Agenda item

Change of use of agricultural building into a boat engine mechanic workshop (Use Class B1)

 

LOCAL MEMBER: COUNCILLOR  DAFYDD MEURIG

 

Link to relevant background documents

 

 

Change of use of agricultural building into a mechanic workshop for repairing boat engines (Use Class B1)

 

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

 

The members had visited the site.

 

a)         The Planning Manager elaborated on the background of the application, and noted that it was an application for converting an existing agricultural building into a workshop for repairing boat engines. It was noted that this was a retrospective application as the use of the building had already commenced.

 

It was explained that the proposal involved using the building mainly to repair and service boat engines, together with storing maritime equipment for on-line sales mainly. It was noted that the business employed nine full-time members of staff with the aim of serving up to five customers a day (who would attend the site via appointment only). There would be five parking spaces for customers on the site, five spaces allocated for staff and seven separate spaces for general parking. There would also be an allocated space for storing up to four boats on the site. The Planning Statement submitted stated that up to five goods/boats deliveries would be expected to the site every week during the summer, with fewer in the winter.

 

The site was located near the buildings of the former Tal y Bont Uchaf farm, which comprised a substantial house, annexe and outbuildings and was a (Grade II) listed building. Access from the public road was along a private track with approximately 120m of this being a public footpath. The building was in a rural area approximately 1.2km to the east of the development boundary of the village of Llandygai.

 

A decision on this application was deferred at the Planning Committee on 23/09/19 so as to allow a site visit to be arranged and in order to undertake further assessment of the impact on the amenities of the local area from traffic using the site.

 

The Transportation Unit had no objection to the proposal and had stated that they did not believe that the development would have a detrimental impact on any road. However, it was noted that considerable objection had come from the local community, claiming that the increase that had already occurred with traffic was already harming road safety and local amenities. (This was the basis for conducting a site visit).

 

In considering the previous use of the building for agricultural purposes, it was noted that there was nothing to prevent large vehicles/machinery from coming and going to the site for that purpose. In addition, when considering the confined nature of the site, it was not believed that there was sufficient space to extend the business beyond its current boundaries and therefore the size of the site in itself would limit the amount of traffic.

 

Having weighed up the application and the revised plans against the requirements of the relevant policies, as well as considering all the observations and objections received during the consultation period, it was considered that the proposal was acceptable for approval with relevant conditions and that the development would not lead to unacceptable harm to neighbouring amenities or those of the wider area.

 

b)         Taking advantage of the right to speak, an objector to the application made the following main points. He noted that he was the Chair of a Community Council, that he represented the residents on the road leading to the site entrance, and was one of those residents who had expressed concerns. He added that he supported the comments of the Local Member submitted on 23.9.19.

·         This was a retrospective application, therefore the residents knew what the application's impacts were on the amenities of local residents

·         He objected to the application, based on the adverse and significant impact on the surrounding area's residential amenities due to traffic movements (Planning Policy PCYFF2)

·         There had been a significant increase in traffic - he did not acknowledge the transport log that had been submitted, as it did not accord with the residents' experiences

·         Residents had had to change their walking patterns

·         He congratulated the company on their success. Nevertheless, he drew attention to the planning statement where it was highlighted that it was intended for the business to continue to grow, hopefully at a nearby industrial estate.

·         The application should be refused based on the adverse effect on the safety of the users of Lôn y Gatws. He referred to Policy TRA 4 which noted that applications should be refused on the basis of causing unacceptable harm to the safe and efficient operation of the highway. There were four young residents living here; use of prams, and it also formed part of the no. 5 national cycle route.

·         He accepted that the company could not control drivers' choices as to which road they used to transport goods.

·         The application was contrary to a key policy in the interest of rural areas CYF6 'encourage small-scale applications that are suited to a rural area'

·         He disagreed with the attempt to compare traffic associated with the business with agricultural traffic

·         Farmers knew the area and were more sensitive to the needs of local residents

 

c)       It was proposed and seconded to permit the application in accordance with the recommendation

         

ch)     During the ensuing discussion, members made the following main observations:

·         The business employed 9 people, the site was orderly, no noise concerns

·         Concerns regarding the access

·         Users could be encouraged to use an alternative route from another direction to reach the site, which had passing places and less impact on residents

·         A suggestion to install signs e.g. no access (to the right) when exiting the site

·         The safety of pedestrians and cyclists must be considered

·         Although supportive of small industries in the countryside, local concerns must also be listened to. If there were concerns about safety and disturbance, we would need to take notice of strong objections

·         It was difficult to differentiate between business traffic and farm traffic in respect of safety.

 

d)         An amendment was proposed to the original proposal, to defer the decision so as to have an opportunity to hold a further discussion with the applicant to try to alleviate the concerns so that there would be no inconvenience to the local residents.

 

dd)    In response to the observations, the Senior Development Control Engineer noted that there were two roads leading to the site which therefore made it difficult for the Transportation Unit to object to the application.

 

In response to the observations, the Assistant Head of Environment Department noted that the impact on residents' amenities should be measured against the economic benefit. It was reiterated that it would be difficult to control the direction of traffic to the business without restricting the network for everyone. Attention was drawn to the additional observations where it was highlighted that the applicant was trying to encourage customers and distribution firms to use the Ponc y Lon access. It was noted that it would be possible to consider installing signs under a traffic regulations arrangement, and to raise awareness and encourage users to use the alternative route, but it would be difficult to enforce one particular route.

 

In response to a question regarding the number of accidents / complaints on the road, the Planning Manager noted that information about accidents had not been submitted, but the Enforcement Unit had received complaints.

 

In response to the amendment, the Senior Solicitor noted that clearly, this entailed voluntary actions for the applicant to consider taking rather than matters that would be enforced through enforcement or conditions.

 

In response to a question regarding binding the use to the operator in order to alleviate concerns in future should the industrial use change, the Planning Manager highlighted that the applicant now owned the house therefore it would be possible to impose a condition so that this situation remained.

 

The Assistant Head of Environment Department noted that thorough consideration had been given to the concerns and he suggested that there was little to be gained from any further discussions. He reiterated that a condition could be imposed which would bind the use to the operator, and that delegated rights could be used to discuss a voluntary plan with the transport officer in attendance.

 

e)         A vote was taken on the amendment - the amendment fell

 

f)          It was proposed and seconded to approve the application with a condition to bind the use to the operator.

 

RESOLVED to approve the application subject to the following conditions:

 

·         Five years

·         Development to comply with the approved plans

·         Restrict the use to Class Use B1 (light industry) only

·         Shall not be open to the public or for receiving deliveries outside the hours of 08:00 - 16:30 (Monday to Friday only)

·         Natural Resources Wales condition(s) as required

·         The business use shall be bound to the property known as Tal y Bont Uchaf