Wrthi'n llwytho
Y penderfyniadau fel y mae cofnodion y cyngor yn eu cofnodi. Bydd crynodeb mewn iaith glir yn dilyn pan fydd wedi'i ysgrifennu.
RESOLVED: To conduct a site visit
RESOLVED: To undertake a site visit.
RESOLVED: TO DEFER SO THAT OFFICERS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE APPLICANT
RESOLVED TO REFUSE THE APPLICATION Reasons: .1. This development would create an urban encroachment onto a greenfield site in open countryside and was not immediately adjacent to the development boundary. It was not considered that the proposal would complement or enhance the character and appearance of the site nor integrate with its surroundings and would not therefore create a reasonable extension to the settlement. The proposal is therefore contrary to the requirements of policies PCYFF 1, PCYFF 3, PS 5 and TAI 16 of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan together with part 2.6 of Technical Advice Note 12: Design which states that design which is inappropriate in its context, or which fails to grasp opportunities to enhance the character, quality and function of an area, should not be accepted, as these have detrimental effects on existing communities. .2. Insufficient information and evidence have been included as part of the planning application to enable the Local Planning Authority to fully assess all necessary material planning considerations. In addition, there is inconsistent and misleading information in the documents submitted regarding the type and size of units to be developed from what was shown on the detailed plans. To enable a complete assessment of the proposal under the relevant policies of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan 2011-2026, further information would be required on the following issues: i. Evidence in the form of a formal market housing assessment proving the need for an affordable dwelling (Policy TAI 16) ii. Evidence of suitability of the housing mix and a valuation of the units (Policies TAI 8 and TAI 15). 3. Based on the submitted information, the Local Planning Authority has not been persuaded that the development would not cause significant harm to the character and balance of the Welsh language in the community and, therefore, the application is contrary to the requirements of policy PS1 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local Development Plan together with the relevant requirements of the SPG Maintaining and Creating Distinctive and Sustainable Communities. 4. Insufficient information has been included as part of the planning application to enable the Local Planning Authority to fully assess the effect of the proposal on local biodiversity. Consequently, the proposal is deemed unacceptable and does not comply with the relevant requirements of policies PS 19 and AMG 5 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local Development Plan and Chapter 6 of Planning Policy Wales. 5. No details of sufficient access arrangements have been included as part of the application and therefore, it is not considered that the proposal meets the relevant requirements in terms of compliance with the relevant criteria of policies TRA 4 and PCYFF 3 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local Development Plan which note the need for new developments to ensure acceptable access provision.
RESOLVED To approve subject to the following conditions: 1 - Time 2 - In accordance with the plans 3 - Contaminated land conditions 4 – Biodiversity conditions, including ensuring enhancements 5 – Food truck only to be located on the site when it is in use 6 - Restriction of food truck hours to 8-7 every day 7 - Agreement on the details of waste management for the food truck 8 - Welsh Signs
RESOLVED: To APPROVE subject to the following conditions: 1. Five years. 2. In accordance with plans and documents. 3. Agree on sound prevention plan and measures for the workshop in the western end of the site. This could include measures such as insulation, agreeing on the location of any extraction systems, hours of use and acoustic fence. 4. Ensure use of bilingual signs that give priority to the Welsh language. 5. Landscaping. 6. Landscape maintenance. 7. Need to agree on any extraction systems on the workshop prior to their installation on the building. Full application for the creation of a depot comprising of offices, workshop, storage buildings together with associated works.
None to note
a) Councillor Huw Rowlands (who was a Member of this Planning Committee), in item 5.4 C23/0883/43/LL on the agenda, as he was Clerk to Bontnewydd Community Council, and the Community Council had submitted observations on the application. b) The following Members declared that they were a local member in relation to the items noted: · Councillor Beca Roberts (who was not a member of this Planning Committee), in item 5.1 application number C18/0767/16/LL on the agenda · Councillor John Pughe Roberts (a member of this Planning Committee), in item 5.3 application number C24/0072/02/LL on the agenda · Councillor Gareth Williams (who was not a member of this Planning Committee), in item 5.5 application number C22/0637/32/LL on the agenda · Councillor Meryl Roberts (who was not a member of this Planning Committee), in item 5.7 application number C24/1026/08/LL on the agenda c) All Members declared that they had received a letter relating to application number C24/0072/02/LL on the agenda (item 5.3)
As a matter of order, it was reported that since the Chair was joining the meeting virtually, the Assistant Head of Department would be announcing the results of the voting on the applications.
