Agenda item

7.1 FPL/2018/42 – Llain Delyn Estate, Gwalchmai

7.2 FPL/2019/31 – Tŷ Mawr, Pentraeth

7.1       FPL/2018/42 – Full application for the erection of 8 market and 2 affordable dwellings, construction of a new vehicular access and road together with soft and hard landscaping on land adjacent to Llain Delyn Estate, Gwalchmai

The application was reported to the Planning and Orders Committee as it has been called in a Local Member. At the Committee’s 5 June meeting it was resolved to convene a site visit and this subsequently took place on 19 June, 2019.

Public Speaker

Sioned Edwards (for the application) outlined the nature of the application and stated that as a proposal for 10 units it had been the subject of a pre-application consultation process which had included Local Members, Trewalchmai Community Council, the public, and statutory consultees. Concerns had been raised about the access to the application site via the Llain Delyn Estate and about the potential effects on the residents of nearby properties during the construction period especially with regard to the use by construction traffic of the private track linking the application site with Crown Street. Ms Edwards highlighted that the Council’s Highways Department had confirmed that it was satisfied with the proposal in terms of access and compliance with parking standards and that the provision of a Construction Traffic Management Plan is recommended by Officers in order to agree on routing and parking with the development thereafter to be constructed in accordance with the details agreed. This is acceptable to the applicant and would also ensure that arrangements are in place in respect of the public footpath which runs the length of the private track. As part of the proposal a financial contribution will be made to primary education provision in the area and the provision of 2 affordable housing units and an open space will also form part of the development. The proposal is acceptable to the Planning Officers subject to conditions and it is hoped the Committee will also be able to support it.

Councillor R.G. Parry, OBE, FRAgS spoke as a Local Member to confirm that whilst he nor the Community Council had any objections to the proposal, they were worried about the potential impacts during the construction phase and about access. The Committee would have seen from the site visit that the site can be accessed in two ways, the first through the Llain Delyn estate and secondly via the track from the Doctor’s surgery. He and the Community Council were requesting that a condition be attached to any planning permission to stipulate that during the construction phase access to the site be confined to the track leading from the Doctor’s surgery so as to avoid the impact and potential hazards of heavy construction traffic passing through the Llain Delyn housing estate.

The Development Management Manager reported that as well as expressing concern about the access, the Community Council has also questioned the need for the proposed housing development in this location and the effects it might have on local infrastructure by placing additional demand on the local school and surgery. The application site is within the development boundary with Gwalchmai being a service centre where residential development would be expected in accordance with the JLDP. The Highways Department has not raised any objections to the application proposing conditional approval specifically with regard to managing construction traffic as per conditions (10) and (11) of the Officer’s report in order to allay the concerns raised by the Community Council and Local Member.  The Officer said that it is therefore a matter of agreeing the details in line with the conditions as opposed to imposing a specific condition to restrict access by construction traffic to one route. The mix of housing proposed by the development is acceptable to the Housing Department and it is also considered to accord with the character and appearance of this part of Gwalchmai Uchaf there being other two storey properties in the immediate vicinity. A financial contribution towards accommodating additional pupils estimated to be generated by the development at the local school is proposed as well as the provision of an open space in compliance with Policy ISA 5. The Officer’s recommendation is therefore to approve the application subject to the conditions listed and the completion of a legal agreement to secure the relevant contributions/ provisions.

In considering the proposal, the Committee sought the perspective of the Highways Department on the access issue and the Local Member’s request for a condition to specify the access route for construction traffic.

The Senior Engineer (Highways Development Control) confirmed that when discussing the Construction Environmental Management Plan referred to in conditions (10) and (11) with the developer, Highways Officers will take into account the concerns expressed and will also carefully assess the two access routes before coming to an agreement with the developer on whether one or the other or whether sharing offers the best option. The Officer further confirmed in response to comments about the Llain Delyn estate road being narrow that whilst estate roads tend to be narrower than other roads, the road through Llain Delyn is not untypical and is of a standard width for that type of development.

Councillor Kenneth Hughes proposed the Officer recommendation to approve the application seconded by Councillor Eric Jones.

