Agenda item

Resubmission of an application to change the use of the existing B1 office unit into a mixed use comprising a medical outpatient unit (use class D1) and office space (B1).

 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Menna Baines

 

Link to relevant background documents

DECISION: ⁠To APPROVE the application contrary to the recommendation.

 

CONDITIONS:

1.     5 years

2.     In accordance with the plans

3.     When the use hereby approved terminates, the use must be reinstated back into B1, B2 or B8 use.   

 

A resubmission of an application to change the use of the existing B1 office unit into mixed-use consisting of a medical outpatient unit (use class D1) and office space (B1).

 

         Attention was drawn to the Late Observations Form.

 

a)               The Planning Officer highlighted that this was a resubmission of an application that had been refused in November 2025 for a change of use from an office to a mixed-use Office/Medical Outpatient Unit within a vacant unit at Llys Castan, Parc Menai, Bangor. ⁠It was highlighted that the proposal was to make internal alterations to the ground floor only with a site plan for 13 parking spaces next to the unit, and 13 additional adjacent spaces, which would give a total of 26 parking spaces for the unit.

 

The unit is located within Parc Menai which has been designated in the Local Development Plan (LDP) as the Main Business Site of the Sub-Regional Centre; which is reserved for certain employment uses. It was explained that alternative uses were only permitted in exceptional cases, and that the plan's policies promoted town centre developments in order to improve the vitality and viability of town centres.

 

It was noted that, ordinarily, the application would be determined under delegated rights, but correspondence had been received from two local members to Bangor calling in this application to the committee.

 

Reference was made to Policy CYF5 which states that proposals to release land on existing employment sites safeguarded for Use Class B1, B2 or B8 in accordance with Policy CYF1 for alternative uses will be granted only in exceptional circumstances. Based on the information submitted, no special circumstances had been proven. In addition, the Local Planning Authority was not convinced that there were no suitable alternative sites within the development boundary for the proposed use.

 

It was noted that the agent had submitted additional information regarding properties that were unavailable at the time of completing the sequential assessment, along with confirmation of the reasons why they were not suitable. They had also highlighted situations where it was not appropriate to consider properties that are unable to meet the developer's commercial needs, and as a result, only sites that are available to rent are relevant in this case. Whilst the agent continued to be of the opinion that no other suitable property was available, the Local Planning Authority still believed that the proposal was contrary to Policy CYF5 of the LDP.

 

It was highlighted that policies PS15 and MAN 1 of the LDP opposed developments that would detract from the vitality and viability of town centres and retail areas, maximised opportunities to reuse suitable buildings in town centres, and opposed the extension of retail and leisure developments outside town centres unless they are supported by evidence of the need for additional provision, and meet the sequential approach set out in national planning policy. The Local Planning Authority continued to be of the view that the proposal could undermine the busyness, function and viability of Bangor City centre and therefore considered that the proposal did not comply with policy PS 15 and MAN 1 of the LDP.

 

It was reiterated that it should be ensured that the proposal complies with all the criteria of Policy ISA 2 of the LDP and, despite acknowledging all the background information submitted to explain the specialist and fairly unique nature of the proposed facility, it was considered that the proposal was unacceptable based on principle as the proposed community facility was not located within the development boundary, near the development boundary, or within a cluster; the proposal was therefore contrary to the requirements of Policy PCYFF1 and ISA2 of the LDP.

 

It was reported that visual amenities, general and residential amenities, transportation and access issues, language issues, and biodiversity issues, had been fully addressed and assessed, as had all comments from those objecting.

 

Having considered all Planning considerations, it was considered that the proposal as submitted, was neither acceptable nor met the requirements of relevant policies. The Officers recommended that the application be refused.

 

b)   Taking advantage of the right to speak, an objector to the application made the following

              observations:

·        That he had sound local knowledge and a professional and business understanding of the proposal

·        That the officer's recommendation to refuse was robust as was a second report by an independent planning consultant.

·        That two local Members to Bangor had called in the application, believing that there was a sound basis for doing so. His role was to highlight the flawed basis of their decision and refute the false merits of the proposal: The Members believed that the justification for the proposal was,

·      Suitable and compatible use in Parc Menai

·      Precedent of comparative uses at Parc Menai

·      Meeting a need in the area

·      No other location – need to pick up/drop off patients outside the door

·        He submitted personal comments that refuted the above views.

1. Policies PS13 and CYF1 – Parc Menai has been designated as a Main Employment Site, and was therefore protected, primarily for B1 Planning Uses. While Policy CYF5 allows consideration of alternative uses on such designated sites, this would be subject to a series of criteria. The proposal does not meet the exceptional circumstances required to justify a non-Class B1 Use in this location, so the protected nature of the site would be jeopardised.

 

2. Policies PS15 and MAN1 – uses that are more appropriate to a town centre location, and that are proposed outside that location, must be justified by evidential need and the available sites must be subjected to sequential testing. In this case, the proposed use would be more appropriate in a town centre location, where suitable sites are available, and it would contribute to the vitality, viability and regeneration of Bangor City centre. The business model and what appears to be a 'need' in this location is strongly challenged. There is no specific requirement to locate the business in this particular location, or near Ysbyty Gwynedd.

