Agenda item

7.1 FPL/2023/181 – Full application for the erection of 6 residential units together with associated development at Shirehall, Glanhwfa Road, Llangefni

The application was presented to the Planning and Orders Committee at the request of Local Members due to local concerns on over-development, the need for these units, lack of parking and access in and out of the site. At its meeting held on 5 June, 2024 the members resolved to conduct a site visit which subsequently took place on 19 June, 2024.

Public Speaker

Mr Owain Hughes, applicant’s Agent, in support of the application said that the Shire Hall is an important building in the centre of this town, a building that has been an important part of the entrance to the historic town. This application gives the applicant an opportunity to add value to the land and to develop the old building. Work has been undertaken with the planning department, to come up with a modern building which is also in keeping with the historical building. Discussions have been undertaken with Natural Resources Wales and they have agreed that there are no flooding issues. The Highways Department has confirmed that they are satisfied with the parking provision on the site and Llangefni has other car parks.

The effect of the proposal, especially on the amenity of nearby land users has been considered in line with the criteria and the intention has been located about 53 meters away from the nearest residential house on Glanhwfa Road. Located between the proposed building and the nearest residential building is a large car park which is used by the staff of Anglesey County Council. Due to the distance and the intervening distance between the intention and nearest residential property, it is not considered that there is a negative effect on nearby residential amenities. The intention conforms with all policies, the statutory consultants are satisfied with the development. The changes and mass of the building are now acceptable to the department and is not detrimental to the listed building.

The Planning Development Manager reported that Llangefni is identified as an Urban Service Centre under Policy TAI 1 within the Joint Local Development Plan (JLDP). This policy supports housing to meet the Plan’s strategy through housing allocations and suitable unallocated sites within the development boundary based upon the indicative provision shown within the Policy. The indicative supply level for Llangefni over the Plan period is 673 units. During the period 2011 to 2022, a total of 197 units have been completed. The windfall land bank i.e. sites with existing planning consent, and likely to be developed in April 2022 stood at 67 units; the allocated sites landbank stood at 235. This proposal would mean that the indicative housing provision in Llangefni would not be exceeded. Considering the above-mentioned figures under criterion (1b) of Policy PS1, there is no need for a Welsh language statement to support the application. A housing statement has been received with the planning application and the Housing Department have confirmed that there is a need for 3-bedroom properties in Llangefni and therefore it complies with Policy TAI 8 as regards to housing mix. Policy TAI 15 seeks an appropriate provision of affordable housing. The JLDP notes that providing 10% of affordable housing is viable in Llangefni. As an increase of 6 units are proposed this means that 0.6 of the total new units should be affordable. The applicant has confirmed that a financial contribution of £49,999 towards affordable housing will be afforded. This will be subject to a S106 agreement. Refence was made to the design of the proposed development as was noted within the report which comply with Policy PCYFF 3 of the JLDP.

The Planning Development Manager further reported that the proposed site is located within the Llangefni Conservation Area and adjacent to the Grade II Listed Shire Hall and Grade II* listed Moriah Methodist Chapel including forecourt wall and gates. Amendments have been made to the application and the proposal has been reduced from 7 to 6 units and the height of the proposal has also been reduced. This amendment ensures that the scale and massing will not have an adverse impact on the setting of the nearby Listed Buildings or on the Setting of the Conservation Area. The Heritage Officer has confirmed that the amended scheme will not harm the setting of the adjacent Listed Building, the character of the Conservation Area or views into and out of the Area. He further referred that the site is abutting the Afon Cefni. The site is located close to Flood Zone C2 of the Development Advice Map, however the proposed building, the entrance and exist routes to the building lies outside Zone C2 area. The Flood Map identifies that the margin of the site to be at risk of flooding and falls into Flood Zone 2 and 3 (Rivers) and the main source of flood risk to the site is from the Afon Cefni. A Flood Consequence Assessment and three addendums have been received with the planning application. Natural Resources Wales initially had concerns relating to flood risk and the increased future flows due to climate change impacts over the lifetime of the development; however, following the third addendum to the Flood Consequence Assessment, Natural Resources Wales have confirmed that their previous concerns have been addressed. Natural Resources Wales have confirmed that no structures/buildings should be erected within 4m of the retaining structure to ensure that the integrity of the retaining wall is not compromised. A riparian wildlife corridor should be provided between the Afon Cefni and the proposed apartment block to ensure that NRW can inspect the river during times of flooding. A condition will be placed on the permission to ensure compliance. The Planning Development Manager referred to the highways issues and noted that the existing vehicular access will be used as a main access. The main intention is to provide one car parking space for each dwelling near the building and the previous Police Station Car Park has parking spaces available. The proposal will accommodate 15 car parking spaces on site. The Highways Authority has confirmed that the existing access and parking arrangements is suitable for the development and have also confirmed that the Construction Traffic Management Plan submitted with the application is acceptable. The recommendation was approval of the application.

Councillor Nicola Roberts, a Local Member said that she called the application to the Committee for determination due to concerns by the residents and the Town Council as regards to the application. She noted that the reports have addressed these issues of concerns as regards to design and flooding and she was pleased that a financial contribution will be afforded towards affordable housing in the area.

Councillor Geraint Bebb and a Local Member said that there were initially concerns as regards to the development, but residents consider that the proposed development conforms with the dwellings within the area. Councillor Geraint Bebb proposed that the application be approved in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation. Councillor Neville Evans seconded the proposal of approval.

