Agenda item

7.1 29LPA1008A/ECON - Rhos Ty Mawr, Llanfaethlu

 

7.2 36C338 - Ysgol Henblas, Llangristiolus

 

7.3 45C89B - Rhos yr Eithin, Newborough

 

7.4 45LPA605A/CC - Dwyryd, Newborough

 

7.5 46C42B - Glasfryn,  Ravenspoint Road, Trearddur Bay

7.1  29LPA1008A/CC – Full application for the erection of a new primary school together with the creation of a new pedestrian access near Bryn Llwyd Estate and a new vehicular access onto the A5025 opposite Rhos Ty Mawr, Llanfaethlu.

 

Having declared an interest in the matter, Councillor Kenneth Hughes withdrew from the meeting during the consideration and determination thereof.

 

The application is presented to the Planning and Orders Committee as it is made by the Council. At its meeting held on 2 September, 2015, the Committee resolved to undertake a site visit prior to determining the application. The site was visited on 16th September, 2015.

 

The Planning Development Manager reported that the development proposed is the erection of a new area primary school as part of the Council’s 21st   Century Schools modernisation programme. The key planning issues are the impact of the development on the designated landscape, historic building and archaelogy, effects on the highway and residential amenity along with ecology and drainage. It is considered that the proposal can be supported in terms of the principle of the development as the site is located on the edge of the village of Llanfaethlu; development plan policies support the creation of community buildings and resources within or on the edge of existing settlements. It is the Officer’s view that due to the topography of the site, the landscape and visual impacts are moderate and can be further alleviated by landscaping. The topography and proposed building layout and design also mean that the proposal will not have an   effect on the setting of the St Maethlu Church. The Highways Authority raises no objection to the proposal in principle and as part of the proposal a footway will link the school and the village. Although the scheme will bring about physical and visual change to the site, these can be mitigated through careful landscaping and screening and by managing the use of the school campus and do not create undue issues such as to warrant refusal. The recommendation is therefore to approve the application.

 

Councillor Victor Hughes proposed that the application be approved and the proposal was seconded by Councillor Vaughan Hughes.

 

It was resolved to approve the application in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation subject to the conditions listed in the written report.

 

7.2  36C338 – Outline application for the erection of a dwelling with all matters reserved on land opposite to Ysgol Henblas, Llangristiolus

 

Having declared an interest in the matter, both Councillor Victor Hughes and the Planning Development Manager withdrew from the meeting for the consideration and determination thereof.

 

The application is reported to the Planning and Orders Committee as the applicant works within the Local Authority’s Planning and Public Protection Service. At its meeting held on 2 September, 2015 the Committee resolved to refuse the application contrary to the Officer’s recommendation on the grounds that it was deemed not to be an infill application; the application site is outside the development boundary; it does not conform to Policy 50 and because it represents overdevelopment.

 

The Head of Planning and Public Protection referred to the written report which addresses the reasons put forwards by the Committee for refusing the application as follows –

 

•  With reference to comments made by the Planning Inspector with regard to the site of a recently dismissed appeal at nearby Ffordd Meillion, it is considered that the land in this case is developed on three sides and Officers are of the view that the site at Ysgol Henblas is visually integrated into surrounding development and would not appear as an alien intrusion and that the proposal can therefore be considered as an infill development.

•  Development boundaries are not designated by Policy 50 so there is an element of interpretation involved. Officers remain of the opinion that the site’s current status would classify it as infill.

•  With regard to over-development, data regarding development growth level, actual build and anticipated growth for the settlement of Llangristiolus obtained as part of a review of the operation of Policy 50 is set out in the report. Information in relation to the number of properties for sale in the village provided as part of the evidence for the Ffordd Meillion appeal is also provided. The difficulty in justifying refusal on the grounds of over-development is in providing evidence that the proposal would “exceed the requirements of the settlement for new dwellings” (Policy 50). Reference is made in this context to the findings of the Inspector in the Ffordd Meillion appeal.

 

In view of the above, Officers remain of the opinion that it is not considered that the reasons given for refusing the application are justified because it would be difficult to substantiate harm to the village.

 

Councillor H. Eifion Jones, a Local Member, informed the Committee that although his son is a co-worker of the applicant, he had received legal advice that he could address the meeting on the application but could not speak in support of it. He acknowledged the reasons put forward by the Committee for its previous refusal of the application and said that there is a feeling in the village that planning consent has led to overdevelopment at the expense of a sufficient supply of affordable housing. In terms of whether or not the proposal represents an infill application, Officers have recognised the possibility of further development of the land on either side of the application site which the Committee would find difficult to refuse if the proposal under consideration is allowed thus possibly setting a precedent.