The Chair accepted the minutes of the previous meeting of this committee, held on 24 March 2025 as a true record
The Committee considered the following applications for development. Details of the applications were expanded upon and questions were answered in relation to the plans and policy aspects.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED: To conduct a site visit
Holiday accommodation development (revised plan) which entails: - · Laying the foundations for lodges with associated decking. · Laying the foundations for glamping pods. · Associated infrastructure to include internal tracks, parking areas, sustainable drainage systems together with foul water drainage. · Soft and hard landscaping including felling some trees, retaining trees and undertaking improvements to the existing woodland. · Construct a reception/sales building together with re-covering the existing building and use as an e-cycle hub with electric charging points. Attention was drawn to the late observations form that referred to revised documents that had been submitted since the preparation of the report, reflecting the reduction in the number of pods and the elimination of development within a zone known as zone 5. It was reiterated that this did not change the assessment or the recommendation of the application. The late comments also set out a landscaping condition, and conditions to agree on a building and tree protection plan and an ecological and planting management plan. a) The Development Control Team Leader highlighted that this was a full application for the provision of holiday accommodation and associated work within an existing woodland to the south-east of the village of Glasinfryn. It was expressed that since the application was originally submitted in 2018, the development had been revised and reduced several times and the number of units has now been reduced to 25 holiday lodges and 4 glamping pods. It was noted that the woodland, which forms the boundary with the Class III Road towards Glasinfryn, was subject to a Tree Protection Order with the remainder of the site being a candidate Wildlife Site. Reference was made to policy TWR 3 which allows proposals to develop new static caravan or new chalet sites, or permanent alternative camping accommodation outside Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Special Landscape Areas, subject to relevant criteria. It was reported that the first criterion specifically referred to an excess of new development, and a 'Landscape Capacity and Sensitivity Study in Anglesey, Gwynedd and the Eryri National Park' to define excess for this site. It was reiterated that the Study identified some capacity for minor to very small developments outside the sites contributing to the Eryri National Park setting within this Landscape Character Area, with the Study defining 'very small' developments as those up to 10 units and 'small' developments as between 10 - 25 units. Although the number of units subject to this application was 29 and recognising that this figure was higher than what is defined as a minor development in the Study, consideration was given to the average capacity of areas rather than individual locations, and consideration of the site as being hidden. To this end, it was considered that there was sufficient capacity for the site in this particular area, and as it was an already well-screened non-invasive site it also complied with the second criterion. In the context of the criterion which refers to the provision of adequate access without significant impairment on the attributes and character of the landscape, together with ensuring that the site is close to the main road network, it was noted that an entrance to the site currently exists with an intention to improve it and provide a visibility splay to the satisfaction of the Transportation Unit as well as protecting the hedge which is subject to the Tree Protection Order. Reference was made to the contents of the detailed impact assessment on the amenities of nearby residents, but ultimately and on the basis of the distance and hidden nature of the site, it was not considered that the proposal would have a significant adverse effect on nearby residents. It was also confirmed that there had been significant discussion about concerns and impacts on trees and biodiversity, and that a number of assessments and surveys had been submitted together with a commitment to provide a plan to manage the site which would include improvements. The surveys submitted were considered to reflect the current situation of the site and highlight the need to manage the woodland to secure the future of the habitat and the biodiversity within it. It was reported that the site had not been designated as a site of National importance. It was recognised to be a candidate wildlife site, but it was considered that the applicant had addressed the needs of the site and as a result the development would be managed and enhanced subject to planning conditions. Therefore, the proposal was considered acceptable in the context of impact on amenities subject to appropriate conditions which would ensure appropriate control, mitigation and improvement measures. Sustainability, flooding, infrastructure and linguistic issues were referred to stating that they had received appropriate attention, and the proposal was acceptable in relation to those issues. The officers recommended to approve the application with conditions. b) Taking advantage of the right to speak, the applicant’s agent noted the following points: · That this was a minor development of a high standard providing a supply of holiday accommodation · The site had been considered ideal for the vision of providing bespoke