Venue: Siambr y Cyngor, Council Offices, Cae Penarlâg, Dolgellau, LL40 2YB. View directions
Contact: Lowri Haf Evans 01286 679878
No. | Item |
---|---|
APOLOGIES To accept any apologies for absence. Minutes: Apologies were received from Councillors Elin Walker Jones, Dilwyn Lloyd
and Owain Williams. |
|
DECLARATION OF PERSONAL INTEREST AND PROTOCOL MATTERS To receive any declaration of personal interest and to note protocol matters. Minutes: (a)
The
Senior Solicitor declared a personal interest in item 5.1 on the agenda
(planning application number C19/0014/19/LL), as a close relative of his lived
opposite the site. The
officer was of the opinion that it was a prejudicial interest and he left the
Chamber during the discussion on the application. (b)
The
following members declared that they were local members in relation to the
items noted: ·
Councillor
Eric M. Jones (a member of this Planning Committee) in relation to item 5.4 on
the agenda (planning application number C19/0355/17/LL) ·
Councillor
Peter Garlick (not a member of this Planning Committee) in relation to item 5.1
on the agenda (planning application number C19/0014/19/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. Minutes: None to note |
|
The Chairman shall propose that the minutes of the previous meeting of this committee, held on, 20th May 2019, be signed as a true record. Minutes: The Chair signed the minutes of the previous meeting of this Committee,
that took place on 20 May 2019, as a true record. |
|
PLANNING APPLICATIONS To submit the report of the Head of Environment Department. 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 C19/0014/19/LL Land at Lon Cefnwerthyd, Bontnewydd, Caernarfon PDF 200 KB Full application for the provision of 29 residential units
with associated landscaping, parking, the creation of a new entrance and an
area of public open space LOCAL MEMBER:
Councillor Peter Garlick Additional documents: Minutes: Full application to erect
29 residential units together with landscaping, car parking,
create a new access and open public area. Attention was drawn to the late observations form that had been
received (a)
The
Planning Manager elaborated on the background of the application, and reminded
the members that the application had been deferred in
the committee meeting on 29.4.19 in order to receive more information / amended
plans that would satisfy the Committee's concerns. It was
explained that the site was located within the development boundary of
the village of Bontnewydd and was designated as a
site for the construction of new housing in the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint
Local Development Plan (LDP). For information, permission had previously been
given for the construction of 26 houses on the site, and it was considered that
a material commencement of this consent had been made and this meant that it
remained 'extant' and that a legal right existed to erect 26 new houses on the
site. It was now a full application for 29 new houses. The Planning Manager
reported that all details of the application had been included in the report,
but specific reference was made to responses to
concerns that had been raised by the members during the previous Committee, as
well as concerns that had been raised by the owner of the nearby house.
Attention was also drawn to the late observations
received. One of these concerns was the layout of plots 14, 15 and 16 with a
request for the applicant to consider suitable amendments to this part of the
site in order to minimise the detrimental impact on the amenities of the adjacent
property (Tywyn), mainly due to overlooking. In
response to these concerns, amended plans were received
for the three proposed properties, and it was reported that the applicant had
stated that he had discussed the amendments with the property owner. It was noted that the amended plans demonstrated the distances
and the boundaries between the houses and the building of Tywyn
and the line of sight stemming from the rear windows of plots 14, 15 and 16
toward Tywyn. The changes to the design of the houses
on these plots that would reduce the number of openings on the first floor of
the houses were highlighted and explained in order to
overcome concerns. It was considered that these
amendments would make the development more acceptable and that they addressed
the neighbour and the Committee's concerns in terms of the impact on the
amenities of the adjacent property. It was noted that the planning officers had re-consulted with the neighbour regarding the amendments, and reference was made to his observations in the late observations form. It was highlighted that the neighbour was unsatisfied with the amendments, and was still expressing concerns with regard to overlooking. The officers were of the opinion that there were no reasonable grounds that could be considered to justify any further concerns about the unacceptable impact on the ... view the full minutes text for item 5.1 |
|
Application No C19/0279/22/LL Land at Tal y Maes Mawr, Nebo, Caernarfon PDF 177 KB Full application to site 4 safari tents, 1 sauna building and other associated works LOCAL MEMBER:
Councillor Craig ab Iago Additional documents: Minutes: A full application to construct
four 'safari' tents, one 'sauna' building along with associated work Attention
was drawn to the late observations form that had been
received (a) The Planning Manager noted
that an agent, acting on behalf of the applicant, had requested that the discussion
be deferred in order to allow the applicant to submit
amended plans and additional information in response to the concerns noted in
the report. Nevertheless, the officers did not see the need to defer; there had
been no pre-application and a new application could be
submitted in future, and the Planning Manager elaborated on the
background of the application. It was noted that this
was a full application to site four safari tents, construct an associated
building to use as a sauna along with other ancillary work including creating
an access road, parking spaces, access paths, landscaping, service links and
installing sewage treatment works. It was added that the site
was located among agricultural fields outside any defined development boundary
