Agenda item

Front extension, create first floor balcony, alterations to roof and extend outbuilding to create annexe

 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Gareth T Morris Jones

 

Link to relevant background documents

Front extension, create a first floor balcony, alterations to the roof and extend an outbuilding to create an annexe

 

It was highlighted that the application was submitted to the Committee at the request of the Local Member and two other members.

 

(a) The Planning Manager elaborated on the background of the application, and noted that this was an application to erect a porch on the front of the house; install a first floor balcony along the front of the house above existing flat roof sections; to undertake alterations to the roof by installing a slate roof and a small dormer door to the front; front decking; and extend the existing outbuilding within the property's curtilage to create an annexe at Bwthyn Bridyn, Lôn Bridyn, Morfa Nefyn.  It was noted that the property was adjacent to the access to Morfa Nefyn beach, but at a slightly higher level than the beach, with a high boundary wall surrounding the front and sides.  

 

It was reported that the application comprised two elements, namely the extension and the alterations to the house and the extension to the outbuilding to create an annexe.  It was reported that the house currently had an asbestos sheeting roof and it was proposed to re-roof with slate, which was an improvement, together with a small dormer door that would not cause substantial harm to the appearance and character of the front.

 

Several objections had been received to the proposal expressing concern about introducing modern features to the property as the existing fishermen's cottages were unspoiled.  Bearing in mind that only a light glazed screen would be in the front of the balcony and that the building's shape would not significantly change, it was considered that the changes would not significantly harm the appearance of the property to justify refusing the alterations.  Since the alterations to the house were relatively minor, it was considered that they were acceptable additions in terms of appearance, scale and the treatment of elevations and complied with the requirements of policy PCYFF 3 of the Local Development Plan.

 

It was noted that the second element involved erecting an extension on the existing outbuilding that formed part of the ownership of the property.  As the curtilage was enclosed by a high boundary wall, only a small section of the wall and the roof would be visible from the access road to the beach.  It was highlighted that the objections had expressed concern about changing the appearance of a historic building, however, the alterations were not considered to be significantly intrusive and were not unacceptable in terms of scale, height and mass on this site that was enclosed by a high wall.   It was considered that the annexe was in compliance with the requirements of PCYFF3.

 

Reference was made to flooding issues that had been included in the report together with a comment that the plans had changed significantly since the Maritime and Country Parks Officer had submitted his objections.

           

Having weighed up the application and the amended plans against the requirements of the relevant policies, as well as considering all the observations and the objections received during the consultation period, it was considered that the proposal was acceptable for approval with relevant conditions. 

 

(b)     Taking advantage of the right to speak, the applicant noted the following main points:-

·         That his family respected the village

·         That adaptations to the plans had been agreed

·         That using slates on the roof was in keeping with nearby housing

·         The property had been in the family's ownership since 1957 and the family's wish was to safeguard it for the future

·         That it was not proposed to use the house for any commercial enterprise -  it was proposed to be for family use only

·         That the building had been contaminated by asbestos and if work was not undertaken to save it then the house would become a ruin.

·         Asbestos removal was essential and therefore it was an opportunity to update and modernise the house

·         It was necessary to ensure that the house was habitable and suitable for future generations

 

(c)     The local member (not a member of this Planning Committee) noted the following main points:-

·         He considered the adaptations to be substantial

·         The Community Council and the local residents were concerned about changing the area's appearance and look

·         That parts of the application were acceptable - accept that the house needed some 'care'

·         Installing slates in the roof was desirable and would enhance the building's external appearance

·         The extension to the outbuilding to create an annexe was also acceptable as this would again enhance the area's appearance

·         He was not in favour of creating the front extension and a balcony - he objected on the grounds of an over development within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), lands of interest and a sensitive area

·         He noted that the modern design would not be in keeping with the cluster of adjacent housing

·         Although the curtilage was enclosed by a high wall, and there was a suggestion that it was not possible to see this from the beach, he doubted the suggestion and noted that it would be visible from the beach.

·         The balcony would be visible and would change the appearance of the historic building

·         The building was included on postcards that promote the area - need to keep the view as it is.

·         That all the cottages were decent without a balcony

·         That the plan was incongruous and he therefore encouraged the Committee to refuse

 

ch)       A proposal to undertake a site visit was made and seconded.

 

a)            During the ensuing discussion, the following main observations were noted by members:

·           The changes to the roof were to be welcomed as well as improving the outbuilding

·           Installing a balcony would be detrimental to the tranquillity of the beach and would be incompatible with the cluster of housing 

·           The buildings were historic with special merits

·           Need to protect the property from over-development

·           The building required care or otherwise it would fall down

·           The balcony was a step too far, however, sections of the application were to be applauded   

 

(d)     In response to the comments, the Senior Planning Service Manager noted that he accepted there was support for specific sections of the application and it may be possible for the officers to hold discussions with the applicant regarding the balcony.

 

RESOLVED

·         To undertake a site inspection visit.

·         To hold further discussions with the agent / applicant regarding the first floor balcony.