holidays for visitors to enjoy the area and use the local cycling network · There had been a £2 million investment in the lodges constructed by local suppliers · The only resource on site would be a bike hire facility · There was a Farm Shop within walking distance of the site · The site was rural and well screened · NRW had confirmed that the trees were not ancient – all the trees subject to an order would be retained, but the woodland would need to be thinned out slightly · That he welcomed the officers' recommendation · The proposal complied with relevant policies · No objections had been received from the statutory consultees c) Taking advantage of the right to speak, an objector to the application made the following observations: · Allowing the application would promote and create an independent company · The proposal did not support the local economy or employ locally (except for cheap workers) · That the language statement submitted was weak · Increasing the number of holiday accommodation units in the area had an impact on the local community · There was no intention to work with or 'co-exist' – this was a catalyst for the Anglicisation of the area · That the demand was 'endless' – this could not be satisfied · That Wales was a land of dying communities · They had already taken over the coast, and were now penetrating the countryside · Approval would set a precedent · The Committee was encouraged to refuse the application as it was an over-development – contrary to policies SO1 point 5.4 and 5.5 and PS1 d) Taking advantage of the right to speak, the Local Member made the following comments: · That she proposed that Members visit the site or refuse the application on the grounds that it was an overdevelopment · That she shared the concerns of her constituents · That the report stated 'no static caravans in the area' - this was incorrect: within 3km of the site there were a number of caravan / holiday accommodation sites · That the application reflected a good network of bus connections; this again was incorrect as there was no bus stop at Llys y Gwynt – the nearest stop was 2km from the proposed holiday camp. Therefore, there were no bus connections. · Only two jobs would be created - limited income for the area. The company had its headquarters in Manchester · While noting a local benefit, the welcome pack which would be left for visitors encouraged them to shop on-line which would reduce the need for them to travel off-site; Large companies would benefit from this and not local shops. · That the proposed site was adjacent to wooded land and offered a natural screen to a busy and dangerous road. Felling down the trees would remove this natural defence and create an impact on local residents. · That the application was based on incorrect information · Extracting profit by creating an unnecessary site would be detrimental to the local community · Encouraged a site visit e) It was proposed and seconded to conduct a site visit RESOLVED: To conduct a site visit
Change the use from Main Residence (C3) to Mixed Use - Second Home (5) and short-term Holiday Accommodation (C6) THE APPLICANT HAD WITHDRAWN THE APPLICATION
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED: To undertake a site visit.
Farm diversification plan for the siting of 5 holiday accommodation units on the land .a) The Development Control Team Leader highlighted that it was an application for land use change and the development of new holiday accommodation in the form of 5 permanent glamping pods, associated parking, modifications to the entrance, drainage and landscaping. It was explained that in dealing with the application the proposal was revised by reducing the size of the site and the number of pods from 6 to 5; the site was situated in the countryside and within a Special Landscape Area (SLA) with one residential property adjoining the site and an external building not owned by the applicant to the east of the existing entrance. Given the type of pods and location of the application within the SLA, it was highlighted that point 1 of policy TWR 3 confirmed that proposals to develop new static caravan sites, new holiday chalet sites or permanent alternative camping accommodation within the Anglesey or Llŷn Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and within the SLA will be refused; the proposal was therefore fundamentally contrary to point 1 of policies TWR 3 and PCYFF 1 as it would establish a new permanent alternative camping site within the SLA. In the context of general and residential matters, it was explained that the nearest dwelling house to the site was located at the bottom of the track which would be used by the users of the proposed holiday units and more or less abutted the application site's southern boundary. Currently, this dwelling house is surrounded by agricultural fields and the river and is in a relatively private and quiet location where there is little activity and disturbance for the occupants of the property. Introducing an alternative camping site at this location would have the potential to cause unacceptable detrimental impact on nearby property due to increased activity, noise and disturbance by visitors. It was added that the nature of holiday use entailed different movements to static residential units, and the applicant does not live on the site in terms of being able to supervise and manage the site and respond to any issues or problems that may arise at the time. It was considered that the proposal was contrary to the requirements of criterion 7 of policy PCYFF 2 on the grounds of impact on the amenities of the neighbours. Attention was drawn to highways, biodiversity, archaeological, sustainability, flooding, drainage and