Agenda, decisions and minutes

To accept any apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillor Louise Hughes

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

)         The following members declared that they had an interest in relation to the item noted:

·         Councillor Elin Hywel in item 5.4 (C22/0898/42/LL) on the agenda due to a family connection.

The Member was of the opinion that it was a prejudicial interest, and withdrew from 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 Rob Triggs (not a member of this Planning Committee), in relation to item 5.2 (C21/0575/00/LL) on the agenda

·         Councillor Gareth Tudor Jones (a member of this Planning Committee) in relation to item 5.4 (C22/0898/42/LL) on the agenda

None to note

The Chairman shall propose that the minutes of the previous meeting of this committee, held on 7^th November 2022, be signed as a true record.

The Chair accepted the minutes of the previous meeting of this committee, held on 7 November as a true record.

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.

Two storey side and rear extension.

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Ioan Thomas

Link to relevant background documents

DECISION:

To approve – conditions:

1.    Five years to commence the work.

2.    In accordance with plans.

3.    Opaque glass to be installed 1.8m in height along the southern side of the proposed balcony.

4.    Prior to the commencement of work on the site, submit details showing the retaining wall.

5.    Complete work on the retaining wall prior to the commencement of work on the extension.

6.    Finish to match the existing house.

Information note:

Welsh Water

Protected species

Two-storey extension to the rear and side of the dwelling.

a)    The Planning Manager highlighted that this was a full application to erect a two-storey extension on the rear elevation of a two-storey property. The extension would comprise a bedroom and bath on the ground level and a kitchen with a front balcony on the first-floor level. The application was submitted to committee as the applicant's father was a Local Councillor.

The house, set on a sloping site that had been dug in, was located within a housing estate and the town's development boundary and the front garden was much lower than the back garden. The extension would fill an empty corner at the back of the house with external stairs along the southern side of the extension forming the access from the front garden to the back; these stairs would be located along the property's boundary with the neighbour.    It was likely that only the first floor section of the rear of the extension would be visible from the estate road to the east, with only a glimpse of the extension's front elevation from the county highway to the west.   

It was considered that the design and appearance of the proposal were acceptable and in terms of visual amenities, very little of the extension would be visible from public vantage points. The proposal therefore complied with policies PCYFF 2 and 3 of the Local Development Plan (LDP).

In terms of transportation and access matters, it was highlighted that observations had been submitted by the Transportation Unit stating that it had no objection in principle, however, from the plans submitted it appeared that the proposal could include a structure to support the stability of the adjacent highway. It was reiterated that it was uncertain from the plan whether the structure already existed or was part of the application and therefore it was intended to ask the applicant to provide further details for clarification. It was noted that a condition would need to be imposed to submit details of the retaining wall prior to commencement of work on the site.

The proposal was considered acceptable as it would not have an impact on the street scape, the amenities of nearby residents or road safety. 

b)    It was proposed and seconded to approve the application in accordance with the recommendation.

RESOLVED: To approve – conditions:

1.         Five years to commence the work.

2.         In accordance with plans.

3.         Opaque glass to be installed 1.8m in height along the southern side of the proposed balcony.

4.         Prior to the commencement of work on the site, submit details showing the retaining wall.

5.         Complete work on the retaining wall prior to the commencement of work on the extension.

6.         Finish to match the existing house.

Information note:

Welsh Water

Protected species

Conversion and change of use of a single dwelling to form 6 x 1 bed apartments

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Rob Triggs

Link to relevant background documents

DECISION: To approve with conditions

1.    Five years.

2.    In accordance with the documents/plans submitted with the application.

3.    Any alterations to external elevations of the building to be finished to be in-keeping.

4.    Condition to agree on affordable housing scheme.

5.    The flats hereby permitted to be for C3 use class only from the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Amendment) (Wales) Order 2022 and not for C5 or C6 use.

6.    Submit and agree on details of storage for waste / recycling bins.

7.    Working hours.

Notes - Welsh Water, Party Wall Act

Conversion and change of use of a single dwelling to form six one-bedroom flats

Attention was drawn to the late observations form.

a)    The Planning Manager highlighted that this was an application that involved converting and changing the use of a single dwelling to form six one-bedroom flats.  One flat would be created in the basement, two on the ground floor and then one flat on the first, second and third floors.  Externally, the change included replacing one window with a door and constructing a steel walkway frame at the rear on ground floor level. The site was within the Abermaw development boundary and the property formed part of a row of houses. The application had been submitted to Committee as it involved five or more houses.

