Venue: Siambr Dafydd Orwig, Council Offices, Caernarfon, Gwynedd, LL55 1SH. View directions
Contact: Lowri Haf Evans 01286 679878
No. | Item |
---|---|
APOLOGIES To accept any apologies for absence. Additional documents: Minutes: None to note |
|
DECLARATION OF PERSONAL INTEREST To receive any declaration of personal interest. Additional documents: Minutes: (a)
Councillor Catrin Wager declared a personal
interest, in item 5.2 on the agenda, (planning application number
C17/0903/16/LL) as she was a friend of the applicant. The Member was of the opinion that it was a
prejudicial interest, and she withdrew from the Chamber during the discussion
on the application noted. (b) The
following members declared that they were local members in relation to the
items noted: ·
Councillor Dewi Wyn Roberts (not a member of this
Planning Committee), in relation to item 5.1 on the agenda (planning
application number C17/1024/39/LL) ·
Councillor Dafydd Owen (not a member of this
Planning Committee), in relation to item 5.2 on the agenda, (planning
application number C17/0903/16/LL). ·
Councillor Eirwyn Williams (a member of this
Planning Committee), in relation to item 5.3 on the agenda (planning
application number C17/0912/35/AM); ·
Councillor Stephen Churchman (a member of this
Planning Committee), in relation to item 5.6 on the agenda (planning
application number C17/1077/36/LL). ·
Councillor Huw G. W. Jones (a member of this
Planning Committee), in relation to item 5.8 on the agenda (planning
application number C17/1124/11/LL). ·
Councillor John Brynmor Hughes (not a member of
this Planning Committee), in relation to item 5.9 on the agenda (planning
application C17/1144/39/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. Additional documents: |
|
The Chairman shall propose that the minutes of the previous meeting of this committee, held on, 18.12.17, be signed as a true record. Additional documents: Minutes: The Chair signed
the minutes of the previous meeting of this Committee, that took place on 18
December 2017, as a true record. |
|
PLANNING APPLICATIONS To submit the report of the Head of Environment Department. Additional documents: 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. RESOLVED |
|
Application No. C17/1024/39/LL - The Shanty, Pen Bennar, Abersoch, Pwllheli. PDF 192 KB Demolition of existing dwelling and construction of replacement three storey dwelling. LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Dewi Wyn Roberts Additional documents: Minutes: Demolition of house to be replaced with a
three-storey house Attention
was drawn to the additional observations that had been received, which included
the response of the AONB Joint Committee. a)
The Planning Manager elaborated on the background
of the application, and noted that it had been submitted to the Planning
Committee on 18/12/2017, where it was resolved to defer consideration on the
application in order to obtain the opinion of the Llŷn Area of Outstanding
Natural Beauty (AONB) Joint Advisory Committee. It was elaborated that the
application was a re-submission of an application that had been refused by the
Planning Committee on 25 September 2017. It was
noted that the applicant had amended the proposal by reducing the size of the
proposed house in response to concerns raised by the Committee and the refusal
reasons of the previous application. It
was expressed that the interior layout of the building had been altered in
order to reduce the surface area of the building by 25%. Detailed plans were
submitted along with photographs showing the proposed house and the exterior
terraces extending back to follow the site's profile. It was suggested that the
building would not create an intrusive development in the landscape and
although the appearance of the house was different, it was not considered that
it would have a significant harmful impact on the landscape. The Members were reminded that the site was
located on Abersoch headland, outside the village development boundary and
within the AONB. It was
emphasised that the proposal would involve demolishing the existing house on
the site and erecting a larger new house in its place. It was noted that local
and national policies supported re-using previously used land for developments,
and it was considered that the proposal met the requirements of policy TAI 13
of the LDP which specifically involved demolishing and erecting a new house
within the village boundary. With a house already existing on the site, the
proposal would not involve creating new residential unit(s) and, consequently,
the development would not add to the housing stock. The Council's Conservation
Officer confirmed that the current building was not of historical or
architectural value and that it did not justify listed status. It was reported that there were many differently designed houses in the area and there was no typical building pattern. With an appearance that would be visible from the sea, it was considered that the design of the proposal, from looking at it from the sea, blended in with the site because it followed the shape, layout and profile of the site and the use of materials that created a light design. It was explained that the design, although modern, it was of a scale and of materials that would be in keeping with the site and suitable to its location and context. It was noted that the AONB Unit had no objection to the proposal, however, the Joint Committee had stated that the proposal would be an over-development on a ... view the full minutes text for item 5.1 |
|