It was RESOLVED to approve the application in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation, subject to the planning conditions and planning agreement contained within the written report.

7.2 FPL/2023/118 – Full application for the change of use of land for the siting 55 static holiday caravans/chalets, change of use of outbuilding into a laundry, reception and site office together with construction of new on-site roads, erection of package treatment building, construction of car parking area together with soft and hard landscaping and associated development at Wern Farm, Pentraeth Road, Menai Bridge

The application was presented to the Planning and Orders Committee at the request of two Local Members due to the Community Council’s strong opinions regarding the scale of the development. At its meeting held on 5 June, 2024 the Committee resolved to refuse the application contrary to the Officer’s recommendation due to highways safety and that the site is not in a sustainable location.

The Planning Development Manager reported that the Highway Authority has confirmed that they are satisfied with the access and visibility for the proposed development. Cars travel on this road at 60 mph. In accordance with Technical Advice Note 18 : Transport, the access should achieve a visibility splay of 215m in both directions. The applicant has provided a plan which identifies 215m of visibility in both directions. Whilst there was no requirement due to the classification of the road, the applicant’s Agent has afforded details of anticipated traffic movement from the site on a daily basis as is noted within the report. The Highways Authority has also confirmed that they are satisfied with the additional vehicular movements using the existing access, parking arrangements and the visibility splay. He further said that the Committee questioned, at the last meeting, as to how this site was sustainable and stated that a similar application was refused in Caergeiliog. The proposed site is approximately 0.51km from the nearest bus stop that links to Menai Bridge which is an excellent public transport hub which links the whole of Anglesey and across the Menai Straits towards Bangor. The site is located approximately 3.4km from the town of Menai Bridge which has a range of facilities such as shops, restaurants, grocery stores etc. A public right of way crosses through the Wern Farm site and links the site to Llandegfan and Menai Bridge which was viewed during the site visit to the site. It was not reported that the public footpath leads from the site along the A5025 to Menai Bridge. Whilst it is accepted that the A5025 is a busy road with no formal footways or lighting with cars travelling at 50 mph to 60 mph, the public right of way leads through the site which alleviates the need for people to walk on this road only for a short distance of 310m to Menai Bridge.

The Planning Development Manager further said that the application referred to by the Committee in Caergeiliog that was refused, is different to this application at Wern Farm. The Planning Inspector confirmed that there was limited range of shops, services and tourist attractions within easy walking and cycling distance of the site in Caergeiliog. Wern Farm is highly sustainable with a choice of travel modes for the people visiting the chalets. Reference was made that questions were raised at the last meeting regarding the proposed planting of trees on the site. The applicant’s Agent has afforded details which confirms that over 3,400 trees will be planted to create a new woodland on the site. There is already over 1,300 trees on the site and this application is the highest quality of planting strategy the department has received. The recommendation continues to be of approval of the application.

Councillor Alun Roberts, a Local Member said that he was speaking on behalf of his other two Local Members in respect of this application. He expressed that he considered that mitigation measures have not been addressed as regards to this application and there are concerns whether the access from the site is safe due to traffic entering and leaving the site which will increase the risks of accidents. He referred that traffic travels at 60 mph along the A5025 that passes the entrance to Wern Farm. If the application was to be approved clear signage needs to be erected to ensure that the access to the site is obvious from both sides of the A5025. Reference has been made that there is no pavement for a distance for walkers to be able to walk from the site to the nearest bus stop. He referred that whether there is a need for such a development and whether it is the best use of agricultural land.

The Planning Development Manager responded that the access conforms with strategic planning policy TAN 18 as there is 215m visibility splay in both directions. He considered that further mitigation measures were required due to additional traffic entering and leaving the site. He further reiterated that there is a public right of way through Wern Farm requiring walking only some 312m along the A5025 to reach the road to Menai Bridge.

Councillor Robin Williams said that he considered that the access to the site was unsafe, and the figures afforded of car movements from the site are optimistic. There are no attractions to keep the tourist on the site. He referred that the application is for 55 chalet and the tourists that will come to the site would more than likely have more than one vehicle. He further said that the footpath mentioned was not sustainable and he did not consider that people will be walking from the site through to Llandegfan and Menai Bridge.

Councillor Robin Williams proposed that the application be refused contrary to the Officer’s recommendation. Councillor Alwen Watkin seconded the proposal of refusal.

Councillor Jackie Lewis proposed that the application be approved in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation. Councillor Neville Evans seconded the proposal of approval.

It was RESOLVED to approve the application in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation, subject to the planning conditions contained within the written report.

7.3 FPL/2023/328 – Full application for the conversion of the chapel into 3 holiday units together with alterations and extensions at Capel Jerusalem, Llangoed

The application was presented to the Planning and Orders Committee at the request of Local Members due to concerns regarding parking and traffic issues and over concentration of holiday accommodation in the area.