 

Those Members who had objected to the application previously, reiterated their concerns regarding the proposal on the grounds of its being an intrusion into the countryside; that it constitutes overdevelopment  and that it would almost certainly lead to further development on either side with further impact on the Welsh language and on the local school. Reference was made to the number of high end properties on sale in Llangristiolus which are beyond the income reach of the local population and which have changed the character of the village. It was emphasised that the need in Llangristiolus is for more affordable homes which this proposal does not meet.

 

Councillor Kenneth Hughes concurred with the Officer’s viewpoint and thought that refusing the application would be an inappropriate decision. He proposed that the application be approved and his proposal was seconded by Councillor Richard Owain Jones.

 

In the subsequent vote, Councillors Kenneth Hughes, Vaughan Hughes, Richard Owain Jones, Raymond Jones and Jeff Evans voted to approve the application and Councillors Lewis Davies, Ann Griffith, John Griffith and Nicola Roberts voted to reaffirm the previous decision to refuse the application. The proposal to approve the application was therefore carried.   

 

It was resolved to approve the application in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation subject to the conditions listed in the written report presented to the Committee at its 2 September, 2015 meeting.

 

7.3  45C89B – Retrospective application for the mixed use of land as a caravan site for up to 12 touring caravans used between 1 March and 31 December each year at Rhos yr Eithin, Newborough

 

The application was first presented to the Planning and Orders Committee on 2 September, 2015 at the request of a Local Member. At the meeting the Committee resolved to undertake a site visit which took place on 16 September, 2015.

 

Mrs Malcom Richard Jones addressed the Committee in support of the application and she made the following points:

 

•  That she had originally intended to apply for a certificate of lawful use having kept caravans for over 10 years but had instead submitted a formal planning application.

•  She highlighted her family’s local credentials.

•  That the family had run a CL caravan site for 5 caravans since 2003 but is now asking for retrospective approval for an additional 7 caravans making a total of 12.

•  The caravan site is located on the road to Llanddwyn and Newborough Beach; the car park at Llanddwyn has been extended and provides for 450 cars as well as coaches. An additional 7 cars on the road would not make a difference in terms of number.

•  The site is private, is in a quiet location and has been landscaped. It is not visible from the road nor from any other development

•  There is a public footpath which has been diverted to run alongside the caravan site and this is mainly used by visitors and has been maintained by the family for a number of years at its own cost. These are the visitors who contribute to local businesses and the local economy.

 

The Committee sought clarification of Mrs Jones regarding the proposed number of caravans on site and their status and questioned her as to her experience of the traffic situation particularly given the increase in the volume of traffic to Llanddwyn and the difficulty in accessing the site from a busy road. Mrs Jones said that the intention is to have 12 non touring tourers on site and that she was willing to curtail the period of use from March to October. As regards access she had not experienced problems and the proposal would mean there would be less coming and going to and from the site.

 

The Planning Development Manager reported that it is the Officer’s view that the proposal is tantamount to the development of a new static caravan site in what is considered to be a very sensitive area in an AONB, and close to Newborough Forest which is a site of special scientific interest. The Officers take the view that this development at this site is inappropriate because of the detrimental impact on the visual amenities of the designated landscape and also because the use of the site would have an adverse effect on the amenities of nearby residential occupiers and on highway safety due to the substandard access. The recommendation is therefore to refuse the application.

 

Councillor Ann Griffith spoke as a Local Member and she set out the merits of the application – no objections by the Community Council nor by CADW with regard to impact on Llys Rhosyr; diversion of the public footpath from the site; generation of income for a local family; mitigation of visual impact through landscaping and planting; positive contribution to the local economy; existing caravan parks with permanent pitches within AONBs -  against the concerns raised by objectors – proximity to AONB leading to its further erosion; proximity to Newborough Forest and SSSIs; exacerbation of the existing pressure on the road network; visual and amenity impacts; sanitary provision and refuse disposal; breach of rules and risk of pollution to water courses from site waste.