It was resolved to approve the application in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation and report subject to the conditions set out therein and the completion of a legal agreement containing the obligations as listed.

7.2       FPL/2019/31 – Full application for the conversion of an outbuilding into a holiday letting unit together with the installation of a new septic tank at Ty Mawr, Pentraeth

The application was reported to the Planning and Orders Committee as it had been called in to committee by a Local Member. At its meeting on 1 May, 2019 the Committee resolved to undertake a site visit which took place on 15 May, 2019. Subsequently, at its meeting held on 5 June, 2019 the Committee resolved to approve the application contrary to the Officer’s recommendation on the grounds that it deemed the proposed development to be justified and compliant with Policies TWR 2 of the JLDP and TAN 23: Economic Development (2014) bringing with it economic benefit to the area.

As she had declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the application, Councillor Nicola Roberts withdrew from the meeting for the consideration and determination thereof. The Vice-Chair, Councillor Richard O. Jones chaired the meeting for this item.

Councillor Ieuan Williams Local Member re-stated his belief that policies had in this instance been interpreted too rigidly the Officer objection being based on the size of the proposed alterations to an old building but discounting the extensions that have been made over the course of time. The Local Member emphasised that in terms of footprint the new conversion will only be slightly larger than the existing building and extensions but will also bring with it economic gain as the applicants – a farming family - seek to diversify and generate tourism for the area. The subject building is one of a cluster of four buildings the other three having been sold for re-development potentially leaving the subject building to dilapidate further in their midst if the application is not approved. The Local Member said he understood that those who had been consulted including by now the buyer of the last of the four properties as well as local businesses were supportive of the application and he asked the Committee to reaffirm its previous decision of approval.

Councillor John Griffith sought further clarity on the size and scale of the proposed conversion citing the Officer’s report that the proposal only retains a small part of the existing building whilst building a substantial addition to make the proposal viable as a 4 bedroomed holiday unit thereby making it far more visible than the other properties around it and therefore more intrusive in its surroundings.

Councillor Ieuan Williams clarified that on site there is an outbuilding which is the original building with a number of later extensions added onto it; these have been discounted in assessing the proposal because they are not deemed suitable for conversion which he felt was an overly strict approach which as far as he knew was not reflected in national policy nor in the JLDP. In terms of footprint the proposal is only 2% to 3% larger than that of the existing buildings and overall the proposal brings order to that which is on site already. Neither did he believe the proposal to be overly visible from its location nor have any impacts on anyone or anything. 

The Development Management Manager said that the report provides a response to the reasons given by the Committee for approving the application at its previous meeting contrary to the Officer’s recommendation. A letter in support of the application has been submitted by the applicant and is included in the representations pack as is a copy of an e-mail from the owner of one of the nearby properties confirming no objections to the proposal. The Officer emphasised that although there is no objection to the conversion of the building and it is accepted that it would bring economic benefit to the area, the proposal as presented is considered highly inappropriate in scale and mass and would dominate in the cluster of buildings of which it forms part, the proposed extensions being 100% larger than the present building. In so being the proposal is contrary to Policy TWR 2 of the JLDP and TAN 23 para 3.2.3 from which the Officer quoted as well as the Authority’s SPG. There is therefore a clear policy basis for refusing the application and the recommendation remains one of refusal.

Councillor John Griffith proposed, seconded by Councillor Richard Owain Jones, that the application be refused in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation because of its unsuitability in respect of scale and mass, and in so doing he highlighted the Officer’s written comments setting out the way in which the proposal is non-compliant with Policy TWR 2; approval would also set a dangerous precedent for future such applications.

Councillor Kenneth Hughes proposed that the Committee’s previous decision to approve the application be reaffirmed and was seconded by Councillor Bryan Owen. Councillor Dafydd Roberts agreed stating that although normally he would not support a conversion proposal that was larger in scale than the original building, he believed the secluded location in this case made the proposal acceptable.

In the ensuing vote the proposal to reaffirm approval was carried by a majority of the Committee.

It was resolved to reaffirm the Committee’s previous decision to approve the application contrary to the Officer’s recommendation and to authorise the Officers to apply conditions on the consent as appropriate.