skip to main content

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Siambr Dafydd Orwig, Council Offices, Caernarfon, Gwynedd, LL55 1SH. View directions

Contact: Lowri Haf Evans  01286 679878

Media

Items
No. Item

1.

APOLOGIES

To accept any apologies for absence.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

None to note.

2.

DECLARATION OF PERSONAL INTEREST AND PROTOCOL MATTERS

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

Additional documents:

Minutes:

(a)       The following members declared a personal interest in the following items for the reasons noted:

·         Councillor Gruffydd Williams, in relation to item 5.2 on the agenda (planning application number C18/0614/43/LL) as he was the applicant's son.

·         Councillor Owain Williams, in relation to item 5.2 on the agenda, (planning application number C18/0614/43/LL) as he was the owner of the site.

·         Councillor Berwyn Parry Jones, in relation to item 5.4 on the agenda (planning application number C18/0744/23/R3) as he was friends with the landowner.

 

The Members were of the opinion that they were prejudicial interests, and withdrew from the Chamber during the discussion on the items noted.

 

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

 

·        Councillor Gruffydd Williams, (a member of this Planning Committee), in relation to item 5.1 on the agenda, (planning application number C18/0614/43/LL);

·        Councillor Aled Wyn Jones, (not a member of this Planning Committee), in relation to item 5.2 on the agenda, (planning application number C18/0614/43/LL);

·        Councillor Dewi Roberts, (not a member of this Planning Committee), in relation to item 5.3 on the agenda, (planning application number C18/0715/39/LL);

·        Councillor Gareth Griffith, (not a member of this Planning Committee), in relation to item 5.5 on the agenda (planning application number C18/0614/43/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.

3.

URGENT ITEMS

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

Additional documents:

4.

MINUTES pdf icon PDF 86 KB

The Chairman shall propose that the minutes of the previous meeting of this committee, held on, 24th September 2018, 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 24 September 2018, as a true record.

5.

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

 

5.1

Application No C18/0023/42/LL - Tynpwll Cottage, Lon Ty'n Pistyll, Nefyn - Revised Report 11.10.18 pdf icon PDF 110 KB

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

 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Gruffydd Williams

 

Link to relevant background documents

 

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

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

 

          Attention was drawn to the additional observations.

 

(a)      The Planning Manager elaborated on the background to the application, reminding members that a decision had been made at the Committee meeting on 25 June to defer the decision in order to receive additional information about the cumulative impact of holiday units in the locality. It was reiterated that the application involved demolishing an existing shed and constructing two single-storey holiday units.   It was noted that an amended report had been distributed to members.

 

In terms of the principle of the development, it was noted that Policy TWR 2 of the LDP supported the development of new permanent holiday accommodation with services, or self-serviced ones, to convert existing buildings into such accommodation or to extend existing holiday accommodation establishments.

 

Reference was made to the additions to the amended report drawing specific attention to paragraphs 5.3 and 5.4 that related to additional information submitted by the agent along with information gathered by planning officers that responded to the Committee's concern about the cumulative impact of holiday accommodation developments. It was highlighted that these paragraphs explained that holiday homes and holiday accommodation were not considered to be the same thing in planning terms; therefore, it was very difficult to consider holiday homes when assessing the cumulative impact of holiday accommodation. Reference was made to information in the report that had been provided by the Council's Taxation Unit regarding the number of holiday accommodation units in the Nefyn district (which included Nefyn, Morfa Nefyn and Edern). Members were reminded that matters such as visual and general amenities and transport had already been discussed; therefore, specific attention was only drawn to additional information. The cumulative impact of holiday units in this area was only 3.8%.

 

(b)       Exercising his right to speak, the Local Member noted the following main points:

·         That Councillors of bordering wards shared his concerns

·         There was no clear difference between the meaning of holiday homes and holiday units. The definition was no longer clear following the tax increase (up to 50%).

·         A substantial increase was seen in holiday homes being converted into holiday units in order to avoid paying tax and to take advantage of TWR 2 to construct more holiday units in gardens.

·         A Holiday Home was a Holiday Home, namely a house that was unavailable for local people but associated with increasing market prices that prevented local people from living in their native areas.

·         There were many more than what had been included in the report - Officers had not included an additional 318 holiday homes within the district and they had not considered the relationship of the neighbouring village of Pistyll with Nefyn or the Natural Retreats development.

·         Static caravans had not been considered.

·         This created a detrimental impact on the use of the Welsh language. The number of Welsh speakers had decreased since the previous census.

·         Was there a real need for additional units?

