Agenda, decisions and minutes

To accept any apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillor ⁠Gareth A Roberts

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

a)         The following member declared that he had an interest in relation to the item noted:

Councillor Cai Larsen (a member of this Planning Committee), in item 5.2 (C23/0772/20/LL) on the agenda as he was a Member of the ADRA Board

The Member was of the opinion that it was a prejudicial interest, and he withdrew from the meeting during the discussion on the application and he did not vote on the application.

b)         The following member declared that she was a local member in relation to the item noted:

·         Councillor Anwen Davies (not a member of this Planning Committee), in item 5.3 (C23/0793/40/DT) on the agenda

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

None to note

The Chairman shall propose that the minutes of the previous meeting of this committee, held on the 26^th of February, be signed as a true record.

The Chair signed the minutes of the previous meeting of this committee, held on 26 February 2024, 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.

Erection of building to provide office and canteen space (Class B1) including refuse storage, access, servicing, landscaping and other associated works. 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Kim Jones

Link to relevant background documents

DECISION:

To delegate powers to the Senior Planning Officer to approve the application subject to completing discussions regarding highways and archaeology matters as well as material planning conditions relating to:

1.               Time

2.               Compliance with the plans

3.               The development shall be implemented in accordance with the ecological/tree reports

4.               The operational methods must be followed as highlighted in the CEMP / pollution prevention plan.

5.               You must act in accordance with the recommendations of the Flood Risk Assessment

6.               Permitted use of building for any purposes within Use Class B1 only

7.               Welsh Water conditions

8.               Ensure Welsh / Bilingual signs

9.               NRW Conditions

10.            If, during the development, it is found that there is contamination that was not previously noted present on the site, then no further development (unless this is agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority) will be undertaken until a remedial strategy detailing how this unspecified contamination will be addressed is presented to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 

Notes:

1.  Welsh Water

2.  Land Drainage Unit

3.  NRW

Erect a building to provide an office space and canteen (Class B1) including refuse storage area, service access, landscaping and associated works.

Attention was drawn to the late observations form by Natural Resources Wales (NRW) that responded to the Construction Environmental Management Plan and Pollution Prevention Plan submitted.

·         The Development Control Team Leader highlighted that it was an application to erect a new building to provide office space and a canteen (B1 Use Class) to serve a Siemens business site in Llanberis together with associated developments; the development would include erecting a three-storey building on sloping green land north of the company's existing buildings. It was reiterated that the need for a new facility had arisen as a result of renovation work in one of the other buildings on the site regarding the need for more manufacturing space. The renovation would mean a loss of serviced space such as offices and a canteen that have now been put in temporary buildings. It was noted that the proposal would not lead to an increase in the density of the use of the site but is rather an effort to provide appropriate ancillary facilities to serve the existing business.

It was reported, in accordance with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Wales) Order 2012 (as amended), that the development was defined as a "major development" due to the floor area proposed to be provided. In line with the appropriate procedure, a Pre-application Consultation Report was received as a part of the application. The report indicates that the developer has informed the public and statutory consultees of the proposal prior to submitting a formal planning application. 

In the context of the principle of the development, it was noted that the application site was located outside the development boundary of the Local Service Centre of Llanberis as defined in the LDP, however it was part of a major site that is already in use by industry. Reference was made to Policy PCYFF 1 of the LDP which encouraged refusal of developments outside the development boundaries, unless they are in accordance with local or other national planning policies, or that the offer showed that a location in the countryside was essential. In this case, when considering that the proposal was to extend an existing business already on the site, it was totally expected that the facility was provided on the site and therefore there was appropriate justification for allowing such a development at this location.

In the context of Infrastructure and Sustainability matters, it was highlighted that Welsh Water had confirmed that there would be adequate capacity in the local sewerage system to meet the requirements of the developments by the end of March 2025 and that a connection to the water supply could be ensured. It was also noted that sustainable draining systems (SuDS) are required to control surface water for every new development of more than 100m² in floor area and an application will need  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Residential development and associated infrastructure works 

LOCAL MEMBERS: Councillor Iwan Huws and Councillor Sasha Williams

Link to relevant background documents

DECISION: To delegate powers to the Head of Planning to approve the application, subject to a further assessment of the need for an educational contribution and to an appropriate 106 Agreement if required. The permission will be subject to the following conditions:

1.     Commence within five years

2.     Development to comply with the approved plans

3.     Must submit and agree on a programme for providing affordable housing

4.     Must agree on external materials including the roofing slates

5.     Removal of permitted development rights

6.     Welsh Water Condition

7.     Highways Conditions

8.     Biodiversity conditions

- pre-occupancy condition to submit details of bird and bat boxes to be approved

- pre-occupancy condition to submit and approve a 5 Year Set-up and Maintenance Plan as documented in the Green Infrastructure Statement

9.     Trees conditions

10.  An Arboriculture Method Statement must be prepared

11.  The operational methods highlighted in the CEMP must be followed

12.  A Welsh name for the housing estate and individual houses.

13.  A condition to ensure that fences are erected to protect the habitat near the stream

14.  A condition to ensure that a play area with equipment is provided

15.  Restrict the use to C3 use class only

16.  Land drainage condition – in accordance with the details received or in line with a plan to be submitted and agreed in writing with the LPA.

