Venue: Cyfarfod Rhithiol / Virtual Meeting. View directions
Contact: Lowri Haf Evans Email: lowrihafevans@gwynedd.llyw.cymru 01286 679 878
No. | Item |
---|---|
ELECT CHAIR To elect Chair
for 2020/21 Additional documents: Decision: Councillor Eric Merfyn Jones was elected as Chair of this Committee for the 2020/21 period Minutes: RESOLVED to elect Councillor Eric
M. Jones as Chairman of this Committee for 2020/2021 |
|
ELECT VICE CHAIR To elect Vice Chair
for 2020 / 21 Additional documents: Decision: Councillor Gareth A Roberts was elected as Vice-chair of
this Committee for the 2020/21 period Minutes: Councillor Gareth
A Roberts was proposed and seconded A second name,
Councillor Louise Hughes was proposed and seconded A vote was taken on the proposals RESOLVED to elect Councillor Gareth
A Roberts as Vice-chair of this Committee for 2020/2021 |
|
APOLOGIES To accept any apologies for absence. Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies were received
from Councillor Linda A W Jones and Councillor Elin Walker Jones (Local
Members) |
|
DECLARATION OF PERSONAL INTEREST AND PROTOCOL MATTERS To receive any declaration of personal interest and to note protocol matters. Additional documents: Minutes: a) Councillor
Berwyn Parry Jones (who was a member of this Planning Committee), in item 7.4
on the agenda, (planning application number C19/1072/11/LL), as he was an Adra Board member. The
member was of the opinion that it was a prejudicial interest, and he withdrew
from the meeting during the discussion on the application. The
Solicitor, Rhun ap
Gareth, in item 7.4 on the agenda (planning application number C19/1072/11/LL)
as his parents-in-law lived near the site. The
officer was of the opinion that it was a prejudicial interest and he left the
meeting during the discussion on the application. b) The
following members declared that they were local members in relation to the
items noted: Councillor
John Pughe Roberts (not a member of this Planning Committee) in item 7.2 on the
agenda, (planning application C19/1197/02/LL) Councillor
Gareth A Roberts (a member of this Planning Committee), in item 7.4 on the
agenda (planning application number C19/1072/11/LL) |
|
URGENT ITEMS To note any items that are a matter of urgency in the view of the Chairman for consideration. Additional documents: Minutes: None to note |
|
The Chairman shall propose that the minutes of the previous meetings of this committee, held on the 10th September 2020 and the 24th September 2020, be signed as a true record. Additional documents: Minutes: The Chair
signed the minutes of previous meetings of this committee, held on the 10th and
24th of September 2020 as a true record, subject to noting that Councillor
Gareth T Jones was present at the meetings. |
|
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. |
|
Application No C19/1028/03/LL Wynnes Arms Hotel, Ffordd Manod, Manod, Blaenau Ffestiniog PDF 266 KB Application
for the conversion of a public house to 5 flats together with rear extension
and parking area LOCAL
MEMBER: Councillor Linda Ann Jones Additional documents: Decision: To refuse the application on grounds of: The proposal to convert the building to five
flats is located within an area with a history of flooding, and no information
has been submitted as part of the planning application to show that the risk of
flooding can be adequately regulated; and therefore the proposal is contrary to
policy ISA 1 and PS 6 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local Development Plan
and Technical Advice Note 15: Development and Flood Risk. Minutes: Attention was
drawn to the late observations form. a) The
Planning Manager elaborated on the background of the application, and noted
that it had been submitted to committee in September, where it was resolved to
defer consideration as a result of receiving concerns regarding flooding on the
site. In the meantime, it was reported
that the applicant had informed the Council that he had submitted an appeal to
the Planning Inspectorate due to a lack of decision by the Council on the application
(closing date 20/10/20). Following the
Committee's determination (10 September 2020 meeting), to defer the decision in
order to receive more information regarding drainage matters, the Flood Risk
and Coastal Erosion Management Unit was consulted. A response was received
noting their objection as they were aware that a culverted watercourse ran
through the development site, which had not been identified in the application.
The developer was advised to establish the exact path and condition of the
culvert prior to undertaking any work on the site. It was noted that there was
strong evidence that the watercourse had caused historical flooding to the
cellar floor of the existing building.
The developer was advised to establish the exact path and condition of
the culvert and to prepare a limited Flooding Consequences Assessment (FCA) to
consider if the site may be developed safely in accordance with TAN15. Until an acceptable flooding assessment would
be produced, the Unit would object to the development on the grounds of
flooding risk. In light of the
information received, it was reported that the only option would be to
recommend to refuse the application. b)
It was highlighted that the Local Member objected on
the grounds of flooding concerns c)
It was proposed and seconded to refuse the application RESOLVED to refuse the application on the grounds
that the proposal to convert the building into five flats was
within an area with a history of flooding, and no information had been
submitted as part of the application to show that the risk of flooding can be
managed safely; and therefore the proposal was considered to be contrary to
policy ISA 1 and PS 6 of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan
and Technical Advice Note 15: Development and Flood Risk. |
|
Application No C19/1197/02/LL Canolfan Grefftau Corris, Corris Uchaf, Gwynedd, SY20 9RF PDF 241 KB Create
a touring caravan site for 11 touring units together with siting of a toilet
block and landscaping LOCAL
MEMBER: Councillor John Pughe Roberts Link
to relevant background documents Additional documents: Decision: DECISION – To
approve subject to conditions 1.
