Agenda item

Application for the erection of a three storey three bedroom dwelling with parking area.

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Gareth Griffith

Link to relevant background documents

DECISION: To delegate powers to the Planning Manager to approve the application, subject to the expiry of the consultation period and the following conditions: -

1.         Time

2.         In accordance with the plans

3.         Slate

4.         Exterior finishes.

5.         Access and parking

6.         Reasonable Avoidance Measures for reptiles.

7.         No vegetation to be cleared during the bird nesting season.

8.         A Welsh name for the houses.

Application for the erection of a three-bedroom, three-storey house with a parking area

a)    The Planning Officer highlighted that the application shared the same design as application 5.4 - it was a full application for the erection of a three-bedroom, three-storey house with a parking area. It was noted that the site was located within the development boundary of the village of Felinheli (as defined in the LDP), near a class 3 public road (Caernarfon Road). It was added that the applicant intended to move to live permanently in the unit that would be called Heulyn.

It was explained that extant planning permission existed for the erection of a three-storey residential property (an application was approved to erect a three-storey dwelling under reference C12/0986/20/LL, as well as to extend the period when the development can be commenced by an additional 5 years under reference C17/1232/20/LL). This meant that the previously approved unit had already been included in the land bank. Having considered this situation, no change has occurred in the residential units being provided and therefore the proposal would not be contrary to policy TAI 4 and did not provide more units than the indicative housing provision set for the settlement in that policy. As a result, no special justification was needed for the development. To this end, therefore, it was believed that this latest proposal was acceptable in principle.

In the context of visual amenity, with the setting of the proposed house in relation to nearby dwellings, its design and scale, it was considered that the proposal would not have a detrimental impact on the residential and general amenities of nearby residents on the grounds of loss of privacy/overlooking and noise nuisance - the proposal was therefore acceptable in terms of the requirements of Policy PCYFF 2 of the LDP.

In the context of protecting existing open spaces and disused railways, the agent submitted an amended site plan to show that there was sufficient distance between the property and the residential garden and the development would not overlap the disused railway line. Similarly, the proposal would not disrupt the use of the safeguarded open space and it did not overlap substantially in this space (the property's garden would be located within the boundary of the designation). To this end, it was considered that the proposal was acceptable as it would not affect the protected open space or the disused railway and would therefore comply with the requirements of policies ISA 4 and TRA 3 of the LDP.

Having considered all the relevant matters, including local and national policies and guidance, as well as all the planning background, it was considered that the proposal was acceptable and satisfied the requirements of the relevant policies.

b)    It was noted that the objector wished to state the same observations as those in application 5.4

c)    Taking advantage of the right to speak, the applicant’s agent noted the following points:

·           That the site was located within the development boundary of the village of Felinheli and bordered with Caernarfon Road that runs along the southern boundary of the site.  The site was in a residential area and the plot was situated on land next door to the application discussed in 5.4. 

·           Pre application discussions had taken place with the Local Planning Authority prior to the submission of a full application - the discussions had continued with planning officers and highway officers since the application's submission.

·           There was previous permission on the site for a four-storey development to provide 4 flats. It was noted that this permission was protected and was a material planning consideration when determining the planning application. 

·           That there was also permission on the site to develop a three-storey residential house and this permission may be implemented up until January 2023 - the fall-back position that could exist under the developments previously approved on the site had to be considered.

·           During the period of considering the application, there had been extensive discussions with the planning officers and the highways officer and amendments had been presented to the plan in response to the observations received.

·           The highways department and planning officers were satisfied with the proposal.

d)    Taking advantage of the right to speak, the local member made the following points:

·         The building did not have the same impact as application 5.4, however, the same matters arose.

e)    It was proposed and seconded to approve the application

RESOLVED to delegate powers to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the application, subject to the following conditions;

1.         Time

2.         In accordance with the plans

3.         Slate

4.         Exterior finishes

5.         Access and parking

6.         Reasonable Avoidance Measures for reptiles

7.         No vegetation to be cleared during the bird nesting season

8.         A Welsh name for the house.