linguistic matters which had received appropriate attention and the proposal was considered acceptable in this regard, but it was stressed that this did not overcome the fundamental objection to the proposal as the establishment of a new permanent alternative camping site within the SLA would be contrary to policy. The officers recommended that the application be refused .b) Taking advantage of the right to speak, the applicant noted the following observations: · That the proposal was an attempt to diversify the farm · One of three daughters from a Welsh family, third generation on the farm with a desire to stay and start a family in Corris · The small farm was 300 acres and needed diversification and the establishment of a new venture and additional income to secure the farm's future. Farming was difficult now with rules and constant changes · SLA was a land classification that had been left out of the Eryri National Park, but had recently been designated as an area that was not to be developed. · All the farm's land was located within the SLA and there was no choice but to diversify. · PCYFF 2: Disturbance to neighbours – one nearby property and therefore the units had been moved 70 m away from that property · In addition to reducing unit numbers, there had been no contact from the Officers regarding an acceptable suitable distance. 70m with screening against noise and light pollution was more than acceptable – these were the requirements for residential accommodation · The proposal was supported by a number of national policies and complied with most Local Development Plan policies · That a Community Council meeting was held and a number of local people were in favour of the development and no one objected, but since then several objections had been received from people who had moved into the area who were second home or Airbnb owners who do not want any competition · Overpopulation in Corris from Airbnb’s. The creation of bespoke holiday units would reduce demand for local housing use as holiday units which in accordance with Article 4 would free-up homes for local first time buyers. · The initiative would benefit the village of Corris – the village and local businesses · That the proposal met the requirements of policies relating to the appearance and setting within the landscape and had been designed to a high level. This was the best site on the farm as it had good links to public footpaths · The Committee's support was encouraged to diversify the business so that a local family can stay local and the need to create a future for the farm .c) Taking advantage of the right to speak, the Local Member noted the following comments; · That Parc Eryri was supportive of Sustainable Tourism for rural farms · That more guidance was needed for initial assessments to ensure the viability of the plan · That officers were prepared to grant an application for 25 unsupported holiday cabins, but rejected an application for 5 locally supported cabins · Diversification would ensure a future and security for the family · The cabins would blend into the landscape, sleeping two persons. The cabins would be installed 70m away from nearby property, would be well screened and hidden · It was intended to plant trees that would enhance biodiversity and species · That the Community Council and local people were supportive and although a few had objected, they did not live locally. A number had highlighted their support for the application · It was intended to use the names of the farm's fields on the pods – this was welcomed · The proposal would support local businesses; direct routes from the site to the village; would benefit the village and the area's businesses; would not impede the parking problems in the village · A good link to the area's walking trails and the Dyfi cycle route · There was no excess of holiday accommodation in the area – no glamping pods within 10m of the site · That the Gwynedd and Eryri's Sustainable Visitor Economy Plan 2035 supported diversification for farmers to create a stronger rural economy · Biodiversity unit responded that the bat report was of good quality · The grounds for the refusal was the position of the site within the SLA. What exactly is the designation of a Special Landscape Area? Corris was not within the National Park because it was too industrial, but more recently had been designated as an SLA. · Adverse impact on nearby occupier's property - 70m away from the property, trees would be planted and would be well screened and hidden · The committee was encouraged to support the application - a young, local family's need to farm in the area. Too many young people were leaving the County due to the lack of opportunities. ch) It was proposed and seconded to conduct a site visit to justify the impact on nearby residential amenities .d) During the ensuing discussion, the following comments were made by Members: · There was a need to review policies to work better to support the County's communities – there was a need for flexibility in the process (comparing applications 5.1. and 5.3 which discriminate between local need) · Had the landowner been contacted prior to granting a SLA designation for the area? Was there consultation with the community prior to its designation as an SLA? What was the meaning of this status in this setting? · Policy AMC 2 highlights that 'it is proposed within the SLA, that due consideration be given to the scale and nature of the development ensuring that it will not have an adverse impact...' doesn't AMC 2 give additional discretion when considering Policy TWR 3? In response to a question, whether pods, when considering planning issues, correspond to touring caravans, it was noted that Policies TWR 2 and 