Five years. 2.
In accordance
with the revised plans and specialist reports. 3.
Restrict the
numbers to 11 touring units 4.
Holiday season /
siting 5.
Restrict the
units to holiday use. 6.
No touring units
to be stored on the site 7.
Biodiversity 8.
Restrict to the
holiday season. 9.
A register to be
kept. 10.
No tree felling,
hedge cutting or clearing of vegetation within the nesting season. 11.
Agree/control
lighting. 12.
Agree details of
the clawdd. 13.
Agree details of
washing facilities unit prior to being sited on the site 14.
Landscaping 15.
Landscape
maintenance 16.
Submit a
Biodiversity Improvement Plan 17. No ground clearance during the reptile hibernation season in the winter Contaminated Land
Note Minutes: a)
The Planning Manager elaborated on the background of
the application, noting that this was a full application to create a touring
caravan site for 11 touring units together with siting
a shepherd's hut as a washing facility. It was explained that the principle to establish the touring
caravan site was based on Policy TWR5 of the LDP and such developments would be
permitted if they can conform to relevant criteria. It was noted that
the site was located in a field with the lie of the land and existing
landscaping on the boundaries, creating a site that was fairly hidden. In terms
of visual amenities, it was considered that the
proposal had no detrimental impact on the rural character and atmosphere of the
local landscape, which was designated as a Special Landscape Area. In the context of
general and residential amenities, it was considered
that the proposed use would not generate substantially more noise and
disturbance than the existing circumstances bearing in mind that the site
location was near a busy Trunk Road and the Corris
Craft Centre. The observations of the Transportation Unit and the Welsh
Government's Trunk Road Unit confirmed that they had no objection to the
revised plan. In the context of
biodiversity matters, it was considered that the
proposal involved the use of reclaimed land and the land had no current use.
Reference was made to the tree report stating that the
development had been designed carefully in order to retain the existing screen
around the site with the intention of improving this screen with additional
planting along the boundaries. It was highlighted that the Biodiversity
Unit had no objection to this proposal provided that
measures were taken to avoid damage to species and that the site was managed to
create a wild flower meadow. It was noted that
mitigation measures had been outlined in the ecological report. b)
Taking advantage of the
right to speak, the applicant’s agent noted the following points:- ·
Corris
Craft Centre was a long standing tourist attraction ·
The application in question was an opportunity for
diversification of a small facility for 11 touring units and to ensure the
viability and secure the future of the craft centre ·
The applicant had received several requests for such a
provision. The facility would allow
visitors to the centre to stay on for a few days to enjoy what the centre has
to offer, as well as the surrounding area. ·
That it was proposed to retain the trees along the
boundary and to create an additional screen ·
It was an opportunity to create an additional source
of income, to secure employment and a resource that was needed in the area -
that would contribute to the local economy and would be a means of supporting
other local businesses ·
They had collaborated closely with the Planning
Department; and had used the response to the consultation period observations
to ensure a suitable design and plan c) Taking advantage of the right to speak, the Local Member ... view the full minutes text for item 8. |
|
Application for works associated with the
construction of the proposed A487 Caernarfon to Bontnewydd bypass including; ·
Use of land as an extension to the existing site
compound area and provision of a maintenance shed, office accommodation,
welfare and car parking facilities, fuel store, sewage storage tank,
mobile concrete batching plant, mobile asphalt batching plant and construction
of a haul route (temporary use), ·
Construction of a new haul road on the northern
boundary of the existing quarry with temporary connection to the proposed A487
Caernarfon to Bontnewydd bypass route during the construction period, ·
Continued extraction of minerals, removal of material
from a mineral working deposit and existing stockpile of materials, ·
Construction of a hardstanding and siting of plant
machinery for the processing and screening of materials, ·
Disposal of inert waste materials for long-term quarry
engineering/ restoration works.
(Application under Section 73 to vary Condition 3 on planning permission
C17/0011/19/MW to reach the ground levels agreed in restoration plan no.
3030/16, excavation materials that are surplus to the requirements of the
Caernarfon to Bontnewydd bypass project in addition to excavated materials
from other sources, shall be deposited at the site in accordance with the NRW
permit) LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Peter Garlick Additional documents: Decision: DECISION – To refuse the
application The proposal changes the scale or nature of
the previously approved development for "works associated with the construction of the proposed A487 Caernarfon
to Bontnewydd bypass ..." and, therefore, the Authority considers that
condition 3 should not be changed in accordance with s.73(2) (b) of the Town
and Country Planning Act. Minutes: Attention was drawn
to the late observations form a) The
Planning Manager highlighted that application C17/0011/19/MW (approved in June
2017) was subject to conditions for development proposals associated with the construction
of the Caernarfon to Bontnewydd bypass. It was highlighted that the application sought, under Section
73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, to vary one of those conditions.