Application No C17/0903/16/LL - Carreg y Fedwen, Sling, Tregarth, Bangor PDF 340 KB Creation of sacred healing acoustic research and enterprise centre including the erection of four new buildings, the formation of parking areas and erection of 2.3m high boundary wall (revised application to one previously withdrawn - C16/1158/16/LL) LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Dafydd Owen Additional documents: Minutes: Creation of sacred healing acoustic research and
enterprise centre including the erection of four new buildings, the formation
of parking areas and erection of 2.3m high boundary wall (revised application
to one previously withdrawn - C16/1158/16/LL) Attention was drawn to the additional observations
that had been received a)
The Planning Manager elaborated on the
application's background. It was noted that the applicant had highlighted that
the description of the proposal was slightly different to what he considered to
be accurate. It was therefore highlighted that the wording of the proposal
would be amended to, 'Creation of a Research Centre which includes the
erection of four new buildings...' It was added that the plans were correct
and the description of the proposal in the report was correct, but the formal
description was slightly incorrect. It was reported that this was an application to
create a new research centre that would research the use of sound for body and
mind healing. It was
noted that the site will consist of a main domed acoustic building connected,
via a corridor, to an entrance building which will consist of a greeting area
and office. There would be three further domed buildings, of a smaller size,
designed to resonate with specific sound wavelengths. It was explained that
this was an application for a small new rural enterprise that would offer
employment opportunities for between two and five people. It would also provide
an opportunity to diversify the local rural economy and would be a means of
using the previously used site for business purposes. It was considered that
the principle of the proposal met with the aims of Policy PS13. With
the site of this application being in an isolated location in a mixed woodland,
it was reported that the buildings, because of their size and materials, would
be in-keeping with the site and would be hidden from distant vistas. It was
considered that the screening offered by the land formation and existing
vegetation would be sufficient to satisfactorily screen the site. No
significant harm to the quality of life for nearby residents was expected from
this low level of activity and, because of its distance from other dwellings,
it was not believed that any significant harm would derive from the site in
terms of matters such as overlooking or shadowing. It was considered that the
proposal, from the development's nature and scale, was acceptable for the
location. In response to concerns from local residents regarding the possible
impact of noise created by the facility's activities, it was expressed that
Public Protection had confirmed that they had no objection to the small
enterprise, but they had proposed appropriate conditions. It was reported that the proposal was not contrary to
any material planning policy within the LDP and that the proposed development
was an appropriate use of the site. b)
Taking advantage of the right to speak,
the applicant noted the following main points: ·
The building was sustainable, having
been built by hand · The enterprise would ... view the full minutes text for item 6. |
|
Application No C17/0912/35/AM - Station Bakery, Stryd Fawr, Criccieth, Gwynedd PDF 143 KB Resubmission of application approved under C12/0476/35/AM for the demolition of existing buildings and the erection of 7 residential units. LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Eirwyn Williams Additional documents: Minutes: A resubmission of an application approved under
C12/0476/35/AM to demolish existing buildings and erect seven residential units a)
The Senior Development Control Officer elaborated
on the application's background and noted that it was a resubmission because
the previous approval had ended. It was highlighted that this was an outline
application including access, landscape and scale details only. It was
emphasised that the principle of this development was mainly under
consideration, rather than the full details. It was reported that the site was located within
the development boundary of Cricieth and within an area where there was a
mixture of commercial units and private housing. It was noted that the proposal
was for the erection of seven residential units, and confirmation had been
received that the applicant was willing to offer two of those units as
affordable units. These two units would be subject to a 106 agreement to ensure
their future affordability. It was noted that the proposal was acceptable and
was a good use of the site. It was unlikely to have a detrimental impact on the
amenities of the local area or on any nearby property. b)
Taking advantage of the right to speak, the Local
Member (a member of this Planning Committee), noted that he had no objection to
the application or to the recommendation. c)
It was proposed and
seconded to approve the application. ch) In
response to an observation regarding an application submitted after five years
as the time within the previous application had ended, it was emphasised that
there were no enforcement rights to force applicants to act. d) In
response to an observation from the Biodiversity Unit that these houses should
include swift bricks, it was highlighted that these bricks encouraged birds to
nest. RESOLVED to delegate the right to approve subject to completing a 106
Agreement to bind two of the seven properties as affordable housing for local
need with relevant conditions involving: 1.
Time 2.
Reserved Matters 3.
Slate 4.
Welsh Water 5.
Highways/Parking 6.
Working hours when
developing the site 7.
Windows 8.
Withdrawal of
permitted rights from the affordable units 9.
Finished floor
levels 10.
Boundary
treatments / landscaping |
|
Demolition of existing industrial buildings and erection of 2 no. extensions to industrial building and associated alterations to existing building and erection of 1 no. new freestanding storage and processing building. LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Kevin M Jones Additional documents: Minutes: Demolition of existing industrial buildings and
erection of 2 no. extensions to industrial building and associated alterations
to existing building and erection of 1 no. new freestanding storage and
processing building. a)
The Senior Development Control Manager elaborated
on the background of the application, noting that the application was for the
improvement of the DMM factory buildings in Llanberis so that the company could
provide better facilities, include new machinery and improve the existing
production processes. It was explained that there were many elements to the
plan: ·
Demolition of existing structures that were linked
to the main building in two locations ·
Erection of two new extensions to the rear of the
main building to replace the structures to be demolished ·
Removal of storage containers from the site ·
Construction of new building for storing and
processing With the development located within an industrial
estate, it was added that its size was acceptable and due to its nature, it was
not considered that there would be any significant harmful impact on private
amenities or on the amenities of the neighbourhood in general. It was noted
that the proposal was a suitable economic development for the area. b)
It was proposed and
seconded to approve the application. c) During the ensuing discussion the following
points were highlighted by individual members: ·
that the company
employed a number of people ·
that the development was located within an
industrial estate RESOLVED to approve Conditions: 1.
Five years. 2.
Development to
comply with the approved plans. 3.
Contaminated land
condition 4.
Welsh Water
Condition |
|
Application No C17/1090/45/LL - Partington Marine Boatyard, Yr Harbwr, Pwllheli, PDF 162 KB Demolish existing covered boat storage are and workshop following storm damage and construct a new workshop and boat storage area LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Hefin
Underwood Additional documents: Minutes: Demolish
existing covered boat storage area and workshop following storm damage and
construct a new workshop and boat storage area. a)
The Planning Manager elaborated on the background
of the application, noting that it was an application to construct a new
workshop and boat storage area following recent storm damage. It was explained
that as the building on the site was in a dangerous structural condition, this
building had already been demolished. It was noted that this site was located within the
development boundary of Pwllheli and within a Landscape of Historic Interest
and was located in the Pwllheli outer harbour area in which a number of boat
yards and workshops were to be found. It was emphasised that the application
had been submitted to Committee as it fell within the category of a commercial,
industrial or retail development over 500m². 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. b)
It was proposed and
seconded to approve the application. RESOLVED
To approve – conditions: 1.
Commencement within five years. 2.
Development to
comply with the submitted plans. 3.
Agree to the exact
colours of the exterior materials. 4.