 

Councillor Jeff Evans said that he could not see a problem with the application as the site is and has been operational for some years during which time the Council has not intervened and it is contributing to the local economy. The Planning Development Manager said that the application has been submitted because the site is and has been causing problems for the Authority since 2014 and it has been the subject of complaints which is usually how the Local Planning Authority learns of developments operating without consent. The Committee needs to be clear regarding the nature of the application which is to allow 12 touring caravans to remain on site for 12 months should they so wish. It does not specify that they cannot come and go as they like.

 

Whilst recognising the value of a local business in a rural area, the Committee expressed reservations regarding the breach of regulations involved in this instance and was concerned by the impact of the development in this area as well as by the adequacy of the access to the site and the risks which that posed. The Committee sought to establish whether there have been accidents in the area and whether any remedial measures might be taken to improve the access or to manage movements to and from the site.

 

The Highways Officer said that he was not in possession of data with regard to accidents. The Highways Authority objects to the proposal because the radius of the access is substandard for vehicles with touring caravans to be able to turn in and out of the site without encroaching on the other side of the highway which is a busy road.  If there were means of controlling the site so that the same caravans are on site throughout the year, then that would be more favourably received. As it is, there is no way to manage which caravans remain on site and neither is there any land either side of the access in the applicants’ ownership which they could utilise to make improvements.

 

Councillor Lewis Davies proposed that the application be refused and his proposal was seconded by Councillor Kenneth Hughes.

 

It was resolved to refuse the application in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation for the reasons set out in the written report.

 

7.4  45LPA606A/CC – Outline application with all matters reserved for the erection of 17 new dwellings, demolition of the existing toilet block together with the creation of a new vehicular access on land adjacent to Dwyryd, Newborough

 

The application is presented to the Planning and Orders Committee as it is made on Council owned land. Both the Local Members have indicated that they wish to call in the application for determination by the Committee. At its meeting on 2 September, 2015, the Committee resolved to visit the site and the site visit was carried out on 16th September, 2015.

 

The Planning Development Manager reported that the key issues in this instance are policy considerations, and amenity and traffic impacts. With regard to policy, the application site falls within the village’s development boundary and although part of the site is allocated under the Ynys Môn Local Plan as a bowling green, this has not been developed and remains a vacant parcel of land.  It is not considered that the development of the site for housing would prejudice the development plan. Should the proposal be approved then a proportion of the development would be allocated to affordable housing and a condition is specified to that end. Although there are local concerns with regard to highway impacts, the Highways Authority raises no objection subject to conditions and parking spaces are provided as part of the proposal. In terms of amenity impacts, it is the Officer’s view that the two storey developments proposed are not out of character with the area and that the scheme provides adequate separation from existing properties. Neither is it considered that the scheme will detrimentally impact the landscape value of the AONB.

 

Councillor Ann Griffith informed the Committee that she would be standing down as Vice-Chair for consideration of this application to focus on her role as a Local Member. She first addressed the Committee on behalf of Diane Broad, a proprietor of a local business and an objector to the application who voices serious concerns about the prospective loss of the toilet and car parking facilities given the ongoing issue in Newborough with regard to a lack of parking spaces. The car park is an essential facility in the village to accommodate the overspill of tourist traffic which might otherwise seek to park in and around the junction at Church Street/ Chapel Street and Malltraeth Street with potentially serious consequences in terms of congestion and accidents. Full regard has not been taken of the changes within Newborough village over recent years with the development of existing businesses and the opening of new ones. There is a desperate need for both car park and toilets and a proper survey should be undertaken to evidence the requirement for these facilities. The objector proceeds to refer to the fact that she has been considering the viability of reopening the Post Office and to establishing a social enterprise and visitor centre.

 

Speaking to the Committee in her capacity as a Local Member, Councillor Ann Griffith said that she had led a campaign against the proposed development since May, 2013, and that she along with the local residents and Community Council do not see a need for this type of development in Newborough especially as there are 21 sites currently with planning permission and over 25 properties on sale in the village two thirds of which are on the market for over £150k. Newborough genuinely needs affordable homes including more social housing which is supported by the statistics which show that there are 62 applications for social housing in Newborough currently. Those applicants are unlikely to be able to purchase properties within the proposed scheme even though it does provide for an element of affordable housing. Councillor Griffith referred to data obtained from the analytics research unit in Gwynedd Council with regard to average house prices in the Rhosyr area in 2014 (£147,500) set against the average household income (£22,986) meaning that 62% of households in Rhosyr have been priced out of the market. Given the level of empty homes in the area it is essential the properties forming part of the proposed scheme do not become holiday homes. The quality of the Welsh Language assessment undertaken is disappointing and refers to the 2001 rather than the 2011 Census. Those able to speak, write and read in Welsh in Newborough have declined to 51.7%.Newborough is also a historically important village and the application site is close to Llys Rhosyr. Councillor Ann Griffith referred to a report  by Gwynedd Archaeological Trust and an EAS report from 2013 which mention evidence of archaeological interest along the street frontage of Church Street and she read extracts therefrom. She emphasised that due regard must be had of this important aspect should the proposed development be permitted. The issue of parking is crucial to Newborough as a village through which the traffic to Llanddwyn passes and without adequate parking facilities the village’s businesses will not be able to prosper. Councillor Griffith went on to highlight the range of issues raised in letters of objection to the Planning service.