The Planning Development Manager reported that members expressed concern during the site visit that there were no parking spaces available in the locality. The Highways Authority have considered the proposal and the supporting Technical Highway Notes submitted with the application. The Technical Notes identified parking availability in the vicinity of the development and primarily suggested that an area marked as ‘Zone A’ would be suitable. It also identified an area opposite the development predominantly serving the short stay parking needs of the village shop marked as ‘Zone C’. It is also noted that the Highways Officer has carried out a site visit on three separate occasions after the planning site visit took place. The Highways Officer confirmed that there was sufficient parking in Zone A on these three separate occasions. The proposal therefore complies with the relevant Highways policies and will not lead to a detriment of the highway network. He further reported that concerns have been expressed that there was already an over-provision of holiday accommodation in the area. There is a 15.36% of holiday units in the area at present; however, the members expressed that this figure did not take into account the AirBnB’s in the area. The Planning Authority are given data from the Council Tax Section; the AirBnB’s are not considered in this figure. The Planning Authority has based their decision on the data provided by the Council Tax Section. The Planning Development Manager further said that discussion have undertaken with the Compliance Manager from the Resources Department who has confirmed that work continues to identify domestic properties on the Island which are registered on the website as AirBnB’s and Sykes Cottages etc., to ascertain whether the properties registered for council tax register and pay the premium; whether the properties registered for council tax but does not pay the premium and whether the properties that are not registered on the council tax register.

As regard non-domestic rates, the properties must be let for 182 days and available to let for 252 days or more. The Council Tax Department are dependent on the Class Valuer to implement this and to review those that do not meet the criteria. However, for consistency with every planning application across the Island needs to be dealt with consistently and in line with the relevant policies and guidelines. In line with the SPG, and assessed every application since 2017, the Council Tax Department provides figures of the number of second homes or self-catering units in the Ward. This consistency is needed to deal with planning applications and is essential for the good name and integrity of the Council. He further said the figure for Llangoed is 15.36% which is a higher than the threshold of 15%. However, consideration must be given to the fact that the Council has lost several recent appeals with the Planning Inspector noting that the Council had not provided any evidence that the small increase over 15% would lead directly to any detrimental effects. The latest figures note that there are 681 units in Llangoed Ward, 70 units are second homes and 35 are self-catering (which is 15.42%. Adding 3 units would increase this figure to 15.86% which is a small increase of 0.44%. It must be considered that this figure is flexible as new houses are built and that people sell properties. Even though the figure is higher than the threshold of 15%, the Council can lose appeals which may lead to costs. The recommendation is of approval of the application.

Councillor Gary Pritchard, a Local Member said that approval of the application could lead to parking and traffic issues in the area. Whilst accepting the comments made by the Highways Officers as regards to parking area Zone A in the village; Zone A has parking for 8 vehicles which is outside residential homes, and it is dependent on what time of the day this parking area is used for parking. He said that Zones A and B are in continual use in the village and outside the shop and the car park at the end of the steep hill would not be viable for anyone staying at the proposed holiday let units. The Highways Authority objected to the original application for 4 holiday units but reducing to 3 holiday units will not make much of a difference to the car parking issues. He further said that the threshold of 15% needs to be adhered to as the figure can increase and the village of Llangoed is close to the town of Beaumaris which has exceeded the threshold and has seen immense increase in second homes and holiday units.

Councillor Alun Roberts, a Local Member reiterated that there are parking and traffic issues in the village of Llangoed. He said that there have been immense concerns as regards to the application by residents and the Community Council due to the lack of parking. Reference has been made to parking availability at Zones A, B and C but this does not solve the problem of the parking issues in the village as many of the dwellings do not have parking spaces and are having to park outside of their homes. He further said that the threshold of 15% of holiday units has been exceeded already and approving this application will further increase the threshold and will set a precedent as has occurred in Beaumaris.

The Planning Development Manager responded to the comments made by both local members and said that the 15% threshold is a guideline within the Supplementary Planning Guidelines to assist Planning Officers and Members to consider application. He expressed that this is not within the planning policies themselves and not a definite figure that needs to be adhered to. The Planning Inspectorate has considered applications within the appeals process and the Council has lost appeals due to be unable to prove the detrimental effect it would have on communities in exceeding the threshold.

The Group Engineer (Development Control) and Traffic Management reported that the site has been visited on numerous occasions to gauge the parking availability in the vicinity and especially near the shop in the village and Zone A. He said that the number of car parking in Zone A does vary at different times of the day. The applicant has suggested that people from the holiday lets could park in Zone A and this was considered acceptable.

Councillor Jackie Lewis ascertained as to what time of the day the site was visited as people who rent holiday lets have more than one car and brings jets skis and trailers. The Group Engineer (Development Control) and Traffic Management that the site was visited at different times of the day and during the weekend.

Councillor Jeff Evans said that if the Chapel is not developed it will become a derelict building in the village. Councillor Evans proposed that the application be approved in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation. There was no seconder to the proposal.

Councillor John I Jones said that it was evident on the site visit that there are traffic issues in the area and the Chapel is opposite the village shop with delivery lorries and people parking outside the shop. He noted that there is no parking provision as part of the application for 6 cars. Councillor John I Jones proposed that the application be refused contrary to the Officer’s recommendation.

Councillor Robin Williams referred to data afforded as regards to holiday accommodation and second homes in Llangoed which was 12.9% in September 2020. At present there are 15.36% holiday units in Llangoed, which is above the threshold of 15%, and approving this application for an additional 3 holiday units will increase the percentage to 16%. Whilst accepting that the percentage of 15% threshold of holiday units in Llangoed is a guideline, it must be considered that enough is enough. It has been accepted that the total of AirBnB’s is not within the data presented and the increase in holiday lets could be even higher in the area. Councillor Williams seconded the proposal of refusal.

It was RESOLVED to reaffirm the decision to refuse the application contrary to the Officer’s recommendation and for the reasons previously given.

7.4 FPL/2024/64 – Full application for the demolition of the existing dwelling together with the erection of a replacement dwelling and retention of new vehicular access, track and parking areas at Tyddyn Dylifws, Tynygongl

The application was presented to the Planning and Orders Committee at the request of a Local Member due to concerns on the impact of the proposal upon neighbouring residential properties, visual impact, and the scale of the replacement dwelling. At its meeting held on 5 June, 2024 the members resolved to conduct a site visit which subsequently took place on 19 June, 2024.

Public Speaking

Mr Mark Tarry, the applicant, in support of the application said that after many surveys and investigations by specialist companies and individuals, the conclusion is the property is no longer fit for purpose due inadequate foundations and is not energy efficient. He said that the access to the property is a concern to his neighbouring property as the lane that passes both properties is very narrow with delivery vehicles being damaged and neighbouring walls having to be re-built. He referred to an incident where a vehicle caught fire on Shepherds Hill and the fire engine was unable to get to the fire as the lane was narrow, and the Fire Officer recommended that the lane should be widened for the emergency services to gain access. Mr Tarry further said that he has constructed a gateway on his land for ease of access for deliveries and emergency vehicles and to alleviate traffic from his neighbours.

The Planning Development Manager reported that following the refusal of an application for the demolition of the dwelling at Tyddyn Dylifws in January 2024 the applicant has produced an up-to-date structural survey of the dwelling which identifies that significant work needs to be done to the existing property. The Planning Officer has visited that property and inspected the internal condition of the dwelling and has confirmed that the property is in poor condition which conforms with the Structural Survey. The relevant planning policy within the Joint Local Development Plan for Replacement Dwellings is policy TAI 13, criterion 4 and 7 which was highlighted within the report. The Structural Survey has been submitted as part of the application confirms that the existing building is in need of extensive upgrading. The underside of the walls has little or no cover from external ground level and the depth far shallower than what is expected. The lack of cover to the underside of the walls could lead to movement of the walls. The Structural Survey also confirms that underpinning stone masonry walls is inherently hazardous and should be avoided due to the unpredictable nature of the masonry. The internal floors would need to be replaced and there is insufficient headroom in the front rooms to raise slab levels within the property. Lowering a new slab would require underpinning of the walls which should be avoided. Other major defects have been identified and are listed in paragraph 5.0.3 of the Structural Survey. The Structural Engineer has confirmed that cost of renovation of the existing dwelling is unlikely to be economically viable and recommended demolition of the existing dwelling and replacing with a new energy efficient dwelling. It is evident that the works necessary to bring the property to an acceptable standard are significant, consequently it is therefore accepted that the renovation and retention of the existing dwelling is not economically feasible in this instance and its replacement is an appropriate and sustainable solution in accordance with criterion 4 of planning policy TAI 13.

The Planning Development Manager referred to criterion 7 of planning policy TAI 13 which states that outside development boundaries, the siting and design of the total new development should be similar in scale and size and should not create a visual impact significantly greater than the existing dwelling in order that it can be satisfactorily absorbed or integrated into the landscape. In exceptional circumstances a larger, well-designed dwelling, which does not lead to significantly greater visual impact could be supported. Whilst the proposed dwelling would lead to a dwelling some 129% larger than the dwelling that currently exists, it is of a high-quality design and use of high-quality materials such as stone cladding, wooden panels, and Natural Welsh slate along with appropriate landscaping would represent an improvement to the design of the existing dwelling and will fit in well with the landscape. He further said that applicant has created an access and track without planning permission and this element of the proposal is retrospective. The new access and track were created due to the existing narrow track leading down to Tyddyn Dylifws. The applicant has explained that it was very challenging to get deliveries to Tyddyn Dylifws and this is why the new access and track was constructed. The new vehicular access provides adequate visibility in both directions and the track leads to the rear of Tyddyn Dylifws where adequate car parking facility has been created. The access and track can only be seen for a short distance and does not impact on the landscape. The access and track are located close to another residential property, but it is not considered that it will generate significant vehicular movements that would warrant refusing the application. The Highways Authority was consulted, and they have no objection to the application. The recommendation was of approval of the application.

Councillor Margaret M Roberts, a Local Member referred that an application on this site was refused in January 2024, and she was unaware what has changed to warrant a recommendation of approval of the application. The applicant wishes to demolish the current dwelling and to erect a larger dwelling and increase the current footprint. She questioned whether such a larger dwelling is acceptable within a rural area and referred to a previous application, which was rejected, where a local family wished to demolish and erect a large dwelling in its place and another similar application was refused as the Committee considered that it should be consistent with its decisions. Councillor Roberts asked the Committee to conform with its previous decisions as regards to consistency, to refuse this application.

Councillor Ieuan Williams, a Local Member referred that the size of the proposed dwelling is of concern as regards to this application. He referred to criterion 7 of planning policy TAN 13 that states that the siting and design of a totally new development should be of a similar scale and size and should not create a visual impact significantly greater than the existing dwelling in order that it can be satisfactorily absorbed or integrated into the landscape. The proposal would lead to a dwelling of 129% larger than the current dwelling and he disagreed with the Officer’s report that the proposal would not have an effect on the landscape. He emphasized that the proposal is not of a similar size to the current dwelling, and he did not consider that there are acceptable circumstances to approve the application. The effect on the amenities of neighboring properties is evident and the construction of the track is near to the wall of the neighboring property with parking places being created. The applicant has planted leylandii trees on the boundary of the neighboring property which will have an effect on their amenities. Councillor Williams emphasized that the application is contrary to planning policy TAI 13 and should be refused due to the size of the replacement dwelling.