No surface water
and/or land drainage to connect with the public sewer. |
|
Application No C17/1077/36/LL - Tir ger Ty'n Ffrwd, Pentrefelin, Criccieth PDF 240 KB Retrospective application to retain vehicular access LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Stephen Churchman Additional documents: Minutes: A
retrospective planning application to retain a vehicular access a)
The Senior Development Control Manager elaborated
on the background of the application, noting that it was a retrospective application
for the retention of a vehicular access. It was reported that the access was
off a class 1 road, namely the A497 in Pentrefelin. It was not considered that the proposal of creating
the access would have a detrimental impact on the area’s visual amenities. It
was emphasised that many of the objectors had voiced concerns involving road
safety, however, the Transportation Unit had not raised any concerns that would
derive from the development. Everyone was reminded that this was an access for
the maintenance of agricultural land with low density use. It was noted that
the access was very similar to similar accesses nearby It was emphasised that should any planning
applications be submitted for further developments in the future, those
planning applications would be considered on their own merits. It was
considered that the site was suitable for an agricultural access and that there
were no implications in terms of road safety. Also, it was not considered that
the proposal, given its scale and location, would detrimentally affect the
amenities of neighbouring residents. b)
Taking advantage of the right to speak, the
applicant’s agent noted the following points: ·
The applicant needed to look after the land and to
do so, he required occasional access to the land c)
Taking advantage of the right to speak, the Local
Member (a member of this Planning Committee) made the following points: ·
The application appeared to be clear and simple,
but that there was a need to consider the application further ·
The entrance was located on a section of the road
which had a bend ·
The access was very close to quite a busy junction
in the village and bus stop. These appeared to be complications on a small
section of the road ·
It was accepted that the gate was similar to others
in the area but, again, problems arose with security ·
The gate could not be opened out as it would open
to the road and across a public footpath ·
It could not be opened fully into the land due to
the proximity to the river - it was therefore impractical ·
The main concerns for the residents of the village
was road safety - the access would add to these concerns ch) In
response to observations made about the road safety concerns, the Senior
Development Control Officer highlighted that the size of the parcel of land was
insufficient for large agricultural machinery and therefore the application had
been considered for smaller machinery such as a 4x4 vehicle. It was emphasised
that use of the access would be occasional and he did not object to the
application. There was no reason to set the gate back d)
It was proposed and
seconded to approve the application. dd) During the ensuing discussion the following
points were highlighted: by individual members: · What was the size ... view the full minutes text for item 10. |
|
A full planning application for the erection of 5 social rented bungalows and 12 social rented houses and the adaption of the current access and internal access road LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor
Rheinallt Puw Additional documents: Minutes: Full planning application for the construction of
five bungalows for social letting and twelve houses for social letting, and
adaptations to the existing entrance and access road a)
The Planning Manager referred to the late
observations form, emphasising that the Planning Service had received advice
from Welsh Government (Economy and Infrastructure Department) expressing that
the planning application could not be approved as the applicant had not
submitted sufficient information (based on submitting a Departure from Standard
application to Welsh Government) regarding the work that needed to be carried
out to the junction between the A5 and Station Road. b)
It was proposed and seconded to defer the
application. RESOLVED
to defer |
|
Application No C17/1124/11/LL - Marketing Suite, Y Bae, Beach Road, Bangor PDF 142 KB Variation of condition 2 of planning permission C16/0229/11/LL in order for the temporary marketing suite to remain on site for an additional 2 years LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Huw G Wyn Jones Additional documents: Minutes: Variation of condition 2 of planning permission
C16/0229/11/LL in order for the temporary marketing suite to remain on site for
an additional two years Attention was drawn to the late observations forms (a)
The Planning Manager elaborated on the background of
the application, and noted that this was an application to amend a condition on
the previous planning permission (C16/0299/11/LL) in order to extend the period
for placing a temporary marketing suite on site for an additional two years. It was explained that two time extensions had
already been granted, the latest with permission running until 31/03/18. It was noted that the
building was used as a housing sales centre associated with the residential
development in Y Bae in Bangor. It was noted that the housing development had
been completed but it was understood that two units remained on the market. It
was hoped to have an extension of an additional two years until all the units
would be sold. It was reported that the cabin was located within
the development boundary of Bangor and was of a reasonable size and location.
