Demolish existing storage unit and construction of 2 holiday units (revised application).
LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Gruffydd Williams
Minutes:
Demolish
existing storage unit and build two holiday units (amended application)
(a) The
Senior Development Control Officer expanded on the application’s background and
noted that the site was located in the countryside and within the Llŷn and
Bardsey Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest. Access was gained to the site along an
unclassified road which had access to a class 2 road approximately 85 metres
south of the site.
Reference
was made to the responses to the consultation process together with the
relevant planning policies within the report.
It was noted that policy TWR 2 of the Local Development Plan supported
the development of new permanent holiday accommodation provided they are of a
high quality in terms of design, setting and appearance. The policy also enables new build
accommodation, if the development is located within a development boundary, or
makes use of a suitable previously developed site. There was an existing holiday unit at Ty'n
Pwll Cottage and the proposal in question would therefore extend the existing
holiday accommodation establishment. It
was therefore considered that the development was acceptable in terms of the
principle of building new accommodation units.
It was explained that the application was a
resubmission of a previously refused application, as it was considered that the
scale of the proposal in question was excessive for the site and did not
reflect its surroundings. In terms of the number of units and design, it was
considered that the proposal in question was an improvement on the previous
application.
The
Transportation Unit had no objection in terms of transport and access matters.
Having
assessed the proposal against the relevant policies and considered all the
responses and observations, it was considered that the use, design and proposed
materials were acceptable and that they would not impair the amenities,
character or appearance of the site, nor the surrounding area. The planning officers’ recommendation was to
approve the application and to include a condition to restrict the use to
holiday accommodation only and to maintain a register of users.
(a)
The
local member noted that he did not support the application for the following
reasons:
·
that
there was no shortage or demand for more holiday accommodation
·
that
demolishing the hay shed and constructing two units in its place would set a
precedent for similar future applications
·
approval
should not be given for the conversion of such farm buildings
(b)
A
Member supported the above observations and stated further that there were
plenty of holiday homes and gave an example of four houses that had been sold
recently in the village of Edern as holiday homes. There was also concern about the tendency
to re-name and Anglicise house names.
Housing estates in the village had holiday homes and it was asked how
many of these houses had registered as holiday units for business tax.
(c)
It
was proposed and seconded to refuse the application on the grounds of an excess
of holiday homes.
(dd) In
response, the Planning Manager explained that officers could be requested to
undertake more research in order to assess the cumulative impact of holiday
units, however, it was explained that competition was not a planning matter. However, it was stressed that policy TW2
permitted new buildings on appropriate sites and the officers were of the view
that the site in question was appropriate.
(d)
The
Senior Solicitor added that they had to be mindful if they refused the
application now as there was no numerical evidence.
(e)
As
a result of the above discussion, it was proposed and seconded to defer the
determination of the application until more evidence was received regarding the
numbers of holiday units and the cumulative impact, including information on
the number of holiday accommodation units that have registered as a business.
(ff) In
response, a Member disagreed with the above amendment and made an appeal to
receive a balanced, unbiased report that reflected the actual situation
regarding the number of holiday units in the area. He was of the opinion that
it was possible to investigate the registration for business tax. He currently
felt strongly that insufficient evidence had been presented with the
application. A Member added that
evidence could be gathered through the increase in litter collections to
businesses registered as holiday units.
(f)
It
was suggested that it would be possible for local members to assist by
presenting information regarding how many holiday units were available in their
areas.
(ng) In response, the Planning Manager noted
that a business plan had been submitted, however, it may not address the
members' concerns as outlined above and an assurance was given that the
officers would further investigate the cumulative impact.
(g)
The
Senior Solicitor added, whilst he accepted that every Member had local
information, that the application could not be refused until the specific
statistics were received from the officers and evidence from local members
could contribute to this.
A
vote was taken on the amendment to defer and it was carried.
RESOLVED: To defer the
application until a balanced report is received to include information
regarding the cumulative impact of holiday accommodation units on the local
area.
Supporting documents: