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 That the application be REFUSED, for the reasons outlined in Section 1.1 of the report of the Director of Community Services, with delegated power being granted to the Head of Planning to determine whether the reasons related to the SAC and the highway impact are included in the decision notice if additional information is submitted, and with the inclusion of the additional reason for refusal as follows: There is insufficient information provided with the application in respect of its manure management plan and ammonia assessment in order for the application to demonstrate that it would not have a detrimental impact on public health.
RESOLVED That the application be APPROVED, subject to the conditions outlined in Section 1.1 of the report of the Director of Community Services.
RESOLVED That the existing Section 52 agreement be discharged without modification so that whole or part of the land can be disposed of by conveyance, lease, tenancy or otherwise separately from the dwelling known as Badger Cottage.
RESOLVED That the existing Section 106 agreement be modified to allow a change to the reference from adoptable road to private road and to modify the timescale in respect of the delivery of affordable housing. [Councillor Jamie Adams left the meeting at this juncture]
RESOLVED That the application be APPROVED, subject to the conditions outlined in Section 1.1 of the report of the Director of Community Services
RESOLVED That the application be APPROVED, subject to the conditions outlined in Section 1.1 of the report of the Director of Community Services
In welcoming everyone to the meeting, the Chairman made the following announcements: · A warm welcome was expressed to the Council’s new Head of Planning, Nicola Gandy, who joined the Authority on the 22 August following her previous employment at Pembrokeshire Coast National Park. Elements of the role were outlined and was said to include responsibility for Development Management, Enforcement, the Local Development Plan, Conservation and specialist services such as Rights of Way, Common Land, biodiversity and historic buildings; the Planning Support Team and the Building Control unit. · That Agenda Item No. 8 - Planning Application No. 22/0286/PA - Three Wells, Llandissilio, Clunderwen, Pembrokeshire, SA66 7TJ - Creation of five self-catering bespoke holiday units (under policy GN.17) with associated car parking and ecological enhancements, had been formally withdrawn by the agent therefore no further work would be undertaken on the application and any future proposal would need to be submitted as a new application. · An update was provided in relation to Planning Application No. 20/1045/PA - Criterion Way, Pembroke Dock Pembrokeshire, SA6 - Proposed Construction of a HGV tanker park, welfare facility (use class B1) and associated infrastructure, which during the 16 March 2022 Committee meeting, was unanimously refused. It was stated that prior to that meeting, on the 2 March 2022, the applicant had lodged an appeal against the Authority’s failure to make a decision on time, however due to a backlog at Planning Environment Decisions Wales (PEDW) the appeal wasn’t validated until recently. PEDW issued a letter to the Council advising that the dual jurisdiction period ended on 30 March 2022 and since the Committee’s decision notice was dated 5 April 2022, the appeal would continue to proceed on the basis of the Council’s non-determination, and not the Committee’s resolution to refuse. However, the letter advised that if the Council wished for it’s decision notice to form part of the statement in the appeal, then this would be accepted. An appeal statement had been submitted, setting out the Committee’s reasoning for its refusal, which was produced in consultation with the proposer and seconder of the motion to refuse. The start date for the appeal was noted to be the 25 July 2022, and the ministerial target for a decision is 31 October 2022. It is to be decided by written representations in the first instance but the start letter advised that the Inspector would decide on the procedure within six weeks of the start date. It was stated that future updates on the matter would be given in due course, during these Chair’s announcements. · An update was provided in relation to the decisions made regarding Planning Application No’s. 21/1102/PA and 21/1104/PA - Pembrokeshire County Council Eco Park Amoco Road, Milford Haven, during the June 2022 Committee meeting, which stated that Welsh Government had confirmed it did not wish to call the applications in, therefore the Committee’s decisions could now be implemented. It was noted that decision notices were being prepared and were likely to be issued in the week commencing 12 September 2022. · Following the decision made at the June 2022 Committee meeting, for delegated power to be granted to the Director of Community Services to determine the proposal on completion of the S.106 agreement, in relation to Planning Application No.21/0864/PA - Land North of The Kilns, Llangwm, SA62 4HG, it was stated that at present the S.106 had not been completed, but that further dialogue was to be held with the agent. · During the July 2022 Committee meeting, delegated power was granted to the Director of Community Services to approve Planning Application No. 22/0026/PA - Land adj Beaconing View, Wooden, on completion of the S.106 agreement. Members were informed that the completed agreement was awaited, and dialogue with the agent was ongoing. · An update was provided in relation to Planning Application No. 21/0877/PA - Land at Goodwick Industrial Estate, Main Street, Goodwick, SA64 0BD, stating that the S.106 agreement had been completed and a decision was issued on 9 August 2022. · Following the decision made during the July 2022 Committee meeting in relation to Planning Application No. 21/0887/PA - Multi Storey Car Park, Cartlett Road, Haverfordwest, for delegated power to be granted to the Director of Community Services to issue the decision to approve, following the resolution of Natural Resources Wales issues, a decision, of approval, was likely to be issued in the week commencing 12 September 2022. · That oral updates would be provided for Agenda Items No. 6, 7 and 12.
There were no declarations of interest received.
Moved by Councillor Jacob Williams; Seconded by Councillor Brian Hall. AGREED That the Minutes of the meeting held on 26 July 2022 be approved as a correct record in both English and Welsh.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That the application be REFUSED, for the reasons outlined in Section 1.1 of the report of the Director of Community Services, with delegated power being granted to the Head of Planning to determine whether the reasons related to the SAC and the highway impact are included in the decision notice if additional information is submitted, and with the inclusion of the additional reason for refusal as follows: There is insufficient information provided with the application in respect of its manure management plan and ammonia assessment in order for the application to demonstrate that it would not have a detrimental impact on public health.
This application was for Committee consideration as it was for an agricultural building over 1000sqm floorspace or with a site area over 1HA (paragraph 1 (i) of the scheme of delegation). The Planning Officer, Claire Jenkins, provided a number of oral updates as follows: • The applicant’s agent had provided some amended plans of the agricultural building which had been further extended during the course of the application. Amended elevations were provided but an amended floor plan was still outstanding. • The applicant’s agent advised that the Manure Management Plan had been sent to a FACTS assessor but the final version had not yet been received by the Local Planning Authority. • Information was submitted to the Local Planning Authority stating that the applicants had installed drainage pipes from the agricultural building which cross onto neighbouring land. It was suggested that the pipes were being used for carrying slurry from the agricultural building to discharge onto third party land. · An additional reason for refusal was given stating that regarding paragraph 6.6 of the Committee report, it was considered that there was insufficient information provided in relation to the ammonia assessment and manure management plan to demonstrate that the application would not result in unacceptable harm to health and safety. · The red line showing on the plan was stated to be incorrect when published, and has now been updated. Following clarification sought by the Chairman regarding the information provided stating that slurry from the agricultural building was being discharged onto third party land, the Planning Officer advised that the information was provided to both the Local Planning Authority and Natural Resources Wales (NRW) via email by a third party and included images. It was noted that the information had not been confirmed by NRW and was purely a suggestion at this time and it was believed that the pipes had been installed post the Planning Officers site visit. The Committee was advised that due notification had been received from the following interested parties who wished to exercise their right to address the Committee: • Community Council – Miss Tracy Watkins • Objector – Mr Alun Boore • Local Member – Councillor Di Clements Following Miss Watkins address, Councillor Mark Carter queried if the applicant had engaged with the local Community regarding the applications. Miss Watkins advised that the Community Council held a meeting in 2019, which the applicant attended, but nothing was received from the applicant or their agent for the most recent planning application. Members noted that as the application was a retrospective application there was no requirement for the applicant or their agent to consult the Community Council, although it would have been common courtesy to do so. Following Mr Boore’s address, Councillor Andrew Edwards requested clarification regarding Mr Boore’s access over the bridleway. Mr Boore advised that his property had longstanding vehicle rights over the bridleway and has done so for over 35 years. In response to a number of questions from Councillor Mark Cater, Mr Boore advised that the development pre-dated his occupation of the property, which he bought in March 2021, and confirmed that he had not had any engagement with the applicants. Councillor Di Clements, Local Member, addressed the Committee to express her disapproval of the application. A plethora of reasons for the Members to support the recommendation for refusal were expressed and included impact on local residents, negative impact on the bridle path, non-compliance with cattle welfare guidelines and water resources control of agricultural wells guidance and water run off issues following deep excavation. Other issues such as highways and traffic concerns and pollution issues were also raised. Councillor Di Clements summed up by urging Members to follow the Officers recommendation for refusal. Following Councillor Di Clements address, the Chairman queried if, prior to the development of the site, the bridle way was available for vehicular access, to which the Local Member advised that the cottage always had permitted vehicular access over the bridle way and confirmed that it was the only access to the application site in question. Councillor Mark Carter commented that the site was unsuitable for the desired purpose and queried if the Local Member knew why the applicant had pursued the site. Councillor Di Clements advised that following an initial discussion with the applicants in 2018, she had advised them of the processes they needed to follow but was not clear on why they pursued the site. Following reference made to a dutch barn as part of the Local Members address, Councillor Tim Evans requested clarification as to who the owner of the barn was. Councillor Di Clements advised that she was of the knowledge that the barn now belonged to the applicants and as part of a follow up question from Councillor Tim Evans the Local Member stated that she was not aware if the RSPCA were involved in any animal welfare matters on the site. The Committee proceeded to discuss the application and the key points were noted as follows: · Councillors Tony Wilcox and Jamie Adams expressed that they were not in support of the application, outlined their reasons and advised that they would be supporting the recommendation for refusal. · The Head of Planning advised Members that Public Protection Officers had visited the site which she would follow up after the meeting to ascertain the most up to date position of any matters that arose from the visit. Councillor Brian Hall Moved that the application be refused as recommended; Seconded by Councillor Mark Carter. The Committee then proceeded to the vote, undertaken by way of a roll-call, which was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Jamie Adams, Alistair Cameron, Aaron Carey, Mark Carter, John Cole, Andrew Edwards, Tim Evans, Nicola Gwynn, Brian Hall, Iwan Ward, Michelle Wiggins, Tony Wilcox and Jacob Williams. [13] There were no votes against the motion or abstentions. RESOLVED That the application be REFUSED, for the reasons outlined in Section 1.1 of the report of the Director of Community Services, with delegated power being granted to the Head of Planning to determine whether the reasons related to the SAC and the highway impact are included in the decision notice if additional information is submitted, and with the inclusion of the additional reason for refusal as follows: There is insufficient information provided with the application in respect of its manure management plan and ammonia assessment in order for the application to demonstrate that it would not have a detrimental impact on public health.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That the application be APPROVED, subject to the conditions outlined in Section 1.1 of the report of the Director of Community Services.
