Agenda item

Demolish existing garage and construction of a new garage

 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Gareth Tudor Morris Jones

 

Link to relevant background documents

 

DECISION: To refuse

Reasons – over development

 

Demolish existing garage and construction of a new garage

 

 

a)            The Senior Development Control Officer highlighted that this was a full application to demolish an existing garage and construction of a new garage.

It was explained that the site was located within the existing development boundary of Morfa Nefyn and within a residential area that was mixed in terms of type and form.  It was reiterated that the site and the surrounding area was located within the Llŷn and Bardsey Island Landscape of Outstanding Historical Interest.

 

The application was submitted to the Committee at the local member's request on the basis of over-development of the site.

 

It was acknowledged that concerns had been highlighted by a neighbour, the local member and the Community Council regarding the proposal and, specifically, concern about the future use of the building. It was explained that it was not possible to anticipate what could happen in the future, but that consideration must be given to the proposal as submitted, which was an application to demolish an existing garage and erect a new garage.  It was noted that the roof space of the new building was to be used as an office, but there was no suggestion that there would be any alternative use to that noted. Nevertheless, it was believed that it would be reasonable to include a condition that the building would not be used for any reason other than for ancillary use to the house including as a holiday let.

 

b)            Taking advantage of the right to speak, the applicant’s agent noted the following comments, and introduced a video explaining the logic behind the planning application to refurbish the outbuilding in their garden

·         That they had lived in the house since 2016 and previously they owned Bodfan nearby

·         The family had been in the area since the 1960s - his grandparents and parents owned property in the area and therefore they were greatly committed to the area - they did not intend to sell any property, which was the hot topic these days.

·         The building was in a poor condition and there was a need to replace it with something that was safe, more modern and fit for purpose.

·         The intention was for it to be used for storing boats and tractors.

·         The roof was sagging, which suggested that the beams were giving way. It was considered that the beams were original [since the time when the building was constructed over 100 years ago]. The guttering had now fallen and there were cracks in all of the walls.

·         Grateful if the Committee could consider the application in a favourable light.

 

c)            Taking advantage of the opportunity to speak, the Local Member noted:-

·         That the roof-space was being converted into an office.

·         Local Residents and the Town Council objected on the grounds of over-development - the proposal was substantially larger than the existing.

·         That 6 houses abutted the site

·         The house had also been extended recently

·         Plenty of parking space without needing a larger garage

·         That Morfa Nefyn was fast becoming a holiday home village - Môn Arfon was a holiday home - the garage would be used for business in the future.

·         The relevant condition was not clear enough to prevent alterations in the future - the condition needed to be strengthened so that it was less ambiguous.

 

In response to concerns about the proposed future use, the Planning Manager noted that this was not a planning consideration and that we could not refuse something hypothetical. Even so, it was noted that the wording of the condition referred to the whole building.

 

ch) It was proposed and seconded to refuse the application on the grounds of over-development and visual matters.

 

d)            During the ensuing discussion, the following observations were made by members:

·         The building seemed to be of an acceptable standard

·         Evidence of the need?  This was something desirable, not essential.

·         There was empty space in the house for an office.

 

dd)       In response to a comment that the applicant had permitted development rights, a Member noted that imposing a condition would ensure control, but that confirmation had to be received of the wording and meaning of the condition.

 

e)            An amendment was proposed and seconded to approve with conditions.

 

RESOLVED to approve with conditions

 

·         Commence within five years.

·         In accordance with the plans

·         Materials and colours to be agreed

·         Use of the garage to be ancillary to the house only, and no business use

·         Demolition period to avoid the bird nesting season

 

Note:

Protected Species

Welsh Water

Party wall agreement

 

RESOLED: To REFUSE

 

Reasons: An over-development