The Planning Development Manager responded that the reasons for refusing the application in January 2024 was that the Planning Department was not satisfied with the justification as to the Structural Survey presented and the cost comparisons in demolition of the dwelling and erection of a replacement dwelling. The applicant has thereafter submitted a detailed Structural Survey as reported previously and more information has been received to recommend approval of the application. He addressed the comments that the Committee should be consistent in its decisions and emphasized that each application must be considered on its own merits. Whilst it is accepted that the footprint of the proposed development with be increased, and a photomontage was afforded to the Committee to view the design and size of the dwelling. He emphasized that the proposal is not within an AONB and will not have a detrimental effect on the landscape as is noted within planning policy TAN 13. He further said that the dwelling will be a residential dwelling and it is a distance from its neighboring properties and the planting of trees does not require permission.

Councillor Robin Williams said that he considered that the proposed dwelling is contrary to planning policy TAN 13 due to its size and will be three-story dwelling. He questioned the reasons as to the need for such an immense access and gate to the site. Councillor Williams proposed that the application be refused contrary to the Officer’s recommendation. Councillor Geraint Bebb seconded the proposal of refusal.

Councillor R Ll Jones said that he considered that the proposed dwelling was not extensively larger than the current dwelling and proposed that the application be approved in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation. Councillor Jeff Evans seconded the proposal of approval.

Following the vote of 7 for refusing the application and 4 for approval :-

It was RESOLVED to refuse the application, contrary to the Officer’s recommendation as it was considered that the application was contrary to planning policy TAN 13, criterion 7.

(In accordance with the requirements of the Constitution the application will be automatically deferred to the next meeting to allow the Officers to respond to the reasons given for refusing the application.)

7.5 FPL/2023/61 – Full application for the change of use of agricultural land into holiday lodge site, siting 13 holiday lodges, construction of new road on site, alterations to existing vehicular access together with soft and hard landscaping on land at Taldrwst, Lôn Fain, Dwyran

(Councillor John I Jones declared a personal (not prejudicial) interest in respect of the application and was able to speak and vote)

The application was presented to the Planning and Orders Committee at the request of a Local Member. At its meeting held on 1 November, 2023, the Committee resolved to conduct a physical site visit which subsequently took place on 15 November, 2023. At its meeting held on 6 December, 2023 the committee resolved to refuse the application contrary to the Officer’s recommendation on the grounds that insufficient drainage information had been received to allow members to come to a decision. The drainage information (including SAB approval) was submitted by the applicant and was presented to the meeting 5 June, 2024. The Committee resolved to refuse the application for the reasons given within the written report.

The Planning Development Manager reported that it is important to note that there is a real risk and likelihood of costs at appeal should the Committee continue with the intention to refuse the application. The applicant has provided information as required by the Committee. He noted that nearly 6 months has passed in dealing with the application. Following the information being provided, members brought forward additional reasons for refusal. He further said that the drainage issue, for SAB was outside the planning process, and this was the only reason for refusing the application in December 2023 and the applicant was given the opportunity to address the matter. The Committee once again refused the application on 5 June, 2024 for additional reasons as is noted within the Officer’s written report to this Committee. Whilst it is accepted that Members may raise other material considerations, there has been 8 months since the application was presented to the Committee and the applicant could have appealed against non-determination of the application during that time.

The Planning Development Manager further reported that as mentioned in the original report to the Committee, the impact upon residential amenities, such as nuisance is considered under planning policy PCYFF 2, which states proposals will be refused where they would have an unacceptable negative impact. The proposal is well screened from the neighbouring properties and as such is not considered that there are any effects arising from overlooking. The main concern was the noise and disturbance through the proximity of the 13 holiday units to the residential property to the west of the site, but having visited the site, the Department was satisfied there is sufficient distance from the neighbouring property to the units to prevent noise and disturbance being an issue to an extent that warrant refusal of the application as was noted within the written report. It was further noted that the site does not include any specific outdoor amenity areas (benches, fire pits, decking etc) and as such would not encourage significant use of the external areas. Furthermore, it must be considered that the neighbouring property is already in close proximity to the existing Taldrwst complex which includes several letting units, B&B rooms along with a bar. Consequently, the Department does not consider that the level of disturbance arising from the scheme would cause such deviation from any existing arrangements that would warrant refusal on this basis alone. The proximity of the site is near the busy A4080 along with the settlement of Dwyran, which have their own background levels of disturbance/noise and therefore it is not considered that there are grounds for refusing the application on the basis of impact on residential amenity. It was further reported that a local member claims that the proposal does not effectively conform with planning policies PCYFF 3 and PCYFF 4 by virtue of the hedge along the A4080 not being evergreen and thus the site will not be obscured for 12 months of the year. The Local Planning Authority accepts that naturally the screening will be less effective during the winter months due to leaf loss, however, during the summer months, the roadside hedge forms an excellent visual barrier from the A4080.

Reference was made that Members referred to two reasons for refusing the application in relation to highways matters, the first of which relating to the junction of Lôn Fain onto the A4080 and the capacity of Lôn Fain to accommodate additional traffic due to its insufficient width. The Highways Authority had no objection to the scheme and were satisfied with the new access and capacity of Lôn Fain. Without substantial evidence for demonstrating why the members chose to disagree with the professional opinion of the Highways Officers, there is a substantial risk of costs of appeal. The new proposed access is 25m from the junction and it could be argued that it is an improvement and widens the road which provides a passing place. The Planning Development Manager said that the applicant has addressed every issue that has been raised and therefore there are no reasons to refuse the application and the recommendation is still one of approval of the application subject to the conditions contained within the report.

Councillor Arfon Wyn, a Local Member reiterated that the application should be refused as the area has saturated ground and the Dwyran Flood Partnership Group monitor the situation daily with most of the members of the partnership living close to the Taldrwst site. He referred that the concerns of local residents need to be taken into account as there is a possibility that sewage will flow into their homes from the soakaways and also their homes could be flooded. He further said that Lôn Fain is a narrow road, and two cars are unable to pass each other. School children walking on the side of the road from the housing estate above the Taldrwst site walk on this narrow road. He referred to the junction onto the A4080 and the visibility is restricted from the right from the Newborough direction. There is numerous other holiday accommodation in the area; within a radius of 5 miles there are 8 holiday developments together with the Plas Coch Holiday Park. He noted that the AONB is opposite this development, and he considered that the AONB should be safeguarded. The quality of the lives of local residents needs to be taken into account as they live near the site with additional traffic and noise pollution from the site. He further said that there are concerns of the sewerage overflow as the development site is on high ground and the soakaways should be at least 1.3m into the ground but the bedrock at this location is only 0.8m.

Councillor John I Jones, and a Local Member said that the application has raised objections from both the Local Members, the Rhosyr Community Council and the local residents. He referred that Lôn Fain is a narrow road with no path to be able to walk safely from the site. The application affords 26 parking places, and these vehicles will need to travel towards the junction joining the main road to Newborough. He noted that there are immense traffic problems in the area due to people visiting Llanddwyn Beach and other attractions in the area. The visitors from the chalets will need to travel from the site to visit these attractions. He expressed that there is no capacity in Newborough to take further visitors as there are concerns that the Emergency Services will be unable to attend to any emergency in the area due to the traffic problems. He further said that the site is near the AONB which needs to be protected. Councillor Jones further referred to a recent application for 10 motorhomes near the A4080 which is a busy road, and this application was refused by the Local Planning Authority and the appeal was rejected. He further ascertained whether the doctor’s surgery can accommodate these people who may need medical treatment. He also referred that the screening of the site will not be screened during the winter months.

In addressing the comments made by the Local Members the Planning Development Manager responded that the concerns expressed as regards to this application have been considered and responses from statutory consultees have been received as regards to this application. The SAB approval has been received and therefore from the drainage and surface water perspective these issues have been addressed. He considered that the Lôn Fain road up to the junction to the entrance of the site is sufficiently wide for two vehicles, but it is from the property at Ty Gwyn that the road narrows to a single lane. The A4080 has a speed limit of 40 mph, and the junction has an acceptable splay. He further said that the capacity for such a development has been addressed at the previous meeting. The distance from the nearby properties is considered sufficient. The Planning Development Manager referred to the comments that there is over-saturation of such developments in the area and traffic problems in Newborough area. He said that the problems in Newborough cannot be considered as part of this application. It is accepted that the site will not be totally screened from the highway during the winter months, but the chalets are brown in colour and the hedgerow should be sufficient to screen most of the site. He further addressed the comments made as to whether the doctor’s surgery can accommodate the additional people from the site. He noted that the tourists to the site will not be permanent residents.

Councillor Jeff Evans said that this application should have been determined at the 6 December, 2023 meeting as the applicant has addressed the concern raised and has afforded the SUD’s drainage and surface water report. He said the Committee had every opportunity to lodge any other matters of concerns at that meeting and continued new issues ought not to be permitted as regards to why this application should be refused. Councillor Jeff Evans proposed that the application be approved in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation. Councillor Robert Ll Jones seconded the proposal of approval.

The Legal Services Manager said that there are risks within any appeal of refusal of this application as the issues raised have been addressed since the 6 December, 2023 meeting and the facts of the application have not changed since then.

Councillor John I Jones said that it must be considered that there are 10 water pods to hold water near the site, and NRW are continuing to score that there is 90% chance of immense flood risks in the area and additional works is required to prevent flooding in the area.

Councillor John I Jones proposed that the application be refused contrary to the Officer’s recommendation. Councillor Geraint Bebb seconded the proposal of refusal.

Following the vote of 8 in approval of the application and 3 against :-

It was RESOLVED to approve the application in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation, subject to the planning conditions contained within the written report.

7.6 FPL/2023/339 – Full application to change the design of the building together with a retrospective application for the installation of package treatment plant at the boat store adjacent to Lane Ends, Llaneilian

The application was presented to the Planning and Orders Committee at the request of two Local Members due to concerns of over development and local concerns. At its meeting held on 5 June, 2024 the Committee resolved to defer the application to allow the Committee to view the PEDW report. The PEDW report has now been circulated to the Members of the Committee.

The Planning Development Manager reported that the application reference 24C352 was approved in February 2019 for the erection of a new garage/boat store. This building was not built according to the approved plans, with bi-folds doors and a window installed instead of the two garage doors on the front elevation. A Juliet balcony was placed on the side elevation rather than the steps and door, a treatment plant was installed together with an internal toilet, and the storage area extends along the whole first floor level, rather than a void above the boat store. The site was subject to an enforcement investigation in 2021 due to the lack of compliance with the approved plans. An application was submitted in an attempt to regularise these changes, but it was refused in August 2022 as the changes to the design were more akin of a dwelling rather than the approved boat store. The decision was appealed, with the appeal dismissed by PEDW in September 2023. This application seeks to change the design of the building, making it more akin of its intended use as a boat store. The current unregularized bifold door will be replaced by a garage door leading to the boat store, the window will be replaced by a garage door for the workshop, whilst the current anthracite grey pedestrian door will be retained. This will lead to the front elevation of the building to resemble a boat store, which is similar to the design to that previously approved in 2019. The other external change is the Juliet balcony instead of the door and stairs. As this is on the south side elevation and is not visible from public view, it is considered a small-scale alteration which will have no impact on the design of the building. It is considered a high-quality design, in accordance with planning policy PCYFF 3. Condition (2) of any approval of the application will ensure that all building works are completed within a two-year timeframe. The internal changes to include a toilet are considered reasonable due to the distance and seasonal nature of the closest public toilets. The other internal changes are the storage area across the whole first floor level, as opposed to the previously approved void above the boat store. The sectional drawings highlight around 5m from floor to ceiling internally, with 2.25m on the ground floor and 2.4m on the first floor. The Local Planning Authority is unable to be specific on the type of boat that will be stored in the building, with condition (06) restricting its use as a boat store, with any alternative use constituting a breach of planning control.

Councillor Robin Williams proposed that the application be approved in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation. Councillor Neville Evans seconded the proposal of approval.

It was RESOLVED to approve the application in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation, subject to the planning conditions contained within the written report.

7.7 FPL/2024/40 – Full application for the use of the existing yard to site storage containers on land at Anglesey Golf Club, Station Road, Rhosneigr

The application was presented to the Planning and Orders Committee at the request of Local Members. At its meeting held on 5 June, 2024 the members resolved to conduct a site visit which subsequently took place on 19 June, 2024.

Public Speaker

Mr Berwyn Owen, the applicant’s Agent, in support of the application said that the Anglesey Golf Club has opened its doors to other activities over the years for a fortnightly bingo session for the elderly, lunches for the staff of the RAF Valley, fundraising events and entertainment evenings. The Golf Club has existed for approximately 110 years. He said that the building is in need of repair and unless there is diversification of the Golf Club it may not survive next year and this would be a great loss to the community. The site is on brownfield land near the golf club. The site is already used as a storage yard with 4 containers sited. It is also used as an open storage yard for building equipment, machinery, and deliveries for the golf course e.g. topsoil. The intention is simply to use the site for additional storage containers. This will include an extensive landscaping scheme prepared by a qualified Landscaping Architect on behalf of the Club which will improve the existing visual appearance of the site. Mr Owen further said that there is no mention within the Officer’s report that the landscaping scheme has been carefully prepared specifically for this coastal location. There is no mention of the valuable community resource that could be lost nor the 5 full time positions, and the fight to keep this historic establishment. This kind of development is supported by Planning Policy Wales and Technical Advisory Note 6.

The Planning Development Manager reported that the parcel of land lies outside the development boundary of Rhosneigr and lies next to the Anglesey Golf Club. Land to the south and west of the application site are established touring and static caravan sites and the land to the north and east is the Anglesey Golf Club. A track runs along the rear of the site leading from the A4080 to the RAF viewers car park. The application site is currently used as an overflow car park for the golf club. Storage containers have also been placed on the land over the past few years, however the numbers have fluctuated between 1 and 5 containers. The proposal is for the change of use of the land to site 44 containers (39 standard and 5 small containers) together with landscaping. Planning Policy PCYFF 4 is relevant to such an application and developments will be granted provided that they conform to all of the relevant criteria. Criteria (1) of the policy notes that the proposed site should be located within or adjoining the development boundary of the Sub-regional Centre, Urban or Local Centre; the site lies 150m away from the development boundary of the Local Service Centre of Rhosneigr. Criteria (2) of the policy notes that proposals should have compelling evidence presented to justify the need for the development taking into account the national tests set out in PPW and TAN 23. Only exceptional circumstances can new initiatives be permitted on non-safeguarded or allocated sites. Whilst the information submitted in support of the application states that the development will provide a vital source of income for the Golf Club and if the proposal is refused it is likely that the Golf Club will cease to exist. Whilst it is evident that the future of the Golf Club is important, there has been no evidence presented that the Golf Club is in financial difficulties and no supporting documentation that there is a need for such storage containers in the area. Criteria (3) notes where appropriate, an existing building or a previously developed site is used in order to meet the need and Criteria (4) notes the scale, type and design of the development is appropriate for the site and the locality or is compatible with existing uses on the site. The application site lies in an open countyside location and is situated next to two holiday parks. The site fronts the A4080 and is located in a prominent location which would be visible when travelling out of the village toward Llanfaelog. The proposal involves the siting of 44 storage containers, and it is not considered that the scale and type of development is acceptable in this prominent location.

