Agenda and minutes

To accept any apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors Simon Glyn, Louise Hughes, Dilwyn Lloyd

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

a)    Councillor Berwyn Parry Jones (who was a member of this Planning Committee), in item 5.5 on the agenda, (planning application number C19/0398/11/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 Chamber during the discussion on the application.

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

·        Councillor Gareth A Roberts (who was a member of this Planning Committee), in item 5.2 on the agenda, (planning application C19/0398/11/LL)

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, 21^st October 2019, be signed as a true record.

The Chair signed the minutes of the previous meeting of this Committee, held on 21 October 2019, 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.

RESOLVED

5.1.      Application Number

Construction of two affordable dwellings (amended application).

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor John Brynmor Hughes

Link to relevant background documents

Construction of two affordable dwellings (amended application)

Attention was drawn to the late observations form that had been received

The members had visited the site

a)         Reference was made to the additional observations sheet where it was noted that a request had been received from the applicant to defer discussion on the application until the Committee meeting in January 2020 so they could have an opportunity to discuss the options referred to in the report. It was added that the Planning Department had no objection to defer the application.

b)         It was proposed and seconded to defer the application

c)         RESOLVED to defer the application until the meeting on 13 January 2020

Application to demolish building (Use class B8) and erect supermarket (Use class A1), creation of 113 parking spaces, soft landscaping works, reconfiguration of site access, including the creation of a roundabout and alterations to existing parking arrangements fronting Dunelm Store together with alterations to service access

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Gareth A Roberts

Link to relevant background documents

a)         An application to demolish a building (Use Class B8) and erect a supermarket (Use Class A1), create 113 parking spaces, soft landscaping work, reconfiguration of the site access including the creation of a roundabout and alterations to the existing parking arrangement in front of Dunelm Store, together with changes to the service access. (Although the application was for an A1 food retail store the evidence and documentation submitted as part of the application referred specifically to Aldi Stores Ltd) 

The Members had visited the site

b)         The Planning Manager elaborated on the background of the application, and noted that it had been deferred from the committee meeting on 21.10.19 following receipt of
comments submitted by the Agent in response to the committee report. It was noted that it was an application to demolish an existing building that was formerly a cash and carry and to erect a supermarket and associated developments on a site located off Caernarfon Road, Bangor, outside the defined town centre but within the development boundary.

There was reference in the report to the many planning policies that were relevant to the proposal along with a full assessment of any impact on town centre vitality and viability. The report also addressed the Evidence of need, the Quantitative Need; the Qualitative Need and the Sequential Need. On the whole, it was not considered that the relocation of the Aldi store would have a substantial impact on city centre viability and vitality. It was explained that section 5.16 - 5.18 of the report noted that policies MAN1 and MAN3 stated that retail and commercial proposals outside the defined town centres would need to be supported by evidence of the need for additional provision.

In the context of qualitative need, the applicant had demonstrated that there was a qualitative need for additional floor space in an enlarged Aldi store and it was considered that the proposal would improve the overall qualitative choice within the immediate area and the wider catchment area serving Bangor, enhancing its position as a regional shopping centre.

The Local Planning Authority had engaged in pre-application discussions with Aldi for some time and it was referred in the report that pre-application discussions had also allowed the Authority to have input into the site selection process and officers were satisfied with the conclusions of the sequential assessment and were not aware of any sequentially preferable sites. It was recognised that it was not possible to extend the shop in its current location.

It was acknowledged that there were economic and social benefits to be derived from the proposal and that it would be likely to make a positive contribution to the area’s economy in accordance with the aims of the JLDP.  Attention was drawn to the observations of the Language Unit which had concluded that risk to the language was neutral as the new jobs created would be available to the local population.