·         What was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.1

5.2

Application No C18/0614/43/LL - Parc Carafanau a Cwrs Golff Gwynus, Pistyll, Pwllheli pdf icon PDF 156 KB

Extend site area in order to site 5 additional holiday caravans on field 470, retain temporary access road and extend to service the additional caravans, erect 1.2m earth bank to northern and western boundary of field 470, revised layout of 5 caravans approved under application C15/0495/43/LL and relocate septic tank

 

LOCAL MEMBER:  Councillor Aled Wyn Jones

 

Link to relevant background documents

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Extend the surface of the site to site 5 additional holiday caravans on field 470, retain the temporary service access and extend it for the additional units, erect a 1.2m earthen clawdd along the northern and western boundaries of field 410, change the layout of five caravans approved under application number C15/0495/43/LL, and relocate a septic tank

          Attention was drawn to the additional observations received

        

(a)     The Planning Manager elaborated on the background to the application, and noted that this was an application to upgrade and extend an existing caravan site.  The application included a proposal to upgrade the ten existing static caravans to holiday cabins and to relocate them to a section of the existing golf course. Approval had been given in 2015 to relocate 5 static caravans to the golf course whilst the other 5 would be relocated within existing boundaries. The proposal also included retaining the temporary service road that had received approval as part of application C15/0495/43/LL and extending it to serve the additional units, erecting a 1.2m earthen clawdd along the northern and western boundaries of the site and relocating a septic tank.

 

         It was noted that there was extensive planning history to the site and, when the C15/0495/43/LL application was approved, it had been for the whole site. It was reiterated that this had been of assistance to rationalise all historical applications on the site. The site was situated in the countryside and within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). It was also within the Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest.

 

         It was highlighted that a number of policies within the Local Development Plan (LDP) were relevant when determining the application. The main policy to consider when assessing the principle of the development was policy TWR 3.  It was noted that the policy permitted small extensions to the site's surface area and /or relocating units from prominent locations to less prominent locations subject to compliance with criteria.

 

         Permission had been granted in application C15/1495/43/LL to extend the current site to 3565 square metres while the existing application requested an extension to the site so that it would take up a total of 7658 square metres. This would be an increase of nearly 43% to the size of the site, based on its size prior to the 2015 permission. Reference was made to the need to relocate a sewerage treatment tank but there was no reason to extend the site in order to locate the sewerage treatment tank.

 

         When considering the reasons, the question was whether to consider the proposal as an extension at all. There was no physical connection between the element of the existing holiday park and the proposed location, and it was proposed to create a wholly separate access and track. It appeared that the relocation would lead to a whole new site. Policy TWR 3 did not support establishing new static caravan sites within the AONB. It was considered that the plan approved in 2015 had been an appropriate compromise to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.2

5.3

Application No C18/0715/39/LL - 68, Cae Du Estate, Abersoch, Pwllheli pdf icon PDF 113 KB

Two storey dormer extension, dormer window and balcony to front and single storey front extension to existing garage and external alterations to the property

 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor John Brynmor Hughes

 

Link to relevant background documents

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Two-storey dormer extension, dormer window and balcony to the front and single-storey front extension to existing garage and external alterations to the property.

 

Attention was drawn to the additional observations received.

 

(a)       The Planning Manager elaborated on the background to the application and noted that it was an application for the erection of a two-storey dormer extension to square off the front of the house, to install a dormer window and balcony to the front along with a single-storey front extension to the area of the existing connecting garage. It was explained that the property stood on a slope in a row of residential houses, in the corner of the fairly modern Cae Du Estate cul de sac and parallel to the traditional Cae Du farmhouse.

 

The property in question was a dormer bungalow which was of slightly different design to the remaining dormer houses in the row, which already had front balconies above integrated garages. It was noted that the proposal would involve filling the south eastern corner to square off the house with a two-storey gable end dormer extension, and install a dormer window and balcony to the front. Although gables were not a common feature in the row in question, there were elements of glass gables in houses in the cul de sac parallel to it within the Estate; therefore, it was not an entirely alien feature in the vicinity. It was noted that the rest of the houses in the row had front balconies and were a common and very prominent feature in the design of houses on the estate, therefore, there was no significant concern regarding the addition.

 

      It was accepted that the house was visible from a distance due to its elevated position; however, bearing in mind that the design of the existing house was different from the rest of the row and the fact that there were views of it in a built-up context amongst houses of various designs, it was considered that the appearance would not have a significant impact on the street-scene or on the AONB landscape.   

 

      In the context of general and residential matters, it was highlighted that objections had been received from neighbours on the grounds of issues such as overlooking, loss of privacy, noise and loss of light. Due to the angle of the layout of the property, it was considered that the new front windows would not directly face Cae Du Farm. It was noted that the side windows of the proposal would be changed from bedroom windows to small bathroom windows; therefore, in this respect, it was an improvement for objectors on both sides, to what was experienced at present. 

 

      Due to differences in the level of the land, the property to the front of the application site, namely the 67 Cae Du bungalow, was on a much lower level and only the building's roof was visible from the application site; therefore, the vastness of the front windows or balcony would not compromise their privacy. Views  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.3

5.4

Application No C18/0744/23/R3 - Land by Cibyn Industrial Estate, Caernarfon pdf icon PDF 104 KB

Create a new car park, access, street lighting together with associated engineering Works

 

LOCAL MEMBERS: Councillors Berwyn Parry Jones and Jason Wayne Parry

 

Link to relevant background documents

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Creation of a new car park, access, street lighting along with associated engineering works.

