Agenda and minutes

To accept any apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors Dilwyn Lloyd, Dewi Wyn Roberts (Local Member).

To receive any declaration of personal interest and to note protocol matters.

(a)       No declarations of personal interest were received from any members present.

(b)     The following members stated that they were local members in relation to the items noted:

·        Councillor Gruffydd Williams (a member of this Planning Committee), in relation to item 6.3 on the agenda (planning application C18/0023/42/LL);

·        Councillor Simon Glyn (a member of this Planning Committee), in relation to item 6.6 on the agenda (planning application C18/0322/46/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.

To note any items that are a matter of urgency in the view of the Chairman for consideration.

There were no urgent items.

The Chairman shall propose that the minutes of the previous meeting of this committee, held on, 4 June 2018, be signed as a true record.

The Chair signed the minutes of the previous meeting of this Committee, that took place on 4 June 2018, as a true record.

To submit the report of the Head of Environment Department.

LOCAL MEMBER:    Councillor Louise Hughes

Submitted - the Head of the Environment Department's report stemming from an application to register on the Public Rights of Way Definitive Map a public footpath in the Community of Arthog.

         The Chair noted that a late letter had been received from Barmouth Town Council complaining that they as a Council had not had an opportunity to submit observations on the application.   In response, the Environment Department Manager explained that the land in question was within the boundaries of Arthog Community Council and therefore there was no necessity to contact any other Community/Town Council on this matter.   

         The Environment Department Manager expanded on the application's legal background together with the evidence to support the application and he focused on the path between A and B on the application plan.  The application had been submitted based upon and in the context of Section 53 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. When considering such applications it was necessary to look at the evidence for and against the application, and in this context based on the act referred to above together with the Highways Act 1980.    Having looked at the evidence to register on the grounds of use, and specifically as the public had walked the path unhindered, continuously over a period of more than twenty years, they had to be certain that the landowners had given a right and permission for the use.   The information for and against the application was looked at and the key factor was the existence of signage and what those signs stated.  Reference was made to Section 31(3) of the Act, namely:

         “Where the owner of the land over which any such way as aforesaid passes-

(a)  Has erected in such manner as to be visible to persons using the way a notice inconsistent with the dedication of the way as a highway; and

(b)  Has maintained the notice after the 1st January 1934, or any later date on which it was erected,

the notice, in the absence of proof of a contrary intention, is sufficient evidence to negative the intention to dedicate the way as a highway”.

         That is, that signage had been erected on the site that was contrary to the claim that a public right existed.  By doing this consideration had to be given to an ordinary member of the public's understanding of what was on the sign together with the landowners' aim.

         Reference was also made to factors that were irrelevant to the application e.g. was the path pleasant with vistas from it.  Therefore, the only matter that could be considered was if public rights of way existed.   

         Attention was drawn to the path's historical background and the development of Mawddach Crescent and the surrounding area.     

         In terms of the evidence to support the application, reference was made to a summary of over 100 statements made by individuals who stated that they used the path.   Full summaries can be seen in Appendix 4 and 4.2 of the report.  In addition to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

To submit the report of the Head of Environment Department.

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.

Erection of 5 dwellings (including 2 affordable dwellings) together with creating a new access into the trunk road.

LOCAL MEMBER:    Councillor Ioan Thomas

Link to relevant background documents

Construction of five houses (including two affordable houses) together with creating an entrance to the trunk road

(a)      The Senior Development Control Officer elaborated on the application's background, and reminded the Committee that the application had been deferred in the March committee in order to assess the impact of the development on a tree with a Tree Preservation Order and located within the rear garden of Ynys Tudur, adjacent to the application site.  As a result, a Trees Survey was submitted by the applicant and the Survey came to the conclusion that the tree's safety may be ensured subject to following and undertaking careful building techniques.

Of the five units proposed, three would be residential units located at the front of the site with two detached houses at the rear.  The site was located within the development boundary of Caernarfon in the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan (LDP) but it was not allocated for any specific use. 

Reference was made to the relevant policies in the report along with the responses to the statutory consultation process. 