in open countryside within an Special Landscape Area
and the Dyffryn Nantlle
Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest. It was noted
that access to the site led through the applicant's residential curtilage along
the existing private access road that backed onto a detached residential house. It was noted that the
applicant, in submitting the application, had noted in the Planning Statement
that Policy TWR 5 had been considered as the tents
would not be permanent, because they would only have a temporary connection
with the land. The planning officers were of the opinion that the most relevant
policy was Policy TWR 3 as more permanent elements
were proposed as part of the development. It was added
that there had been no clear information or adequate reference submitted about
the intention with the timber platforms and the likely steps to secure them to
or into the ground. It was
considered that the proposal to install electricity and water connections for
the individual tents, create an access road, construct a sauna building
(despite its small size), footpaths and hard standings and install a series of
lights created permanent elements as well as an excess of hard standings which
were contrary to Policy TWR 5. Part of paragraph 6.3.85 of the explanation of policy
TWR 5 noted: "They should only provide basic facilities for sleeping,
seating and eating without installation of water services or provision of
drainage facilities for WC, showers and washing. This ensures that such
structures do not generate a level of permanence that could increase the level
of landscape impact and site restoration should removal of the structures be
required.” It would not be reasonable or practical to set up electricity,
water and sewerage connections at the beginning of the holiday season and then
remove them at the end of the season. With these elements being
fixed or permanent, it would not be possible to agree with the agent's
view that Policy TWR 5 was the relevant policy for considering this
proposal. Consideration was ... view the full minutes text for item 5.2 |
|
Non material amendment to approval C13/0288/03/LL in order to construct a smaller extension with white rendr instead of natural stone finish as approved. LOCAL MEMBER:
Councillor Annwen Daniels Additional documents: Minutes: An unsubstantial amendment
to permission number C13/0288/03/LL - to construct a smaller extension with
white render rather than natural stone as approved (a)
The
Planning Manager elaborated on the background of the application, and noted
that it had been submitted to the Planning Committee
as the applicant's wife was a Councillor. It was highlighted
that the proposal was acceptable and complied with the relevant requirements of
local and national policies. (b)
It
was proposed and seconded to approve the application in accordance with the
recommendation. RESOLVED
to approve the application 1. Five
years. 2. In
accordance with the plans. |
|
Application No C19/0355/17/LL 7, Beddgwenan Estate, Llandwrog PDF 95 KB Application for the alteration of the roof at the front of
the building in order to facilitate on extension to the existing property. LOCAL MEMBER:
Councillor Eric Merfyn Jones Additional documents: Minutes: Application to alter the
roof at the front of the building in order to facilitate an extension to the
existing property. (a) The Development Control
Manager elaborated on the background of the application, noting that this was
an application to extend the current two-storey house at the rear and to the
front. The extension would include
making internal alterations including moving an existing bedroom to the new extension
space and creating a bathroom in place of the former bedroom, as well as
increasing the size of an existing bedroom on the first floor and extending the
existing hallway on the ground floor. It was explained that the
application had been resubmitted as a previous application for the same
proposal had been refused, and that it was a Local Member who was submitting
the application to the Committee as he was of the opinion that a further
assessment of the plans was required. It was highlighted that the applicant had
refused to compromise and that the planning officers, although of the opinion
that the proposal was acceptable, suggested that the design could be improved
as the scale of the plan in question was unsuitable. It was considered that the
extension created a dominant, top-heavy and alien feature which would neither
improve its character nor respect its site context within the estate. It was
reiterated that this would be contrary to Policy PCYFF 3 of the Local
Development Plan It was explained that the
property stood in one of the farthest plots from the estate entrance. Despite
this, its setting was visible from the entrance. Although the officers were of
the opinion that the extension would be unacceptable from a visual aspect, it
was not believed that it would have a detrimental effect on the neighbours'
amenities or that it would cause them an unacceptable disturbance. Therefore,
with regard to this aspect, it was not believed that it would be contrary to
the relevant requirements of policy PCYFF 2 of the LDP. (b)
Exercising his right to speak, the Local Member read a letter on behalf
of the applicant, who was unable to attend: It was noted, ·
that the roof's height needed to be raised in order to overcome a lack
of height in the bathroom. ·
that a number of the houses in the estate had been modified by the
original developer, or had been modified after changing hands. ·
that this application was for raising the roof level, and there was no
application to extend ·
the change would barely be noticeable. ·
although the officers refused the application, it was highlighted that
there was no public objection to the proposal. The local member (a member
of this Planning Committee) made the following main points: ·
That a number of the houses in the estate had been adapted and, although
the applicant had planned adaptations to houses numbers 11 and 12, he regretted
that he had not adapted his house sooner. ·
That letters of support of the application had been received · That the estate was ... view the full minutes text for item 5.4 |