 

          Attention was drawn to the additional observations that had been received.

 

(a)       The Senior Development Control Officer elaborated on the background to the application and noted that it was a full application to create a park and share facility for the construction work of the Wylfa power station. It was noted that the facility would accommodate approximately 153 vehicles which included parking for the disabled, electric vehicles and motor bikes.

 

Reference was made to the relevant policies noted in the report.  It was reported that the public consultation period had ended and that one objection had been received on the grounds that the proposed bypass and car park would have a detrimental impact on the Fferm Bodrual holiday accommodation business.

 

In terms of the principle of the development and that the site was located adjacent to, but outside, the Caernarfon development boundary as included in the LDP, policy PCYFF1 along with policies PS12 and PS9 would apply in this instance. Having considered these policies, it was considered that the proposal was acceptable in principle given that the Local Development Plan permitted such a development on this parcel of land along with the fact that its location opposite the industrial estate was crucial given its proximity and accessibility to the local roads network that would serve Wylfa.

 

Although the site was located in the countryside, in the context of visual amenities it was considered that the impact of the bypass would be much greater and broader than the impact of the car park on the local landscape given its design, the landscape plan and the scale of the proposal compared with the design and scale of the bypass.

 

In the context of residential and general amenities, it had already been noted that an objection had been received from the occupants of Fferm Bodrual which was located approximately 100m from the application site. In the context of the application, it was considered that creating a car park next to an industrial estate and to the west of a new bypass would not create a significant increase in noise disturbance and that it would not lead to loss of privacy given the distance between the application site and the property/holiday accommodation, along with the fact that the bypass would be located between the two sites.

 

(b)       When considering highway matters, the need to update this consideration was highlighted as Welsh Government had confirmed that they had no objection to the application, subject to including an appropriate condition.

 

It was reiterated that the recommendation had been modified to delegate the right to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the application, subject to receiving favourable observations from Natural Resources Wales and imposing additional conditions.

 

In response to a question, the officer highlighted that the car park would be available to the public should Wylfa not go ahead.

 

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

 

(ch)  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.4

5.5

Application No C18/0780/20/LL - Fferm Plas Llanfair, Ffordd Caernarfon, Y Felinheli pdf icon PDF 136 KB

Siting of 4 seasonal holiday accomodation units in the form of shepherd huts together with a shower hut (amended application to that refused under reference number C18/0393/20/LL)

 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Gareth Wyn Griffith

 

Link to relevant background documents

Additional documents:

Minutes:

(a)      Siting of 4 seasonal holiday accommodation units in the form of shepherds' huts together with a shower hut (amended application from that refused under reference C18/0393/20/LL).

 

         Attention was drawn to the additional observations received.

 

         The Senior Development Control Officer elaborated on the background to the application and noted that it was a full application for the siting of four seasonal holiday accommodation units in the form of shepherds' huts together with a shower hut. It was reiterated that the proposal would also entail the planting of trees and shrubs together with the creation of a parking area. It was highlighted that the application was an amendment to the plan refused in June 2018 under delegated rights where the holiday units were sited in a row within the application site. The huts would be sited in a semi-circular formation in the amended plan.

 

         It was explained that the site was on a parcel of land in a corner of an agricultural field, with unobstructed views toward the Menai Strait (a Special Area of Conservation) and Anglesey (with the banks of the Menai Strait within its AONB). Access would be gained to the site from a private roads network. It was noted that agricultural land and the residential dwellings of Llanfair Hall were located to the north of the site and open agricultural land and the dwelling of Llanfair Old Hall were located to the south.

 

         It was reported that the principle of establishing new, temporary holiday accommodation was included in Policy TWR 5 of the Local Development Plan. It was reiterated that such developments were approved if compliance with a number of criteria could be secured. The proposed development was required to be of high quality in terms of design, layout and appearance, and located in an unobtrusive location. Despite being located in the corner of the field, such a development on a parcel of land, which by its nature and character was open, would be an obtrusive development in the landscape and would create structures that were incompatible with the open landscape.

 

         Historically, it had been noted that this part of the landscape would have been identified as park land with an open character and nature, and although there were other developments locally, these were on a domestic scale rather than within the open landscape.

 

Having considered the nature and amended layout of the holiday accommodation units, the parking bays, the associated equipment and the introduction of human activities of a tourist nature to the landscape, the cumulative effect of these elements of the development would still be akin to creating an obtrusive development in the local landscape. Any ancillary facility should be located in an existing building or, should this not be possible, that any new facility should be commensurate with the scale of the development. It was considered that adding the washing and toilet structure to the four holiday units would not be commensurate with the scale of the development since it would increase the density of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.5