It was noted that the information submitted to the Committee in March had not changed and that the deferral dealt with biodiversity matters, namely concern regarding the impact on a tree with a Tree Preservation Order. Based on these concerns the trees expert was requested to be on site during the construction work to ensure that the land work is supervised within an area to safeguard the tree's roots.  The Trees Officer confirmed that a condition should be included in any planning permission to state that the applicant would have to follow mitigation measures noted in the Trees Survey to avoid harm to the tree.   

The recommendation remained the same as discussed in the March Committee, namely to approve in accordance with relevant conditions. 

RESOLVED:     To delegate the right to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the application, subject to the applicant completing a legal agreement under Section 106 in order to ensure that two affordable houses out of a total of five are affordable houses initially and in perpetuity and to relevant conditions relating to:

1. Five years.

2. In accordance with the revised plans.

3. Natural slate.

4. Agree the houses' external materials.

5. Withdrawal of permitted development rights regarding the location of windows.

6. Withdrawal of permitted development rights for extensions.

7. Condition to protect a tree with a tree preservation order.

8. Transportation Unit and Welsh Government highways conditions.

9. Welsh Water condition regarding protecting the combined sewer.

Change of use of former nursing home to create 4 self contained holiday units, construction of separate buildings to be used as a swimming pool.

LOCAL MEMBER:    Councillor Peter Garlick

Link to relevant background documents

Change of use of a former residential nursing home to create four self-contained holiday units, erect a separate building to be used as a swimming pool together with extensions and alterations to the existing building.  

(a)      The Development Control Manager explained that due to the concerns that had arisen regarding the application, the Committee was requested to defer this application in order to undertake an inspection site visit on the day of the next Planning Committee meeting.   

RESOLVED:  To defer the application and conduct a site inspection visit as suggested above.

Demolish existing storage unit and construction of 2 holiday units (revised application).

LOCAL MEMBER:    Councillor Gruffydd Williams

Link to relevant background documents

Demolish existing storage unit and build two holiday units (amended application)

(a)     The Senior Development Control Officer expanded on the application’s background and noted that the site was located in the countryside and within the Llŷn and Bardsey Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest.  Access was gained to the site along an unclassified road which had access to a class 2 road approximately 85 metres south of the site. 

Reference was made to the responses to the consultation process together with the relevant planning policies within the report.

It was noted that policy TWR 2 of the Local Development Plan supported the development of new permanent holiday accommodation provided they are of a high quality in terms of design, setting and appearance.  The policy also enables new build accommodation, if the development is located within a development boundary, or makes use of a suitable previously developed site.   There was an existing holiday unit at Ty'n Pwll Cottage and the proposal in question would therefore extend the existing holiday accommodation establishment.   It was therefore considered that the development was acceptable in terms of the principle of building new accommodation units.

It was explained that the application was a resubmission of a previously refused application, as it was considered that the scale of the proposal in question was excessive for the site and did not reflect its surroundings. In terms of the number of units and design, it was considered that the proposal in question was an improvement on the previous application.   

The Transportation Unit had no objection in terms of transport and access matters.

Having assessed the proposal against the relevant policies and considered all the responses and observations, 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.  The planning officers’ recommendation was to approve the application and to include a condition to restrict the use to holiday accommodation only and to maintain a register of users.

(a)         The local member noted that he did not support the application for the following reasons: 

·         that there was no shortage or demand for more holiday accommodation 

·         that demolishing the hay shed and constructing two units in its place would set a precedent for similar future applications 

·         approval should not be given for the conversion of such farm buildings 

(b)         A Member supported the above observations and stated further that there were plenty of holiday homes and gave an example of four houses that had been sold recently in the village of Edern as holiday homes.    There was also concern about the tendency to re-name and Anglicise house names.    Housing estates in the village had holiday homes and it was asked how many of these houses had registered as holiday units for business tax.

(c)          It was proposed and seconded to refuse the application on the grounds of an excess of holiday homes.

(dd)     In response, the Planning Manager explained that officers could  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.3

Demolish existing beach hut and construct new hut.

LOCAL MEMBER:    Councillor Dewi Wyn Roberts

Link to relevant background documents

Demolition of an existing beach hut and construct a new one

(a)     The Senior Development Control Officer noted that late observations had been received from the Local Member who stated his concern regarding the size of the structure and the hut was on a beach within the AONB.  The member felt that such developments were damaging to the appearance of the beach and did not fit and was an over-development.   