Note – Welsh Water, Land Drainage Unit, Transportation Unit, Fire Service and

Natural Resources Wales

Residential development and associated infrastructure works

Attention was drawn to the late observations form regarding educational contribution, further observations from the Community Council noting concerns regarding flooding, drainage and parking, biodiversity matters as well as the applicant's agent's response to those observations / concerns.

a)      The Planning Manager highlighted that this was a full application for a residential development with associated infrastructure work on a plot of land outside, but immediately adjacent to, the development boundary of the Coastal / Rural Village of Felinheli as defined by the LDP. Proposal includes:

·         23 affordable dwellings

·         Landscaping work including planting new trees and hedges

·         0.14ha of public open land as well as a specific play area

·         New vehicular access to the south of Y Wern estate through an existing informal parking place (the existing parking areas will be relocated)

·         Creation of a new estate road to meet the servicing vehicular access requirements

·         Drainage measures that will involve creating two surface water attenuation pools and diverting the existing public sewer.

It was explained that the application site was partly on brownfield land near the existing housing estate, partly on an overgrown wooded site and the rest on agricultural land. It stood partly within the Gwersyll Dinas Listed Monument (CN 047) buffer zone and a small part of the site within Flood Zone B as defined by the maps that accompany Technical Advice Note 15 "Development and Flood Risk".

In the context of the principle of the development, reference was made to Policy TAI16 which enabled housing developments on sites that were outside, but abut the development boundary but it had to be ensured that the proposal complied effectively with Policy requirements. As an exception to the usual housing policies, proposals for developments of 100% affordable housing may be suitable on a site of this type which directly abuts the development boundary. The policy noted that the site must form a logical extension to the settlement; it was noted here that the application site filled space within the development pattern of the village with the existing development surrounding three sides. It was reiterated that Policy TAI16 also showed that the acknowledged need could not be addressed within a reasonable timetable on a market site within the development boundary which included a requirement for affordable housing. It was reported that no housing sites had been earmarked within the development boundary of Felinheli and when considering the physical restrictions of the land within the development boundary of the village in terms of matters such as gradient and flood risk, it was not believed that it was likely that a suitable site for a development of this size to be available within the village in a reasonable time.

It was also noted that proposals on such a site must be for a small-scale development, which was proportionate to the size of the settlement, unless it could be clearly demonstrated that there was a demonstrable requirement for a larger site. It was noted that 1,177 residential properties  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

External alterations to previously approved scheme under ref: C08D/0205/40/LL to include first floor extensions, external materals and appearance. 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Anwen J Davies

Link to relevant background documents

DECISION: To refuse.

1.     The proposed development's size, bulk, design and finish would not reflect or respect the site as it would create an unacceptable and incongruous feature on the form and character of the landscape and the local area and, therefore, on the local area's visual amenities. The proposal is therefore contrary to criteria 1, 2 and 3 of Policy PCYFF 3 of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan, 2017, as well as the advice contained in the Technical Advice Note 12 document: Design.

External changes to a plan previously approved under plan number C08D/0205/40/LL including a first-floor extension, elevations and external materials

a)      The Development Control Team Leader highlighted that this was a full application to erect extensions to a two-storey house. ⁠⁠It was explained that the Council gave permission for single-storey and part two-storey extensions under reference C08D/0205/40/LL in 2008 with part of the extensions on a single-storey level partially erected, and that this application meant a change in the plan agreed in 2008. It was reiterated that the extensions had been located on the front, side and back elevation of the house and was a modern design and substantially bigger than the existing building.

It was noted that the site was located in open countryside and outside any development boundary as defined in the LDP. The existing property was a traditional two-storey house, finished with pebbledash, with the nearest residential property approximately 120m away.

The application was submitted to the committee at the local member’s request.

Reference was made to Policy PCYFF3 which stated that proposals would be approved, including extensions and changes to existing buildings and structures, if they complied with a number of criteria. The Local Planning Authority considered that the proposal, because of its size, bulk, design and finish, would create an alien feature in the open countryside and have a substantial negative impact on the area's visual amenities as it would not be in keeping with the character and appearance of existing house and houses in this area of countryside. As a result, the intention would not meet criteria 1, 2 and 3 of policy PCYFF3 in the LDP which ensured that proposals added to and improved the character and appearance of the site and the building in terms of setting, appearance, scale, height, mass and elevations treatment; that they respected the context of the site and its place in the local landscape; and used materials that were appropriate to its surroundings, nor the requirements of Technical Advice Note 12: Design that supports proposals of high-quality designs.