It was not considered that the cabin, or its occasional use, would have a
significant detrimental impact on the amenities of the nearby residents. (b)
Taking advantage of the right to speak, the
applicant noted the following points: ·
The purpose of the building was to assist with the
marketing and sales element of the units in Phase 1 of the development ·
Two units were still for sale ·
The building was fit for purpose and was used to
meet potential buyers ·
It did not create an adverse visual impact ·
Any observations or discussions on phase 2 of the
development would be treated as a separate application (c)
Taking
advantage of the right to speak, the Local Member (a member of this Planning Committee)
made the following points: ·
The marketing cabin was not being used ·
The member suspected that it had been closed for
two months ·
The two units that were still for sale were being
sold through local estate agents ·
Local residents suspected that this application for
a time extension to the cabin was for phase 2 of the development in Y Bae ·
The building was unnecessary - it no longer served
a purpose ch) It was proposed and seconded to refuse the
application, contrary to the recommendation,
as it no longer served a purpose. d) During
the ensuing discussion, the following points were highlighted by individual
Members: ·
If there were only two units left for sale, why was
there a need for a period of an additional two years? ·
Would it be possible to
consider a shorter period? ·
What if the company appealed the decision? dd) In response to the observation for a shorter period, it was reported that the marketing cabin had planning permission up until the end of March 2018. If there was no further permission, the building would be moved. If the building was not moved, enforcement steps would be taken. In the context of ... view the full minutes text for item 12. |
|
Application No C17/1144/39/LL - Ty Hir Caravan Park, Mynytho, Pwllheli PDF 233 KB Site two additional static caravans to increase numbers from 17 to 19 and construction of new earth bank LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor John Brynmor Hughes Additional documents: Minutes: Site two
additional static caravans to increase numbers from 17 to 19 and construction
of an earth bank a)
The Planning Manager elaborated on the background
of this application, and noted that this was an application to site two
additional static caravans on the site together with additional landscaping
which would include the construction of a bank and reinforcing the existing
vegetation. It was highlighted that two similar
applications had already been refused during 2017. It was
noted that the existing static site had planning permission for 17
units. There was also a site for touring caravans
located at Tŷ Hir,
authorised via a legal use certificate application in 2013. It was noted that the site was located within a Special
Landscape Area and a Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest, and was
submitted to Committee at the request of the local member. In the
context of the principle of the development, it was explained
that the main policy to consider when assessing the development was policy TWR
3 – part 3. It was added that this
policy may permit small extensions to the site's
surface and /or re-locating units from prominent locations to less prominent
locations subject to compliance with criteria. One of the criteria was that the
improvements did not lead to an increase in the number of static caravans or
chalet units on the site, unless, in exceptional circumstances, the proposals
would involve relocating existing sites located within the Coastal Change
Management Area. The policy did not allow an increase in the number of static
caravans on sites within the AONB or the Special Landscape Areas. It was noted that the proposal involved increasing the numbers
of units on site by adding two units. The proposal did not comply with the
requirements of Policy TWR 3 in terms of sites within the Special Landscape
Area. It was acknowledged that the development demonstrated some
improvements to the facilities of the current static site, and that the
additional landscaping would improve the appearance and the environment of the
site. Nevertheless, attention was drawn to paragraphs
5.3 and 5.4 of the report, and it was emphasised that any landscaping plan,
improvements or exchanging the touring units for static units would not
overcome the fact that the Policy did not permit increasing the number of
caravans on sites within a Special Landscape Area. b)
Taking advantage of the right to speak, the
applicant noted the following points: · The request is
only two additional static units · The content of the
policies and the report was acknowledged but there was a real possibility to
adjust the application to comply with the policy · Two static
caravans had been added in 2014, but it was decided not to increase further -
they did not know at the time that the Local Development Plan would prevent a
further increase in numbers · There was a
possible shortcoming by the officers in terms of sharing information about the
changes · The two additional units would be located in a ... view the full minutes text for item 13. |