It was reported that Abermaw, in the LDP, had been identified as a Local Service Centre under Policy TAI 2 which supported housing developments that would meet the Plan’s strategy, which was based on the Policy's indicative supply. From the information received from the Joint Planning Policy Unit, it was noted that the indicative supply level for Abermaw over the Plan period was 91 units, with 50 units completed between 2011 and 2021 and 36 units with extant planning permission. The proposal would create 6 additional living units meaning that Abermaw had reached the indicative growth level for this development and the proposal would be acceptable in terms of Policy TAI 2 of the LDP.

There was a reference to Policy TAI 9 which permitted the sub-division of existing properties to self-contained flats provided they conformed to the four criteria within the policy.  Attention was drawn in particular to criterion (4) which noted that the proposal must not exacerbate existing parking problems in the local area. It was reported that although there were no parking spaces within the property curtilage, the existing property had nine bedrooms and the proposal would provide a total of six bedrooms. It was reiterated, due to the reduction in the number of bedrooms provided, that the Transportation Unit considered there would be less demand for parking spaces locally and there would be a positive impact on the local parking provision. The proposal was therefore acceptable in terms of criteria (4) of Policy TAI 9 of the LDP

It was noted that a third party has submitted observations highlighting concerns that the flats would be used as holiday flats and the impact of this on the town with the possibility that it would become similar to other areas in Gwynedd and further afield.  In response, it was noted that the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Amendment) (Wales) Order 2022 which had come into force on 20/10/22 had made changes in terms of the class use of residential units and the C3 class use was now recognised as dwellings used as the sole or main residence. Two use classes had been added - C5 for dwellings used in a different manner to a sole or main residence and C6  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Alterations to access and install 1.8 meter high fence

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Rhys Tudur

Link to relevant background documents

DECISION: To approve with conditions

1.            In accordance with the plans submitted with the application.

2.            Work to be undertaken in accordance with access statement.

3.            Any vegetation /fence /wall within the visibility splays should be no higher than 1 metre.

4.            Work to be completed within three months of the date of this permission

Note - Welsh Water Letter 10/10/22, highways permit for work on highway verge

Amendments to access and erection of 1.8m fencing

a)    The Planning Manager highlighted that the application, which was part retrospective, involved amending an access and installing a high fence on the site in the countryside directly near a class 3 road which ran from Llanystumdwy to Rhoslan. It was noted that the aim was to create an access to the woodland that would measure approximately 24.5 metres wide and to install a gate 10 metres back from the highway. A 1.8m security fence would be erected between the gate and the visibility splays and vegetation would be cut back and maintained within the visibility splays to a height of less than 1 metre.

Although recognising the concerns of neighbours, the application in question did not involve any change to use/activities that would take place within the woodland itself. 

The application had been submitted to the Committee at the Local Member’s request.

Reference was made to the observations received from the Transportation Unit. It did not object to the proposal, however it was proposed that a condition be imposed to prevent the visibility splay from being affected. The condition would ensure that the maintenance work was completed in accordance with the plans and the access statement and that any vegetation and/or fence/wall within the visibility splays should be no higher than 1 metre. It was reiterated that it would be appropriate, under the circumstances of this application, to include a condition that work was to be completed within a specific timetable suggesting that 3 months was a reasonable period.

It was considered that the proposal complied with the requirements of the relevant policies.

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

c)     In response to the Community Council's objection that the fence was too high, it was noted that there was no reasoning behind the height of the fence, but that the height assisted in holding back the vegetation. It was reiterated that the fence did not enclose the entire site and was not intended to keep livestock. Therefore, there was no justification for the height.

RESOLVED: To approve with conditions

1.         In accordance with the plans submitted with the application.

2.         Work to be undertaken in accordance with access statement.

3.         Any vegetation/fence/wall within the visibility splays should be no higher than 1 metre.

4.         Work to be completed within three months of the date of this permission.

Note - Welsh Water Letter 10/10/22, highways permit for work on highway verge

Erection of Chapel of Rest 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Gareth Tudor Jones

Link to relevant background documents

DECISION: To defer at the request of the applicant's agent

Construction of Chapel of Rest

Attention was drawn to the late observations form.

a)    The Planning Manager highlighted that the applicant's agent had requested a deferral to discuss the transportation matters of the application in question. It was also noted that additional information had been received from the applicant which addressed one of the reasons for refusal. 

b)    It was proposed and seconded to defer the application. 

RESOLVED: To defer at the request of the applicant's agent