Erection of a two storey extension to the existing office to provide toilets, showers and more office space together with the erection of 3 retail units (A1) and extend the existing car park
LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Gareth W Griffith
Link
to relevant background documents
Minutes:
Construction of two-storey extension to existing office to provide
toilets, showers and more office space together with the construction of three
retail units (A1) and extending the current car park.
(a) The
Planning Manager elaborated on the background of the application and noted that
the design and access statement explained that the building would facilitate
natural supervision in a central location between the port to the south west
and the port system to the east. It was also intended to operate the port gates
from the building. The building would also provide new facilities including
toilets and showers in a central location for marina users.
Attention
was drawn to the fact that ownership had been changed since submitting the
application. A letter had been received from the new owner stating his
intention to continue with the application.
It
was noted that the application site was entirely within the Felinheli
development boundary. It was added that the application site also made use of
previously developed land and that this was encouraged through Planning Policy
Wales and the JLDP.
A
number of observations had been received objecting on the grounds that the
building was a dominant development, which was too big and would have a
negative impact on the character of the marina which included listed buildings.
On the other hand, observations had been received in favour of the development
which acknowledged that the proposal would offer a visual improvement to the
area by getting rid of the mobile cabins and the area would be much more
attractive.
It
was noted that in assessing the location, height and bulk of nearby buildings
that included three-storey houses, a block of flats and a substantial hotel in
the context of the natural level of the landscape, it was not considered that
the development would be a dominant structure or that it was too big for the
site. It was also considered that the design and the materials were acceptable
to the location. It was also not considered that the development would be
harmful to the setting of the nearby listed buildings. It was considered that
it was reasonable and necessary to impose a condition and to ensure that the
retail units were not constructed without the offices to ensure a satisfactory
appearance to the development and to protect the area's visual amenities.
It was considered that the impacts associated with
offices, amenity facilities and small retail units could be acceptable close to
residential houses, especially given the current land use. To protect the residential amenities of the
nearby houses, it was considered reasonable to restrict the shops' opening
hours to between 8am and 8pm every day and also to prevent deliveries outside
of these hours.
The application was accompanied by a flood
consequence assessment and Natural Resources Wales had confirmed that potential
consequences could be managed sufficiently on this site provided that
conditions were imposed in relation to the finished floor level of the retail
units, incorporating flood damage prevention measures in the existing building
and its extension and reaching agreement on and the implementation of flooding
action plan.
It was noted that the plans showed an intention to
extend the car park in order to serve the development. The Transportation Unit
had no objection to the proposal based on imposing a condition which prevented
the use of the car park as a boat storage area. A high number of objections
were received on grounds of parking issues and problems which already existed
in the area and the effect of the proposed development on this.
Following further discussions, observations were
received from the new owner, stating that there would be no objection to
imposing a condition to prevent the car park from being used to store boats. It
was also considered appropriate to ensure that the car park would be available
for customers of the new shops together with users of the marina by condition.
It was considered that imposing such a condition could offer improvements to
the area as there was currently no control over the car park and the condition
should reduce the need for boat owners to park on the side of the road by
keeping the car park for cars only.
The
development was acceptable in terms of relevant local and national policies for
the reasons noted in the report.
(b) Taking
advantage of the right to speak, an objector noted the following main points:-
·
That he was the Chair of a Committee of most
residents of the Old Slate Quay;
·
Any new development would lead to an
overdevelopment of the site;
·
That the local member and the Community Council
were supportive of the objection;
·
The report did not give consideration to the
planning application approved in 2010, although it had not been developed, it
would be in the near future;
·
The development would affect the area's character;
·
That parking issues already existed in the area.
(c) The following main points were
made by the local member (not a member of this Planning Committee):
·
That there were already associated facilities on
the site, but that the previous owner had leased them out;
·
Impact on parking and transport, problems in this
area already;
·
That it was misleading in terms of the car park; it
was used to keep boats. Where would the boats be kept should a condition be
imposed preventing them from being kept there?
·
That large buildings were taking over the area;
·
That there was a need to consider the 87 houses
that would be impacted by the development;
·
He asked the Committee to consider refusing the
application.
(ch) In
response to the above observations, the Planning Manager noted:
·
The Community Council had not objected
but they had offered observations as noted in the report;
·
That there had been a change in
ownership and the original associated facilities were not available for users
therefore consideration could not be given to them. The proposed associated
facilities were located in a prominent and better place for users;
·
It was considered that the proposal was
not an overdevelopment of the site.
·
That the condition clearly prevented
the car park from being used to store boats. Should there be a need to move a
boat from the water on a crane, it was possible to keep the car park clear for
the relevant period. The applicant could be asked for more information if there
was a wish to do so.
It
was proposed to refuse the application contrary to the officers’ recommendation
as it was an overdevelopment of the site, the proposal would add to the current
parking and transport problems, the impact on listed buildings and the impact
on the amenities of local residents. The proposal was seconded.
The
Senior Planning Service Manager noted that the planners' role was to assess
applications and all of the information received, and to present a robust
recommendation. He noted that consideration had been given to local
observations. He suggested that consideration should be given to holding a site
visit as the main concern was the size of the development. He noted that it
would be extremely difficult to justify refusing on the grounds of parking and
transport issues, considering the Transportation Unit's observations. In terms
of issues relating to design, the development's size, the visual impact and the
impact on nearby listed buildings, these may be considered on the site before
reaching a decision. In was noted that, in the meantime, it would be possible
to ask the applicant to confirm practical details in terms of moving the boats.
An
amendment was proposed to hold a site visit, to ask the applicant for further
information in terms of the situation with the current associated facilities,
as well as confirmation of the use of the car park and how it was intended to
move the boats from the dock to the land in future. The amendment was seconded.
RESOLVED to hold a site visit, to ask the applicant for further information in terms of the situation with the current associated facilities, as well as confirmation of the use of the car park and how it is intended to move the boats from the dock to the land in future.
Supporting documents: