Issue - meetings

Full application for the demolition of an existing dwelling (C3 use) and construction of a new replacement dwelling (C3 use) with improvements to an existing access. 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor John Brynmor Hughes

Link to relevant background documents

DECISION: To approve, contrary to the recommendation

1.     5 years

2.     In accordance with the plans

3.     Finish and slates on the roof

4.     Archaeology condition - archive record

5.     Biodiversity enhancements

Full application to demolish an existing dwelling (C3 use) and construction of a new replacement dwelling (C3 use) with improvements to an existing access.

a)     The Planning Manager highlighted that the proposal entailed the demolition of an existing empty building (which had clearly retained its status as a residential property) and the erection of a 4-bedroom, two-storey building partially over the footprint of the existing property but would be slightly higher. It was explained that the site was located within the development boundary of the village of Sarn Bach with a parallel class 3 public road and a public footpath leading off the road through the site. It was added that an existing vehicular entrance led past the gable of the property serving the site and was access to an established camping and touring caravan site attached to the property to the rear of the main building. The neighbouring buildings were to some extent a mix in design and finishes, but all included common features in form and finishes such as slate roofs and a finish of natural stone and render. 

The application was submitted to the Committee for a decision at the Local Member's request.

In the context of the principle of the development, policy TAI 13 (demolition and re-erection of houses) was considered, highlighting that policy TAI 5 was not relevant because the existing property, considering its delegated rights to extend, was beyond the requirements of the policy. It was noted that the proposal complied with the requirements of policy TAI 13 and that there was no objection to the principle of demolishing the property and erecting another in its place.

However, it was considered that the proposed property, due to its design, finishes and scale would completely change the character of the site and attract the eye to an unacceptable degree. It would not respect its site context and location within the village. It was recognised that various examples of development had been permitted within the area, but that each application had to be considered on its own merit – in this case, it was not considered that the proposal had entirely succeeded in enhancing the character and appearance of the site as the design would create a much more prominent feature and would not integrate or contribute positively to the local streetscape and the development pattern of the surrounding area. The view was supported by the observations of the AONB Unit. It was accepted that an effort had been made to change the design of the property, but it was not possible to overcome all the concerns in terms of visual impact and impact on the AONB. To this end, the proposal conflicted with the relevant requirements of policies PCYFF 2, PCYFF 3 and AMG 1 of the LDP together with the advice of Technical Advice Note 12.

Reference was made to matters regarding residential amenities, transport, language and biodiversity, noting that they were acceptable.

The proposal was considered unacceptable in its submitted form as it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9