It was explained that Condition 3 restricted the
import of surplus materials from other areas to what was generated by the
bypass construction project. It
was explained that Section 73 enabled the applicant to
submit an application to develop land without complying with conditions
attached to an extant planning permission.
Under this section the Local Planning Authority
may amend or remove conditions, but may not amend any other part of the
permission. A successful s.73
application results in the grant of a new planning permission and therefore the
original permission remained intact.
When determining a s.73 application, the LPA
may impose conditions beyond those proposed in the application. However, the conditions imposed should only
be ones that could have been imposed on the original
permission. Previously, it was held that the amendments permitted should not amount to
a “fundamental alteration” of the proposal put forward in the original
application. The reasons why the
officers considered that undertaking such a change would not be appropriate via
a Section 73 application, were elaborated upon. The
Solicitor highlighted that the applicant had shared information / additional
opinion with the Members and the response of Council officers to this opinion had been shared with the applicant in April 2020. b) It
was proposed and seconded to refuse the application c) During
the ensuing discussion, the following observation by a member was noted: ·
Why had a new application not been
submitted? ·
Concern that it would have an impact on the timetable
to complete the bypass ·
That a new application should be submitted as a means
of controlling what was placed in the quarry pit ch) In response to an observation regarding
the submission of a new application, it was noted that extensive discussions
had taken place over the last few months and there were differing opinions
regarding the right way forward. d) In
response to the observation regarding the application possibly preventing the
completion of the bypass work, it was noted that the application related to filling
a quarry pit with materials and it should not impair the bypass timetable. RESOLVED to refuse the application due
to the reason that the proposal changes the scale or nature of the previously
approved development for "works
associated with the construction of the proposed A487 Caernarfon to Bontnewydd bypass ..." and, therefore, the
Authority considers that condition 3 should not be varied in accordance with
s.73(2) (b) of the Town and Country Planning Act. |
|
Residential
Development of 30 Units (to include 12 affordable units) together with
infrastructure, parking spaces, access, footpaths and amenity area. LOCAL MEMBER;
Councillor Gareth A Roberts Additional documents: Decision: DECISION ·
To refer the application to a cooling off period ·
To refuse the application for the following reasons • Lack of
need for housing • Linguistic
Assessment is insufficient • Flooding
matters • Land
contamination matters • Transportation matters – Penrhos Road
junction and also Penyffridd Road • Insufficient
provision / contribution of open spaces Minutes: a)
The Planning Manager elaborated on the background of
the application and explained that the proposal was located in Penrhosgarnedd
and was a site previously used by Bangor University as a horticulture field
centre. Currently, it was a plot of
derelict and abandoned land that was overgrown and the site of the former field
centre building, demolished some time ago.
Residential housing surround the site, in the form of an estate and the
site was within the Bangor development boundary. It was reported that the construction of housing on a site
within the development boundary was acceptable.
In the context of the
application, it was highlighted that the proposed density of the housing
development was a little lower than expected, however, bearing in mind the
limitations of the site that included the need to create a wildlife corridor,
retaining the copse, providing open amenity spaces together with safeguarding
an area for land drainage, it was considered that providing 30 units would be acceptable
for the site. It was highlighted that Policy TAI 1 stated that housing would
be delivered through housing allocations together with suitable windfall sites
within the development boundary. It was true that the land in question had not been allocated for housing, but was entirely located
within the development boundary and there was an element of recognition
regarding the growth of Bangor via windfall sites. It was noted that the Bangor indicative supply level over the
term of the Local Development Plan was 969. In accordance with more recent
figures (as a result of regular monitoring), that considered completed units,
the number in the current land bank and the number in the application, the
capacity/indicative target for the site was 10 units. To provide more than the
indicative target, it was explained that the applicant
had to submit a justification that satisfied the Council that the proposal
addressed the recognised need for housing. In this case, 12 of the proposed
units would be affordable housing (a higher percentage than policy requirement)
together with 18 units to be sold on the open market.
It was noted that the housing mix statement
corresponded to the need and the Council's Strategic Housing Unit had confirmed
that the 30 units were on the list of contingency schemes to receive Welsh
Government Community Housing grant bearing in mind that such a development was
a priority. It was also noted
that the applicant had stated there was potential for some open market housing
to be offered as intermediate rented housing or as an equity
sharing scheme that would increase the number of accredited affordable
housing that would be offered. It was added that there
was an element of certainty that the proposal would be realised soon and address
the recognised need for housing in the area.
It was reported that the plan was of high
quality with the feeling and form of an estate that would provide housing for
families with plenty of surrounding green areas. Attention was drawn to the main objections ... view the full minutes text for item 10. |