(a)      The officer elaborated on the application's background and noted that it was an application to replace the existing Ynys Fawr beach hut with a new, larger hut on Borth Fawr beach, Abersoch.  The existing hut was located behind a row of beach huts that stand on the beach.   Following the concerns of relevant officers regarding the height of the proposed hut an amended plan was received indicating a reduction in the hut's height.   The hut stands on a rural coastal site within the AONB, near a Heritage Coast and within the Coastal Change Management Area.

         Reference was made to the relevant policies and the responses to the consultation process within the report.

         In terms of the main material planning considerations, concern was expressed stemming from the public consultation based on the size and height of the hut.    Although the proposal involved replacing the hut with a larger hut, the proposal was not considered to be unreasonable in terms of scale, height and mass and was not an over development as it largely followed the same size pattern as other huts in the vicinity.  As the design of the proposal was suitable for a beach hut and its setting, appearance, scale, height, and the treatment of the proposal's elevations were fairly similar to the rest of the huts in the row, it was considered that the proposal was acceptable and respected the context of the site and its place in the AONB landscape.

         Having assessed all the considerations, it was considered that the proposed beach hut was acceptable in terms of size, design and materials, and the officers' recommendation was to approve the application with relevant conditions that included no occasional living or sleeping use. 

(b)      It was proposed, seconded and voted to approve the application.

RESOLVED: To approve subject to conditions:

1.    Commence within five years.

2.    In accordance with the plans

3.    The hut will be of a blue BS 18 E 53 colour, unless otherwise agreed beforehand with the Local Planning Authority.

4.    No occasional living or sleeping use.

Change of use of shop (A1 use class) to cafe (A3 use class)

LOCAL MEMBER:    Councillor Dylan Bullard

Link to relevant background documents

Change of use of shop (A1 use class) to cafe (A3 use class).

(a)     The Development Control Officer elaborated on the background of the application, noting that it was for the change of use of a shop (A1) to a café (A3) with a Welsh theme to display local crafts and produce and Welsh music. It was noted that it was not proposed to undertake any external alterations, however it was intended to install an extractor on the gable-end of the building.

It was explained that the previous use of the unit was as an Ethel Austin shop, which had shut a number of years ago, and since then planning permission has been granted to convert it into two separate shops with a dance studio above.

The building was situated within the main shopping area and the designated Town Centre of the Pwllheli Urban Service Centre and within a C1 flooding zone.

Reference was made to the responses to the consultations within the report. It was noted that no new information had been received since then.  Observations had been received from the public on the applications and these were noted in the report. 

Since being granted permission to convert the building into two shops in 2014, it was explained that the shop in question had not been occupied, but the adjacent shop operated as a William Hill bookmaker. Previously, the Ethel Austin shop occupied the whole property, before the chain went into administration in 2010, and was briefly occupied by the Life and Style retail business until 2011. Given that the shop had been empty for a prolonged period, it was considered that there were justified grounds for the change the use in order to bring the shop back into use and to remove the dead frontage in such a prominent and central location within the town. The proposed use as a café would be an attraction in the town centre, and it was not considered that the change of use would have a detrimental impact on the function of the main shopping area nor the town centre. 

It was proposed to install an extractor on the building and the observations of the Public Protection Unit were awaited on this, and following the receipt of favourable observations, it was considered that the change of use was acceptable, and would not have a detrimental impact on the amenities of any nearby residents. 

Due to the scale of the application and its location as well as its existing features, it was considered that the proposal complied with the relevant local and national policies.   Therefore, it was recommended to delegate powers to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the application, subject to the receipt of favourable observations from the Public Protection Unit on the suitability of the proposed extraction system/flue and to conditions listed at the end of the report.  

(b)     It was proposed and seconded to approve the application.

            RESOLVED:  To delegate powers to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the application  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.5

Revised application to extend existing static caravan site, increase numbers from 31 to 35, relocate 3 static caravans and creation of a new playing field.

