Agenda item

Residential Development of 30 Units (to include 12 affordable units) together with infrastructure, parking spaces, access, footpaths and amenity area.

 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Gareth A Roberts

 

Link to relevant background documents

To refuse the application

 

Reasons:

 

1. Negative impact on the Welsh language
2. Pen y Ffridd Road is unsuitable for access to a development of this size

 

 

         A residential development of 30 units (to include 12 affordable units) together with infrastructure, parking areas, access, paths and an open space

 

Attention was drawn to the late observations form. It was highlighted that appendix 1 (Committee report 20/10/20) of the cooling-off report had been included in the late observations form together with a written submission of the applicant's observations and the objector’s observations as well as the comments of the Joint Planning Policy Unit.

A presentation of the plans subject to the application was given and the amended plan was highlighted that included children's play equipment on the open space.

        

a)    The Assistant Head of Planning and Environment explained that the application discussed at the committee on 20 October 2020 had been refused, contrary to the officers' recommendation. The application had been refused for 6 reasons and consequently the application had been referred to a cooling-off period. 

 

Information was re-submitted to the Committee highlighting the policies, risks and options available to them. Reference was made to an amended linguistic statement that complied with the requirements of PS1 and the relevant Supplementary Planning Guidance together with a plan showing the children's play area and equipment within the application site. In addition, a second consultation was conducted with all the relevant consultees for them to have an opportunity to confirm their views and observations on the application for 30 houses (2 or 3 bedroom semi-detached houses) with 12 of the houses being 100% affordable and 18 of the houses being open market housing and 5 being offered for intermediate rent or a 'rent to buy' scheme. This would enable eligible families to rent a house with the option to buy in the future and within the Bangor development boundary.

 

Reference was made to Part 3 of the report that confirmed the relevant policies together with the responses to the 6 reasons for refusal.  It was added that the report included detailed evidence of the need for housing with the Housing Service and the Joint Planning Policy confirming the need for affordable housing in the area together with the general need for 2 or 3 bedroom housing. The proposal therefore complied with policies TAI 1, 8 and 15.

 

In the context of flooding matters, NRW, the Council's Water Unit and Welsh Water were re-consulted and confirmation was received that they had no objection to the application. The Public Protection Service was re-consulted regarding land contamination and it was reported they did not have any objection to the application and they were satisfied for the remedial strategy to be implemented by imposing a standard planning condition.   It was added that the Transportation Unit had no objection in terms of road safety, traffic flow and the capacity and suitability of Ffordd Pen y Ffridd and the Ysbyty Gwynedd roundabout. 

 

It was considered that the contents of the report responded to and overcame the 6 reasons for refusal. No objections had been received from the statutory consultees or the other relevant consultees and therefore in the opinion of the Assistant Head, there was no sufficient evidence to support the 6 reasons for refusal.  Consequently, reference was made to the possible risks to the Council as a result of refusing the application referring specifically to the possible substantial financial risks for the Council in an appeal, as it was not considered that there was evidence to defend the reasons for refusal.  It was also confirmed that the applicant had submitted an appeal to the inspectorate and it was understood that the applicant intended to make an application for costs.

 

In section 5 of the report the options open to the Committee were listed. It was emphasised that there were risks with each of the refusal reasons and the risk increased as the number of reasons to refuse increased.  It was reported that should the Committee decide to refuse the application, then in accordance with usual procedure the proposer and seconder would have to defend the appeal on behalf of the Council, however, Officers would give advice and support to Members as far as possible, as had occurred with past appeals.  

 

It was stressed that the recommendation was to approve the application and there was sufficient evidence to confirm that the development complied with the relevant planning policies.

b)    Taking advantage of the right to speak, the Local Member made the following points:

·         Following canvassing work, holding discussions and meetings locally there was sufficient evidence that there was no local need for the development - no one locally supported the development. 

·         All the arguments had already been submitted.

·         The site was not suitable for a housing development

·         The application needed to be refused

 

c)    Proposed (Councillor Gruffydd Williams) and seconded (Councillor Simon Glyn) to refuse the application on the grounds of the negative impact on the Welsh Language and transportation matters (Pen y Ffridd road was unsuitable for access to a development of this size).

 

ch) During the ensuing discussion, the following observations were made by Members:

 

·      No sufficient amendments to the original report / assessment

·         12 affordable houses not enough - the rest of the houses were open market housing 

·         Why consider 'Bangor' as a community? Bangor was a patchwork of individual communities and therefore it was unsuitable to set a basis for Bangor as one entity

·         It was necessary to further consider the impact on the Welsh language

·         The Ysbyty Gwynedd Roundabout would reach capacity as a result of the improvements to schools - the impact of this on the infrastructure had not been evidenced - a back-up plan was required if there was congestion   

·         There was a need to respect the wishes of the local community who objected the development as well as the views of the Local Members

·         The infrastructure was not sufficient

·         The application was fragmented -  there would be a detrimental effect and impact on the Welsh language together with transportation 

·         The unsuitability of the narrow road into the estate had to be considered

 

·         That the proposal complied with the Gwynedd Council Housing Strategy and provided housing for local people very similar to Yr Hendre development, Caernarfon

·         The site was located within the development boundary of the Local Development Plan

·         No evidence to object - the argument for refusal was weak

 

d)   In response to an observation that the report, in the context of the risks to the Council, was threatening in its nature, the Monitoring Officer noted that the Planning Service had a responsibility to highlight the planning policy situation, the evidence that was to hand including possible risks to the Council, as this was the purpose of the procedure to submit a cooling-off report as the report explains.

 

dd) In response to a question regarding if consideration had been given to the capacity of local surgeries, the Planning Manager noted that the Planning Service sought to consult with the Local Health Board on major applications, however, a response was not received every time.

 

    e)  In accordance with the Procedural Rules, the following vote to refuse the application was recorded: 

           

In favour of the proposal to refuse the application (7):  Councillors Elwyn Edwards, Simon Glyn, Louise Hughes, Gareth M Jones, Huw W Jones, Eirwyn Williams and Gruffydd Williams

 

Against the proposal to refuse the application (3):  Councillors Edgar Owen, Anne Lloyd Jones and Stephen Churchman

 

                        Abstention (1):  Councillor Eric M. Jones

 

      RESOLVED to refuse the application contrary to the recommendation

 

Reasons:

 

1.            A negative impact on the Welsh language.

2.           Pen y Ffridd Road is unsuitable for access to a development of this size