3 distinguish between touring and static caravans. In this context, it was highlighted that the pods are physically connected to the ground with water and electricity services and are therefore considered to be static. In response to a supplementary question as to whether the pods could be taken down over the winter months, and this may be acceptable, it was noted that these were not the requirements of the application submitted, but Policy TWR 2 would not prevent development within the SLA landscape. In response to the above comments and planning considerations, it was noted that it should not be considered who submits an application and each application should be considered on its own merits and within local and national policies. It was stressed that while the ability to be flexible in weighing-up some planning decisions, the establishment of a new permanent alternative camping site within the SLA would be completely contrary to policy TWR 3. In terms of the SLA status in Corris, a public consultation would have taken place during the LDP consultation when the landscape was assessed in terms of capacity to receive permanent tourist accommodation while also identifying sensitive areas. The result of that assessment was that the quality of the landscape had been identified as SLA and that this area, like AONB areas, had an excess of caravans and permanent accommodation and therefore a policy had been formulated to protect the sensitivity of those areas. RESOLVED: To undertake a site visit.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED: TO DEFER SO THAT OFFICERS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE APPLICANT
Application for materials recycling area for soils, construction and demolition waste, erection of recycling plant building, concrete batching plant, creation of new vehicular access and internal haul routes, creation of flood water storage areas, retrospective change of use of land for general storage (B8 Use Class) that includes processing, sawing, packing of mineral materials, retention of workshop building, portacabins and associated parking a) Attention was drawn to the late observations form which stated that correspondence from the agent had been received on 24.04.2025 confirming the intention to submit further information relevant to the application. It was highlighted that officers would need time to assess the information and amend the report. As a result, it was suggested that the Committee defer the discussion of the application. b) It was proposed and seconded to defer the discussion RESOLVED: TO DEFER SO THAT OFFICERS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE APPLICANT
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED TO REFUSE THE APPLICATION Reasons: .1. This development would create an urban encroachment onto a greenfield site in open countryside and was not immediately adjacent to the development boundary. It was not considered that the proposal would complement or enhance the character and appearance of the site nor integrate with its surroundings and would not therefore create a reasonable extension to the settlement. The proposal is therefore contrary to the requirements of policies PCYFF 1, PCYFF 3, PS 5 and TAI 16 of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan together with part 2.6 of Technical Advice Note 12: Design which states that design which is inappropriate in its context, or which fails to grasp opportunities to enhance the character, quality and function of an area, should not be accepted, as these have detrimental effects on existing communities. .2. Insufficient information and evidence have been included as part of the planning application to enable the Local Planning Authority to fully assess all necessary material planning considerations. In addition, there is inconsistent and misleading information in the documents submitted regarding the type and size of units to be developed from what was shown on the detailed plans. To enable a complete assessment of the proposal under the relevant policies of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan 2011-2026, further information would be required on the following issues: i. Evidence in the form of a formal market housing assessment proving the need for an affordable dwelling (Policy TAI 16) ii. Evidence of suitability of the housing mix and a valuation of the units (Policies TAI 8 and TAI 15). 3. Based on the submitted information, the Local Planning Authority has not been persuaded that the development would not cause significant harm to the character and balance of the Welsh language in the community and, therefore, the application is contrary to the requirements of policy PS1 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local Development Plan together with the relevant requirements of the SPG Maintaining and Creating Distinctive and Sustainable Communities. 4. Insufficient information has been included as part of the planning application to enable the Local Planning Authority to fully assess the effect of the proposal on local biodiversity. Consequently, the proposal is deemed unacceptable and does not comply with the relevant requirements of policies PS 19 and AMG 5 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local Development Plan and Chapter 6 of Planning Policy Wales. 5. No details of sufficient access arrangements have been included as part of the application and therefore, it is not considered that the proposal meets the relevant requirements in terms of compliance with the relevant criteria of policies TRA 4 and PCYFF 3 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local Development Plan which note the need for new developments to ensure acceptable access provision.