There were no objections in the context of highways, access and language, and the Biodiversity Unit had confirmed that the bat survey received along with plans that offered biodiversity enhancements were acceptable.

Having considered every relevant planning matter, it was not considered that the application could be supported based on its size, bulk, design and finish as it would create an alien feature in the countryside and have a substantial negative impact on the area's visual amenities. It was considered that the proposal was unacceptable and it was recommended that it should be refused.

b)      Taking advantage of the right to speak, the agent noted the following observations:

·         That the application was for extensions and changing materials of an application approved in 2008 under ref:C08D/0205/40/LL

·         That the original application was to create a floor extension with an area of 242m², and a first-floor extension of 60m² to the existing house in Tŷ'n Llwyn.

·         Building work  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Proposed works at the Viaduct Gardens region of Barmouth to include: 

1.    Repairing, strengthening and raising the height of an approximately 60m section of sea wall, 

2.    Erecting a new setback wall and floodgate/barrier in the area behind the primary sea wall, 

3.    Install a new drainage network to manage surface water and overtopping in the area behind the setback wall and flood gates, 

4.    Installation of Property Flood Resilience (PFR) in the Quay area, 

5.    Installation of a new surface water outfall pipe that protrudes from the sea wall into the harbour.  

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Rob Triggs

Link to relevant background documents

DECISION: To approve with conditions

1.     Commencement within five years.

2.     In accordance with the plans and documents submitted

3.     Public Protection conditions – timings

4.     Submit and reach agreement on a CEMP

5.     Submit and reach agreement on soft and hard landscaping details

6.     Implement the landscaping details

7.     Plan to protect the structural condition and permanent access of the mains public water supply crossing the site

8.     Plan to protect the structural condition and permanent access to the public waste water assets crossing the site

9.     Working hours of construction period

10.  Sheet piling hours

11.  Implementation of noise level mitigation measures

12.  Installation of noise barriers

13.  Submission and agreement on a Noise Management Plan for the construction period.

14.  Archaeological conditions

Note:- 

SuDS, NRW, Network Rail, Public Protection and Welsh Water advice to the developer.

Proposed works in the area of Barmouth Viaduct Gardens

a)         The Planning Manager highlighted, ⁠that it was an application to improve the flood defence mechanisms. The work would include:-

·         Repairing, strengthening and raising the height of approximately 60m in length of sea wall;

·         Erection of secondary walls with new floodgates in the area behind the main sea wall;

·         Installation of new drainage network in order to manage surface water and flooding in the area behind the secondary walls and flood gates;

·         Installation of new surface water outlet pipe which obtrudes from the sea wall to the harbour;

·         Installation of flood resilience equipment in properties in the quay area.

It was reported that a sea wall would be re-built and surfaced with stone from the existing wall with a parapet wall section approximately 1.2 metres above the nearby floor level.  The existing rock armour would be redistributed on the highest part of the beach across the front of the sea wall and reinforced with additional rocks as required. A new setback wall would be erected along the northern boundary of Viaduct Gardens, which would include glass on the highest section. The work would also include a plan to manage surface water with floodgates, gutters, drains and a variety of adaptations to the existing system as well as a new surface water outfall on the beach. At the end of the work, the public place in Viaduct Gardens would be restored through landscaping work and the installation of new street furniture.

In the context of the principle of the development, it was noted that the site was partially located within the development boundary of Barmouth. As a result, and without any other options in terms of an alternative location to provide the work, it was considered that the proposal was acceptable in terms of Policy PCYFF 1 of the LDP. Reference was made to policy AMG 4, which referred to Coastal Protection and asked for proposals to show that a preponderant economic and social benefit would derive from the development. It was also noted that proposals must ensure that there was no unacceptable harm to water quality, public access, the built environment, the character of the landscape or seascape and biodiversity impacts.

Several technical reports were submitted with the application which included significant evidence that justified the work in question.

In the Shoreline Management Plan, the policy for this part of Barmouth, which includes the harbour section and the access road, as well as seaside defences notes Hold the Line. The Shoreline Management Plan states "There would be a need to maintain and raise
defences around the harbour and to maintain the road and railway defences and
probably to further reinforce the defence at Ynys y Brawd. This is considered as sustainable and maintains the important use of the harbour and access to the town." As a result, it was considered that the principle of maintaining and increasing the height of defences around the harbour, the road and the railway was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.