and increase in the hard surface plots, would result in a prominent and intrusive feature in open countryside and would have a detrimental impact on the landscape and visual amenities of the rural area as well as leading to an excess of permanent sites in the local area. The proposal is therefore contrary to criteria 1.i and ii. of policy TWR 3 and policy PCYFF 3, of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan (July 2017) and Supplementary Planning Guidance: Holiday Accommodation.

2.     The scale of the proposal would create excessive movement along the county road together with an increase in activities, causing noise and disturbance to the detriment of the amenity of local residents. Therefore, the proposal is considered to be contrary to policy PCYFF 2 of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan (July 2017).

3.     There is insufficient information in the form of details of the location and size of the drainage area as well as the results of percolation tests in connection with the proposed Sewerage Treatment System. The proposal is, therefore, contrary to the policy requirements of ISA 1 of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan (July 2017) which ensures adequate infrastructure provision.

4.     Insufficient information including a geophysical survey has been submitted as part of the application, and therefore no conclusion can be drawn about the proposal's compliance with policy AT4 of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan (July 2017) which safeguards undesignated archaeological sites and their setting.

Change of use application for the letting of 12 Holiday Cabins on land at Y Ffôr, Pwllheli

Attention was drawn to the late observations form.

a)           The Planning Manager highlighted that it was an application to develop a new holiday accommodation in the form of 12 permanent holiday cabins and associated parking, drainage and landscaping. The wooden cabins would be timber clad and stained in a conservation colour and each would include bedrooms, a bathroom, living room and kitchen-diner. 

It was reported that the units would be placed in the corner of an agricultural field in open countryside. Although there is no special landscape designation to the application area, it does have the appearance and character of an undeveloped rural landscape with several residential properties, not in the applicant's ownership, located near the site.

It was noted that it was intended to provide a private clean and foul water drainage system for the proposal however the developer had not submitted the results of any porosity/ percolation tests in relation to the private sewerage system. A landscaping plan was submitted with the application showing a proposal to plant a vast number of trees along the south-western and south-eastern boundary of the site, as well as reinforce the current hedge along the county road; however, details of that plan were not received with the application.

It was highlighted that Policy TWR 3 was the relevant policy in this application as the cabins would be there permanently. It was noted that the first part of the policy referred directly to an intensification of new developments. It was reiterated, in order to define 'intensification', attention was drawn to the explanation in 6.3.69 of policy TWR 3 which referred to the 'Anglesey, Gwynedd and Eryri National Park Landscape Sensitivity and Capacity Study' 2014. Within each Landscape Character Area the landscape's character is assessed to ascertain the capacity of the local landscape for further developments of holiday chalets or caravans.  

It was reiterated that this specific development fell under the Landscape Character Area G10 (Canol Llŷn) and the study noted, "Outside the AONBs there may be very limited capacity for developments typically comprising of small scale to very small scale, sensitively sited and well planned developments that should relate well to the existing built environment / urban ground cover". It was noted that the Study defined very small developments as those of up to 10 units and small developments as those between 10 and 25 units." Although the site in question fell within the definition of a small development, it was not considered that this site was one that related well to the built environment or urban ground cover, and on this basis, it was not considered that there was capacity for the proposal on this rural site.

Attention was drawn to the second criterion which referred to the design, layout and appearance of the proposed development stating that is was of high quality, and that new developments should be located in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7