Full application for a development of 8 affordable homes with associated works, on a rural exception site (phase 1 of 2) .a) The members were reminded that the application had previously been submitted but a decision had been made to defer it at that time so that the applicant would have an opportunity to respond to the reasons for refusal and submit further information. It was noted that the application was a full one to erect 8 single-storey affordable houses together with associated works on a rural exclusion site, outside the current development boundary of the village of Botwnnog. The proposal would involve erecting the houses and providing access by extending the existing road through the Congl Meinciau estate and then through a strip of vacant land to the location of the new houses. A parking space would be provided at the front of the individual dwellings. It was explained that recent information submitted indicated a mix in the type and size of the houses to be provided, but that this had not been conveyed in the plans submitted and the plans had not been changed from what was originally submitted. It was added that the proposed plans did not include any information in relation to the arrangement and layout of the gardens or the individual space of the houses or any reference to formal landscaping. It was reported that the application site, was currently overgrown vacant land with traces of past clearance work. It was added that the land and surrounding area were within the Llŷn and Ynys Enlli Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest designation and within the Llŷn West Special Landscape Area. Attention was drawn to an area of land measuring approximately 30 feet wide between the boundary of the existing Congl Meinciau estate and the start of the boundary of the new estate which was owned by someone else and was therefore a civil matter to be decided. This landowner's consent will be required to create access to the new housing along with the need for separate formal planning permission for the creation of a new estate road. The officers continued to recommend that the application be rejected on the grounds that the information received was insufficient and despite the applicant's request for an extension of time to submit more information, it was considered that sufficient opportunity and time had already been granted. Although it was accepted that information had been received, the information was superficial without evidence to support it, and therefore the plan could not be fully assessed. No marketing assessment, mix and valuation evidence had been accepted; no evidence of justification of the proposal was received and the need had not been proven. Although an impact assessment was received, the information was still superficial without evidence of the local situation. A biodiversity assessment or transport and access details were not received. The basic requirements for submitting an application had not been met. .b) Taking advantage of the right to speak, the Local Member noted the following comments; · The Committee was encouraged to allow a deferral for another month · The applicant worked hard to try and seek additional information · Carrying out a site visit would be beneficial .c) It was proposed and seconded to refuse the application. RESOLVED TO REFUSE THE APPLICATION Reasons: .1. This development would create an urban encroachment onto a greenfield site in open countryside and was not immediately adjacent to the development boundary. It was not considered that the proposal would complement or enhance the character and appearance of the site nor integrate with its surroundings and would not therefore create a reasonable extension to the settlement. The proposal is therefore contrary to the requirements of policies PCYFF 1, PCYFF 3, PS 5 and TAI 16 of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan together with part 2.6 of Technical Advice Note 12: Design which states that design which is inappropriate in its context, or which fails to grasp opportunities to enhance the character, quality and function of an area, should not be accepted, as these have detrimental effects on existing communities. .2. Insufficient information and evidence have been included as part of the planning application to enable the Local Planning Authority to fully assess all necessary material planning considerations. In addition, there is inconsistent and misleading information in the documents submitted regarding the type and size of units to be developed from what was shown on the detailed plans. To enable a complete assessment of the proposal under the relevant policies of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan 2011-2026, further information would be required on the following issues: i. Evidence in the form of a formal market housing assessment proving the need for an affordable dwelling (Policy TAI 16) ii. Evidence of suitability of the housing mix and a valuation of the units (Policies TAI 8 and TAI 15). 3. Based on the submitted information, the Local Planning Authority has not been persuaded that the development would not cause significant harm to the character and balance of the Welsh language in the community and, therefore, the application is contrary to the requirements of policy PS1 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local Development Plan together with the relevant requirements of the SPG Maintaining and Creating Distinctive and Sustainable Communities. 4. Insufficient information has been included as part of the planning application to enable the Local Planning Authority to fully assess the effect of the proposal on local biodiversity. Consequently, the proposal is deemed unacceptable and does not comply with the relevant requirements of policies PS 19 and AMG 5 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local Development Plan and Chapter 6 of Planning Policy Wales. 5. No details of sufficient access arrangements have been included as part of the application and therefore, it is not considered that the proposal meets the relevant requirements in terms of compliance with the relevant criteria of policies TRA 4 and PCYFF 3 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local Development Plan which note the need for new developments to ensure acceptable access provision.