In terms of visual improvement, it was reported that there were no concerns in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Demolition of existing building and construction of a 3 storey residential building comprising of 28 extra care flats (16 two-bedroom flats and 12 one-bedroom flats, ancillary ground floor uses including communal facilities, office, plant room, bin store and buggy store) and associated car parking and landscaping

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Dylan Bullard

Link to relevant background documents

         Demolition of existing building and construction of a 3 storey residential building comprising of 28 extra care flats (16 two-bedroom flats and 12 one-bedroom flats, ancillary ground floor uses including communal facilities, office, plant room, bin store and buggy store) and associated car parking and landscaping.

a)         The Planning Manager elaborated on the background of the application and noted that the site was located within the town of Pwllheli and within a Conservation Area. It was explained that the proposal was described as extra care flats for those aged over 55 years, and the floor plans showed that all the flats were self-contained with a bedroom(s), bathroom, lounge and kitchen, as well as a communal lounge and relatively small kitchen attached to it.

         It was highlighted that the Adults, Health and Well-being Department had confirmed that they were supportive of the application and that the demand for this type of provision was likely to increase over the next 20 years, with Pwllheli identified as a growth area. It was noted that ADRA was the applicant and that the information submitted with the application highlighted that 100% of the units would be affordable, which meant that the proposal satisfied the requirements of policy TAI 15.  It was reported that the Housing Strategic Unit had also confirmed that the proposal met the requirements of the area, and that the Housing Association was a partner for this development. The property also met Development Quality Requirements and had been included within a programme to receive a Social Housing Grant.

         In the context of general and residential amenities, it was highlighted that the rear elevation of the new building was partly two-storeys and partly three-storeys and faced the rear of the Penlon Llŷn housing terrace. It was explained that amended plans related to windows and the relationship between the development and existing houses as well as some of the distances between them and any impact on the amenities of nearby residents. It was noted that it was proposed to use the area between the new building and the boundary of the housing terrace as a communal garden with a car park located to the east of the building being retained for parking uses.

         In the context of open spaces, it was highlighted that policy ISA5 confirmed the need to assess the area's needs for providing appropriate open spaces as a result of the proposed development (more than 10 living units). However, in accordance with the wording of the Supplementary Planning Guidance, there was no need to request a contribution towards an open space in this context.

         In considering biodiversity matters, it was noted that a Habitats Survey had been received with the Biodiversity Unit confirming that the report had dealt with the majority of biodiversity concerns on the site. In order to be able to support the proposal, it was added that there was a need to confirm the recommendations and mitigation measures within the Mitigation Statement which was to include details regarding the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Application to site four safari tents, one sauna building and retention of children's play area and associated works

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Craig ab Iago

Link to relevant background documents

Application to site four safari tents, one sauna building and retention of children's play area and associated works

Attention was drawn to the late observations form that had been received

a)        The Planning Manager elaborated on the background of the application, and noted that this was a full application to site four safari tents, construct an associated building to be used as a sauna along with other associated work including creating parking spaces and a turning area for vehicles, landscaping, connections to utilities and installing sewage treatment works.  In addition to this, a children's play area which had already been created within the same site would be retained. It was explained that the application was a re-submission of a previously refused application, with amendments to certain aspects, including the relocation of the site to a location nearer to the applicant's residence. It was also explained that a new location plan had been received that morning which changed the red/blue line which outlined the application site.

Attention was drawn to policy TWR 5 which stated that proposals for touring sites, camping or alternative temporary camping accommodation sites would be permitted provided they comply with all the relevant criteria.

It was argued in the Planning Statement submitted with the application that policy TWR 5 should be considered as the tents would not be permanent, because they would only have a limited connection with the land. However, the planning officers were of the opinion that the most relevant policy was policy TWR 3, as in the case of the previously refused application, as more permanent elements were being proposed as part of the development.

            Attention was drawn to confirmation in the information submitted with the application, that the tents' frames and canvas covers would be removed, as well as the timber deckings which would now be laid on the ground and secured with a series of pegs. Despite the information, officers were of the opinion that creating other permanent elements to remain on the site at all times, namely electricity/water/sewerage connections for the four individual tents, in addition to the stone foundations under the sauna building, was contrary to criterion 3 of policy TWR 5. Officers also questioned the practicality of dismantling the tents and ancillary equipment (namely the bathroom and kitchen areas) and fully removing them from their site at the end of the season.

In addition, part of paragraph 6.3.85 of the explanation for 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 was considered that the proposal to install electricity, water and sewerage connections and a stone base at the start of a holiday season, and then to remove them at the end of the season, complied with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.