 

3. Policy ISA2 – the proposed use is defined as a community facility, which must be located within a defined development boundary. In this case, the proposed use and location is contrary to policy and jeopardises the principles of locating community facilities in sustainable locations.

 

4. Policies PS4, PS5 and TRA4 – the key principle is to locate developments, primarily used by the public, in a sustainable location, accessible by other modes of transport, including walking and cycling. In this case, the Officer's supportive position, together with that of the Transport Unit, is the subject of debate based on key information:

·      that the parking requirements identified for the proposed use have been greatly underestimated.

·      The Arriva 5A bus service is not a 'regular' one as referenced, realistically. A bus service to this location has been greatly influenced by Parc Menai's employment trend, so only a morning and evening bus service is provided for office staff arriving at and departing from Parc Menai businesses.

 

In summing up, he noted,

·         There was no rational justification for locating the proposal at Parc Menai.

·         For the second time, exceptional circumstances had not been proven to contravene established planning policy

·         That other more appropriate sites are available in town centre locations

·         That the Highways Unit's report is erroneous and factually incorrect.

·         That he was asking  the Committee to acknowledge the Officer's recommendation and refuse the application.

 

c)     Taking advantage of the right to speak, the applicant noted the following observations:

·        The business would provide a specialist health service to local patients in response to the healthcare crisis in North Wales which has specialist waiting lists of up to 4 years.

·        In 2023, the business, across its premises, had provided free access to 12,000 patients which resulted in the identification of 53 early cases of cancer.

·        The unit at Parc Menai had been empty for a while. Although the unit has been on the market for 20 months, there has been no interest in office use and therefore, this clearly highlights that there is no demand for B1 use.

·        Concerns suggest that a location in Bangor City Centre should be prioritised, but creating a health centre requires a calm environment, convenient access for vulnerable patients, good facilities, a door drop-off point and safe parking nearby. Realistically, Parc Menai is the only site that meets these requirements.

·        The units in Bangor City Centre are unsuitable due to size, a lack of parking and its environment for vulnerable patients.

·        That Cyngor Gwynedd has already accepted the principle – dentist and optician medical units already operate under the same use class in Parc Menai, why is it therefore not acceptable for this proposal?

·        Planning policies should serve the people, not hinder improvements and access to people's healthcare. Asked the Committee to consider the wider picture and recognise the crisis and support the application in the interests of the community

·        This is not just a decision for a building, but a decision that will give access to care and save lives

 

ch) Exercising the right to speak, one of the Members who had called in the application made the following observations;

·        That Parc Menai's status as a Business Park had been meaningless in practice for years; an orthodontic business was granted permission by the Committee, and the concept was completely scrapped with Coleg Menai's application – despite officers having recommended that the application be rejected, it was permitted on appeal, and therefore, unlike the planning officers, PEDW (Planning and Environment Decisions Wales) did not recognise the Parc's status as a Business Park.

·        The application granted permission by the Committee for an orthodontic business was granted primarily because of convenient access to a service. There had been a rationale to permit an orthodontic business because of accessible access, why not allow this?

·        Locating the business in the city centre would not be reasonable for many

·        It was essentially a consultation business with treatment rooms to support the consulting aspect. How different is this from going to get advice from a lawyer or accountant? – there were legal and accounting business units located in the Parc. What's the difference?

·        Patients are unable to get to the service in the city centre

·        Asking the Committee to approve the application.

 

d)     It was proposed and seconded to approve the application, contrary to the recommendation.

 

Reason: That there were 'special circumstances' here and therefore the application complied with policy B1. It would be difficult for vulnerable people to access such a service in the city centre.

 

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

·      That the location was suitable and convenient for patients

·      That Bangor City Centre is not suitable for this type of service – need convenient access for vulnerable patients.

·      Improving Bangor City Centre or improving patient service? – access to the City Centre is difficult – North Wales Health Services need a boost

·      Patient care is important.

·      Changing people's shopping habits is needed in order to regenerate the City centre.

·      Concern again that comments had not been received from Bangor City Council - what can the Committee do to facilitate this?

·      That such a resource is needed, but is here the most suitable place?

·      The Council was being criticised for moving businesses/services from the high street

·      That there was a medical centre development for the City Centre which will be located near the bus station and within walking distance.

·      Approving this would detract from the regeneration of Bangor City Centre – it would set a precedent.

 

In response to a question as to whether there were other vacant units at Parc Menai, it was confirmed that there were vacant units there, and that this had been submitted as part of the application by the agent.

 

RESOLVED: To APPROVE contrary to the recommendation.

 

CONDITIONS:

 

1.    5 years

2.    In accordance with the plans

3.    When the use hereby approved terminates, the use must be reinstated back into B1, B2 or B8 use.