LOCAL MEMBER:    Councillor Simon Glyn

Link to relevant background documents

Revised application to extend existing static caravan site to increase numbers from 31 to 35, relocate 3 static caravans and creation of a new play area

(a)     The Senior Development Control Officer noted that neither the applicant nor his agent had submitted an enquiry regarding what was possible on the site in question following the withdrawal of the previous application, despite the fact that officers had expressed fundamental policy concerns regarding the proposal. The officer expanded on the application's background, noting that it was to extend an existing static caravan site to increase the numbers from 31 to 35 together with relocating three static caravans and to create a new play area.  The proposal would also include additional landscaping on the western and southern boundaries of the extended part of the site.

Reference was made to the relevant planning policies together with the responses to the consultation process as noted in the report.

In terms of the main material planning considerations, the main policy to consider was TWR 3 and this stated that it may permit small extensions to the site's surface and /or re-locating units from prominent locations to less prominent locations.  One of the criteria was that the improvements do not lead to an increase in the number of static caravans on sites within the AONB or in the Special Landscape Areas.   The application was to increase the number of units on the site by adding four units.   The proposal did not therefore comply with the requirements of Policy TWR 3 in terms of sites within the Special Landscape Area.  By re-locating three static caravans to the existing play area, this meant that the hedge on the southern side of the play area site would be lost in order to create a new road and would make the site of the play area far more open and visibly sensitive than it currently was.  Extending the site would, therefore, make this site more prominent in the landscape and where public footpaths run very close to the application site.  It was, therefore, not considered that the proposal in its current form would improve the site's setting in the surrounding landscape which was a designated Special Landscape Area.

In the context of visual amenities, extending the existing site would make it more prominent in the landscape and although the application indicated an intention to carry out landscaping along the western and southern boundaries it would take time to mature.  

Observations on the application were received from the Transportation Unit stating their concerns about the entrance and that the proposal would increase the use of an already sub-standard entrance.  Such an increase without improvements to the entrance would be unacceptable. 

As policy TWR 3 does not permit an increase in the number of static caravans at existing sites within the Special Landscape Area, and it was not considered that extending the site would improve its setting in the surrounding landscape, together with road safety concerns it was recommended to refuse the application.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.6

Outline application with all matters reserved for the provision of 9 dwellings with integrated garages.

LOCAL MEMBER:    Councillor Gareth A. Roberts

Link to relevant background documents

An outline application with all matters reserved to erect nine new houses with integrated garages

(a)      The Development Control Manager elaborated on the background of the application and noted that the indicative plans had been submitted these suggested the size, setting and likely elevations of the proposed development that includes three rows of three, three-storey houses with three bedrooms each.  Seven of the units would be for the open market and two would be offered as affordable houses.

The site was located within the Bangor city development boundary which had not been specifically designated for any specific use.  It was explained that the land level rose to the front which abutted the existing access road towards the Maes Berea estate to the south and west.  The existing estate was established and comprised approximately 55 houses that were a mixture of two and three-storey houses.

Attention was drawn to the relevant planning policies and the responses to the consultation process noted in the report. 

Letters of objection to the proposal had been received and were noted in the report.

It was noted that the principle of the proposal was acceptable and it was a logical extension of the existing estate and the indicative plans conveyed and reflected what had already been approved and built within the rest of the estate. 

Two out of the eight units were offered as affordable houses.  Additional observations had been received from the Joint Planning Policy Unit which stated the need for housing identified by Tai Teg in 2018.  The statistics suggested that one to three bedroomed houses were more likely to address the current and anticipated future demand in terms of market housing and affordable housing. It was noted that the required evidence to support the recommendation to refuse the application on the grounds of a mixture of houses had not been received, bearing in mind that the proposal was preparing two affordable units as part of the proposal.

The Transportation Unit had no objection to the proposal.

Due to the scale of the application and its location as well as its existing natural features, it was considered that the proposal complied with the relevant local and national policies.   Therefore it was recommended to delegate powers to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the application subject to the completion of a 106 Agreement to ensure that two of the nine houses subject of this application are affordable, and to relevant planning conditions. 

(b)     It was proposed and seconded to approve the application.

(c)     Attention was drawn that Tai Teg had noted on the additional observations form of the need for 180 two-bedroom units against 124 three-bedroom units, it was therefore asked why there was not a better mixture of housing on the site in question.   

(ch)   In response, the Planning Manager referred to the comments of the Joint Planning Policy Unit on the additional observations form and the fact that officers were not confident that they currently had the necessary evidence to support the recommendation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.7