 

Having addressed the Committee as a Local Member and having declared an interest in this application, Councillor Ann Griffith subsequently withdrew from the meeting for the determination thereof.

 

Councillor Peter Rogers also speaking as a Local Member emphasised the traffic problems in Newborough with investment in Llanddwyn making it one of the most visited sites but without a corresponding investment in the road network around the area. Newborough village is at saturation point and given the volume of visitors cannot afford to lose neither toilet nor car parking facilities. Newborough is also a deprived area and further development as proposed serves little purpose it if not accompanied by employment opportunities especially for the younger generation. There are undeveloped plots in the area and the proposal would be better sited outside the village on the way to Aberffraw.

 

The Committee sought clarification of the parking situation and whether the provision of spaces offered as part of the proposal might offset the loss of the car park.

 

The Highways Officer said that according to the Traffic Officers there are currently 13 available parking spaces together with one disabled parking space. The proposal provides for 11 public parking spaces apart from the remainder of the site which will provide for private parking for occupiers of the properties and is in accordance with the Council’s parking standards. In light of the traffic that already uses the road, it is not considered that the increase generated by the proposed additional 17 properties will have a material effect. Although the Highways Authority is aware of problems with the road network it would be difficult for it to refuse the application because the Traffic Officers have not stated that the car parking spaces are full and neither have they had complaints to that effect. The Officer said that he believed that 11 parking spaces provided as part of the proposal would serve current usage i.e. mixed use by both residents and visitors.

 

The Committee was concerned about the car parking situation in Newborough and the possibility that the proposal would further deprive local residents and visitors of parking facilities. However given the evidence presented  by the local members regarding affordable housing need in the area, the Committee emphasised the importance of providing affordable housing for the community. The Planning Development Manager confirmed that 47% of the development would be provided as affordable housing but that it was a matter for the developer to determine how that element will be delivered.

 

Councillor Victor Hughes said that he thought that an opportunity has been lost with this application to ensure that traffic linked to the development does not pass through the village square and to link the two sites by utilising an alternative strip of land. The Highways Officers said that the Highways Authority has only assessed the application as presented and that he could not confirm whether or not the land referred to is adequate.

 

 

Councillor Victor Hughes proposed that determination of the application be deferred to ask the applicant to consider re-siting the proposed development. His proposal was seconded by Councillor Richard Owain Jones.

 

It was resolved to defer determination of the application in order to ask the applicant to consider re-siting the proposal.

 

7.5  Full application for the demolition of the existing dwelling together with the erection of a new dwelling in its place at Glasfryn, Ravenspoint, Trearddur Bay

 

The application is presented to the Planning and Orders Committee at the request of a Local Member. At its meeting held on 2 September, 2015 the Committee resolved that a site visit be undertaken and this was subsequently carried out on 16th September, 2015.

 

The Planning Development Manager reported that the scheme is a one for one replacement of an existing dwelling the principle of which is acceptable in policy terms. The scheme respects the context and position of the existing dwelling and maintains its character as part of the wider setting. At the time of the site visit attention was drawn by Local Members to the potential impact of works on the boundary wall between the subject dwelling and the adjoining property and to concerns expressed  by the neighbour about the flow of water from the application site to his land.  The Officer said that additional information has been received confirming that the scheme will incorporate plans for a retaining wall along the boundary within the curtilage of the existing dwelling along with a drain meaning there will be no additional loading on the boundary wall and no water flowing from the site to the adjoining property .

 

Councillor Lewis Davies proposed that the application be approved and the proposal was seconded by Councillor Vaughan Hughes.

 

It was resolved to approve the application in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation subject to the conditions listed in the written report.