This application was for Committee consideration as the application was for a wind turbine over 30 metres in overall height to blade tip (paragraph 1(j) of the scheme of delegation). The Area Team Leader of the North Development Management Team provided an oral update in relation to paragraph 5.2 of the Committee report which made reference to a fallback position. The previous consent was outlined to state that ‘in the event of a turbine ceasing to produce electricity for a continuous period of nine months the turbine tower and associated equipment shall be dismantled’. Members were advised that the turbine previously on the site had been un-operational for at least nine months and therefore the consensus effectively expired and therefore there was no fallback position. The Committee was advised that due notification had been received from the following interested party who wished to exercise her right to address the Committee: · Objector – Mrs Jackie Williamson Mrs Williamson did not join the meeting to provide her representation, although prior to the meeting had provided a copy of her representation which the Chairman read out on her behalf. The Committee proceeded to discuss the application and the key points were noted as follows: · Councillor Tim Evans queried where the electric produced by the turbine would feed into i.e. a farm or the national grid. The Area Team Leader of the North Development Management Team commented that as there was a transformer on site it would be his assumption that the electricity would feed into the transformer and then into the National Grid. · Following a question from Councillor Mark Carter, the Area Team Leader of the North Development Management Team advised that even if a turbine had remained on the site until recently, planning permission for the proposed turbine would still be required. Councillor Mark Carter Moved that the application be approved as recommended; Seconded by Councillor Jamie Adams. · Councillor Alistair Cameron highlighted a number of points raised as part of the objectors written representation and requested that the Area Team Leader of the North Development Management Team provided a response to some of them, which he did. · Following a point raised by Councillor Nicola Gwynn in relation to a successful legal challenge by an individual who had suffered migraines from the flicker of wind turbine blades, the Area Team Leader of the North Development Management Team advised that impact on health had been assessed by Public Protection of which no concerns were raised. The Head of Planning made reference to paragraph 6.29 and re-iterated that it had been deemed that shadow flicker would not have adverse effects. Members attention was drawn towards the noise mitigation condition and they were advised that the agent had agreed that in the instance that the wind was blowing from the east/south-east the turbines would be switched off at certain times to limit noise being carried towards neighbouring properties. The Committee then proceeded to the vote, undertaken by way of a roll-call, which was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Jamie Adams, Alistair Cameron, Aaron Carey, Mark Carter, John Cole, Andrew Edwards, Tim Evans, Nicola Gwynn, Brian Hall, Iwan Ward, Michelle Wiggins, Tony Wilcox and Jacob Williams. [13] There were no votes against the motion or abstentions. RESOLVED That the application be APPROVED, subject to the conditions outlined in Section 1.1 of the report of the Director of Community Services.
This application was formally withdrawn by the agent prior to the Committee meeting, but after publication of the agenda. No further work will be undertaken on the application and any future proposal would need to be submitted as a new application.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That the existing Section 52 agreement be discharged without modification so that whole or part of the land can be disposed of by conveyance, lease, tenancy or otherwise separately from the dwelling known as Badger Cottage.