Change of use of 5 residential flats (C3) to 5 short-term holiday accommodation units (C6) THE APPLICANT HAD WITHDRAWN THE APPLICATION
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED To approve subject to the following conditions: 1 - Time 2 - In accordance with the plans 3 - Contaminated land conditions 4 – Biodiversity conditions, including ensuring enhancements 5 – Food truck only to be located on the site when it is in use 6 - Restriction of food truck hours to 8-7 every day 7 - Agreement on the details of waste management for the food truck 8 - Welsh Signs
Application to locate a food truck with public toilet facilities and picnic areas. Retention of hardstanding for car parking and an access route. Construction of 20 allotment sheds. .a) The Planning Manager highlighted that this was an application to erect 20 garden sheds for allotments, the placement of a food truck with public toilet facilities and picnic areas, the retention of a hardstanding pitch for car parking and the facilitation of vehicular access. Although the sheds required planning permission, planning permission was no longer required for the creation of allotments. The principle of the proposal was considered acceptable in terms of policy ISA 2 as the site borders the Penrhyndeudraeth development boundary and the development was easily accessible by foot, bicycle and public transport. It was reiterated that the principle was acceptable given policy MAN 6 which supports small-scale retail development in the countryside and policy MAN 7 which applies to hot food take-away uses. While acknowledging that there would be some visual impact, it was not considered that having sheds on allotments would be unexpected and due to its size and location along with natural vegetation around the site, it was not considered that the proposal would be detrimental to the appearance of the site or impair the visual amenities of the area. It was noted that the design of the toilet was in line with the sheds and allowed accessible access; The quality of the appearance could be ensured by setting conditions to ensure that the colour of the sheds and toilet matched each other. Although the site was located in a sustainable location with a pavement serving the site, it was accepted that users of the allotments will need to use a vehicle at times to transport goods and gardening equipment, but when weighing-up any visual effects, and the fact that land use as an allotment was a permitted development, it was considered that some minor visual impact would result from the car park rather than vehicles parked on the pavement and creating road safety issues. As a result, the parking and access arrangements were considered acceptable. In the context of the installation of a food truck, which was a vehicle rather than a building, it was considered that it would be seen in the context of other vehicles parked on site. To limit the visual impact, it would be appropriate to impose a condition to ensure that the truck was placed on the site only when in use and that it would need to be removed from the site each night. When considering residential amenities, it was explained that the site was located in an area on the outskirts of the town, with residential housing nearby, and the nearest house was approximately 20m away from the allotments. Given the nature of the allotment use, it was unlikely that the proposed installation of sheds would affect any residential amenities. It was reiterated that there were other miscellaneous uses nearby such as a railway station and industrial/commercial units and therefore the area was not considered as a purely residential one. The concerns received in response to the consultation period were highlighted, and it was not considered that the development would attract anti-social behaviour to the site as it was a fairly open site with natural surveillance due to its location near the nearby public road. However, it was accepted that issues relating to the food truck may have an impact on residential amenities due to noise and odours and therefore in response, the truck will be located near the car park which was approximately 150m away from the nearest residential house – this would mitigate most of the impacts. It was reiterated that it would be appropriate to impose a condition to limit the opening hours along with a condition to agree on a waste management plan to ensure effective pest eradication, protection of the environment and the area's appearance. In the context of flood issues and given that the site was in a flood zone, NRW had no objection to the proposal and it was confirmed that it was in compliance with TAN 15. NRW had nevertheless expressed concern that the land was contaminated given the historic use of the nearby Cookes works, but by imposing conditions to carry out a detailed land survey, it was considered that, in accordance with the requirements of policy PCYFF 2, the proposal would require ensuring health and safety protection. The officers recommended approving the application .b) Taking advantage of the right to speak, the Local Member noted the following comments. · She was supportive of the application · That the proposal responded to the need · That the proposal was good for the community · The area would be respected .c) It was proposed and seconded to approve the application RESOLVED To approve subject to the following conditions: 1 - Time 2 - In accordance with the plans 3 - Contaminated land conditions 4 – Biodiversity conditions, including ensuring enhancements 5 – Food truck only to be located on the site when it is in use 6 - Restriction of food truck hours to 8-7 every day 7 - Agreement on the details of waste management for the food truck 8 - Welsh Signs
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED: To APPROVE subject to the following conditions: 1. Five years. 2. In accordance with plans and documents. 3. Agree on sound prevention plan and measures for the workshop in the western end of the site. This could include measures such as insulation, agreeing on the location of any extraction systems, hours of use and acoustic fence. 4. Ensure use of bilingual signs that give priority to the Welsh language. 5. Landscaping. 6. Landscape maintenance. 7. Need to agree on any extraction systems on the workshop prior to their installation on the building. Full application for the creation of a depot comprising of offices, workshop, storage buildings together with associated works.