This application was for Committee consideration as it sought to discharge a section 52 agreement that was required in respect of application reference D2/88/944. Councillor John Cole Moved that the existing Section 52 agreement be discharged without modification as recommended; Seconded by Councillor Mark Carter. The Committee then proceeded to the vote, undertaken by way of a roll-call, which was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Jamie Adams, Alistair Cameron, Aaron Carey, Mark Carter, John Cole, Andrew Edwards, Tim Evans, Nicola Gwynn, Brian Hall, Iwan Ward, Michelle Wiggins, Tony Wilcox and Jacob Williams. [13] There were no votes against the motion or abstentions. RESOLVED That the existing Section 52 agreement be discharged without modification so that whole or part of the land can be disposed of by conveyance, lease, tenancy or otherwise separately from the dwelling known as Badger Cottage.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That the existing Section 106 agreement be modified to allow a change to the reference from adoptable road to private road and to modify the timescale in respect of the delivery of affordable housing. [Councillor Jamie Adams left the meeting at this juncture]
This application was for Committee consideration as it sought to modify a section 106 agreement which was required in respect of application reference 13/1076/PA. The Committee proceeded to discuss the application and the key points were noted as follows: · Councillor Alistair Cameron queried if the road current being not-adopted could lead to issues in the future and queried how ATEB could state that they did not wish to be responsible for the road despite owning properties along it. The Head of Planning advised that the Local Planning Authority were unable to dictate that roads be adopted as part of the planning process. It was noted that the matter had been raised with ATEB who had confirmed that it would form part of the legal agreement with the developer that they would not inherit the road responsibilities and that the responsibility would fall to future occupiers of the properties. · The Chairman also made reference to the road, and requested clarification as to whether it had been built to standards that would, in future, qualify for adoption if necessary. The Head of Planning advised that the consent did not require the road to be brought up to an adoptable standard, which is what was being sought as part of the current modification request. Councillor John Cole Moved that the existing Section 106 agreement be modified as recommended; Seconded by Councillor Brian Hall. The Committee then proceeded to the vote, undertaken by way of a roll-call, which was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Jamie Adams, Alistair Cameron, Aaron Carey, Mark Carter, John Cole, Andrew Edwards, Tim Evans, Nicola Gwynn, Brian Hall, Iwan Ward, Michelle Wiggins, Tony Wilcox and Jacob Williams. [13] There were no votes against the motion or abstentions. RESOLVED That the existing Section 106 agreement be modified to allow a change to the reference from adoptable road to private road and to modify the timescale in respect of the delivery of affordable housing. [Councillor Jamie Adams left the meeting at this juncture]
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That the application be APPROVED, subject to the conditions outlined in Section 1.1 of the report of the Director of Community Services
This application was for Committee consideration as it was for assembly and recreation use (D2 use class) over 500 square metres in floorspace (paragraph 1(f) of the scheme of delegation). The Committee proceeded to discuss the application and the key points were noted as follows: · The Chairman requested clarification as to why, if in future the occupier of the building wanted to change it back to retail use a new planning permission application would be required. The Planning Officer, Kane Thomas, advised that any change of use application would require a retail impact assessment which would consider the availability of retail premises available within the town centre at the time. · Councillor Tim Evans highlighted the condition which stated that no ancillary café or sale of food or drink would be permitted on the premises and queried if the gym facility could provide a vending machine. The Head of Planning advised that although a vending machine would be in breach of the condition it would be small scale when assessed against fact and degree would be unlikely to trigger any action. Councillor Andrew Edwards Moved that the application be approved as recommended; Seconded by Councillor Mark Carter. The Committee then proceeded to the vote, undertaken by way of a roll-call, which was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Alistair Cameron, Aaron Carey, Mark Carter, John Cole, Andrew Edwards, Tim Evans, Nicola Gwynn, Brian Hall, Iwan Ward, Michelle Wiggins, Tony Wilcox and Jacob Williams. [12] There were no votes against the motion or abstentions. RESOLVED That the application be APPROVED, subject to the conditions outlined in Section 1.1 of the report of the Director of Community Services
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That the application be APPROVED, subject to the conditions outlined in Section 1.1 of the report of the Director of Community Services
This application was for Committee consideration as it was made on behalf of an officer of the planning service (paragraph 1(m) of the scheme of delegation). The Planning Officer, Kane Thomas, provided an oral update stating that on publication of the Commitete report, the consultation period was still running and a consulatation reponse in support of the application had been received from Milford Haven Town Council. Councillor Brian Hall Moved that the application be approved as recommended; Seconded by Councillor Mark Carter. The Committee then proceeded to the vote, undertaken by way of a roll-call, which was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Alistair Cameron, Aaron Carey, Mark Carter, John Cole, Andrew Edwards, Tim Evans, Nicola Gwynn, Brian Hall, Iwan Ward, Michelle Wiggins, Tony Wilcox and Jacob Williams. [12] There were no votes against the motion or abstentions. RESOLVED That the application be APPROVED, subject to the conditions outlined in Section 1.1 of the report of the Director of Community Services
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.