Full application for the creation of a depot comprising of offices, workshop, storage buildings together with associated works. Attention was drawn to the late observations form. a) The Development Control Team Leader highlighted that the site was located within the Caernarfon development boundary and all was within an area protected as the principal employment site for employment use. It was supported that the site was served by an unclassified county road leading through the estate and it was intended to include provision for 44 car parking spaces (including 3 for the disabled), 10 for lorries and 8 for other machinery as well as cycle storage space. With the site located within the Caernarfon development boundary and a protected area for employment and in particular industrial uses B1, B2 and B8, the principle of intent was acceptable in terms of policies PCYFF 1 and CYF 1. The land was described as fairly flat and backed onto the rest of the estate which is at a significantly higher level to the north. It was recognised that the single and double-storey units would be visible from the Caernarfon bypass and would add to the structures and equipment storage areas in the landscape. However, the existing estate would form a backdrop to the site and, therefore, reduce the impact of the proposal on the landscape. Reference was made to a site plan and a cross-section plan which highlighted the intention to implement a landscaping scheme for the southern, western and northern boundary of the site which would include tree retention along the southern boundary. As a result, it was not considered that the proposal would have an unacceptable visual impact. In the context of general and residential matters it was noted that the largest proposed building would be located at the western end of the site, approximately 17 metres from the boundary and approximately 28 metres from the rear view of nearest neighbours' houses. It was highlighted that it was intended to install additional insulation material on the rear wall of the building to reduce any noise that would result from it. It was reported that the planning statement stated that this was intended as a maintenance shed and that noise was not expected to derive from it. There were no windows or doors on the rear view and the building would also alleviate noise emanating from elsewhere on the site. It was therefore considered that there was potential to add to the noise mitigation measures by imposing appropriate conditions to minimise adverse impact on neighbouring residents. Highways, biodiversity, and linguistic issues were referred to and had received appropriate attention. The officers recommended approving the application b) Taking advantage of the right to speak, the applicant noted the following observations; · The site was located on a plot of land designated for development · That the company needs to increase their existing workshop in the area · Proposed use and economic benefits. Following an increase in business, responding by attempting to combine five regional depots to centralise resources that would create employment opportunities for local people in the area · That this site was ideal in terms of strategic and logistical advantages · It was close to the road network for Mid Wales that would reduce travel times · The forecast was that there would be an increase in the number of full-time staff to 36% · That the annual net salary was equivalent to £1.4 million which was mainly spent in Gwynedd · The proposal would offer a dedicated office for staff along with a commercial workshop for vehicle maintenance, a traffic control signal unit and storage facility for lifting and hydraulic systems · The project will be a source of local, sustainable economic development that would create new job opportunities and provide trade with other local business suppliers in the area · Access roads had already been formed with the intention of using existing infrastructure · That letters of support have been received · No objections had been received c) It was proposed and seconded to approve the application ch) During the ensuing discussion, the following comments were noted by Members: · That the company was very successful with a good reputation · That the Town Council supported the application · That the company needed extra space · That they need to consider a bilingual website RESOLVED: To APPROVE subject to the following conditions: 1. Five years. 2. In accordance with plans and documents. 3. Agree on sound prevention plan and measures for the workshop in the western end of the site. This could include measures such as insulation, agreeing on the location of any extraction systems, hours of use and acoustic fence. 4. Ensure use of bilingual signs that give priority to the Welsh language. 5. Landscaping. 6. Landscape maintenance. 7. Need to agree on any extraction systems on the workshop prior to their installation on the building. Full application for the creation of a depot comprising of offices, workshop, storage buildings together with associated works.
Rhaid i gynghorwyr ddweud pan fydd ganddyn nhw gysylltiad personol â rhywbeth sy'n cael ei drafod, fel swydd, eiddo neu aelod o'r teulu. Mae buddiant sy'n rhagfarnu yn ddigon cryf i'r cynghorydd adael yr ystafell fel arfer a pheidio â chymryd rhan.
Caiff datganiadau eu darllen o'r cofnodion unwaith y byddan nhw wedi'u cyhoeddi.
Yn rhestru cynghorwyr presennol y cyngor yn unig. Nid yw aelodau cyfetholedig, swyddogion a chyn-gynghorwyr yn cael eu dangos.