The Planning Development Manager further reported that the application site lies close to the designated AONB, SPA, SSSI and Wildlife sites. Currently low-lying hedges are located along the border of the site, however due to the topography of the site the existing containers can be seen from the adjoining A4080. The placing of an additional 40 containers on the land would result in the site being highly obtrusive and would have a negative visual impact on the locality and would be highly visible when travelling along the A4080 to and from the village and from the nearby public right of way which runs through the golf course grounds and surrounding elevated viewpoints. This land is classed as being in the open countryside, the proposal would lead to an unacceptable industrial use in the open countryside. Criteria 4 of planning policy CYF 1 also states that development must be appropriate to the site. Sketches have been submitted in support of the application to illustrate how the development may look in the future. The Senior Planning Officer – Landscape and Trees has reviewed the documents and stated that the planting scheme proposed to mitigate the development would take between 10-15 years to establish properly on a normal site and the fact that the site is in such an open setting and subject to high winds and salt air would severely affect the establishment of any planting. The Planning Development Manager said that the site lies in a prominent position in the open countryside and would lead to an unacceptable development which conflicts with Policy PCYFF 1, PCYFF 3, PCYFF 4 and CYF 4 of the Joint Local Development Plan. The proposal was to refuse the application for the reasons given.

Councillor Douglas Fowlie, a Local Member said that he considered that the application conforms with planning policy PS1 – Welsh Language and Culture as events are held regularly at the Golf Club and the Welsh language is at the forefront of the activities of the Club. He referred that the reference has been made that the site is within the open countryside, but it was evident on the site visit that the site lies opposite a caravan site, the golf club, sports club and the railway line and not within the open countryside. He further referred to planning policy CYF 4 – New Large single user industrial or business enterprise on sites not safeguarded or allocated for employment purposes: Councillor Fowlie said that 5 employees are employed by the Golf Club. He noted that there has only been one objection to the application.

Councillor Neville Evans, and a Local Member said that he accepted the planning considerations attached to the application, but the Golf Club is in financial difficulties and there is a strong possibility that the Club will close which will have a significant effect as it attracts visitor to the area and will result in 5 members of staff losing their employment. He said that during the site visit it was evident that there is a need to tidy the area and this proposal will result in improvement to the visual impact of the site. He further said that businesses must diversify to continue in business. Councillor Evans read out a letter of support by Golf Wales to the Committee.

The Planning Development Manager in response to the comments made by the Local Members and said that he appreciated that the Golf Club is an important asset to the community with events taking place regularly at the club. However, there is no evidence submitted that the Anglesey Golf Club is in financial difficulties and the application has been considered within its own merits and against relevant planning polices and its effect on the landscape. The site is outside the development boundary of Rhosneigr and is within the open countryside according to PCYFF 1 planning policy. He further said that it is considered that the site is not appropriate for 44 storage containers as the site is near a tourist and coastal area. Due to its location near the coast, it will take years for the planting scheme to grow to landscape the site.

Councillor Jackie Lewis referred to the events that take place at the Golf Club and questioned where the vehicles will be parking as the proposed site is currently the over-flow car park for the Club. She referred to whether the Golf Club owns the land and whether there are other types of trees which grow better to mitigate the effect on the landscape. The Planning Development Manager responded that as previously reported that the application has been considered on its own merits as additional information has not been presented with the application. He noted that the loss of the over-flow car park would be a matter for the applicant’s agent to address. He questioned why there was a need for storage of containers to be on the site and other material use should be considered for the Club to diversify to help with the financial difficulties that is faced by the Club. He addressed the questioned as regards to the tree planting on the site and noted that the site is near the coast and did not consider that there are native trees that could be planted to grow better to mitigate the effect.

Councillor Neville Evans proposed that the application be approved contrary to the Officer’s recommendation. Councillor Jeff Evans seconded the proposal of approval as he did not consider that the site was in open countryside and that such a facility needs to be supported.

It was RESOLVED to approve the application contrary to the Officer’s recommendation as members accepted that the club was in financial difficulties and were it to close its loss would mean a loss both of jobs and of a valuable local resource. Whilst accepting that the location was, technically, in open countryside, the character of the location was more like that of a brownfield site.

7.8 HHP/2024/56 – Full application for alterations and extensions at 2 Saith Lathen, Ty Croes

The application was presented to the Planning and Orders Committee at the request of a Local Member due to concerns regarding parking, building over drains and over-development of the site.

The Planning Development Manager reported that the application site is a semi-detached cottage located within the Bryn Du cluster as defined by the Joint Local Development Plan. The application is for alterations and extensions to the property, consisting of a single storey rear extension. The application site is a small property, with a lounge/bed sit in the original cottage, together with a kitchen, sitting room, bathroom and utility in the extension approved in 2019. The proposed scheme is for the erection of a single storey rear extension, extending from the rear of the existing extension. It will extend approximately 4.4m beyond the rear elevation and will measure 2.8m wide and will have a flat roof at 2.8m height, which is the same as the existing extension. It is a small-scale extension which will integrate into the rear garden, which has ample space to accommodate the extension without compromising the amenity space for the occupiers and complying with planning policy PCYFF 2. He noted that if the extension measured 4.0m it would be considered under permitted development criteria. The extension is a single-storey development, and it is not considered that it will have a negative effect on its neighbouring property and the Local Highways Authority have raised no objection to the application. Welsh Water have confirmed that they have no assets within the curtilage of the site. The recommendation was of approval of the application.

Councillor Douglas Fowlie, a Local Member said that the proposed extension would be located directly above the water services which is of concern to the neighbouring property. He considered that this proposal is over-development of the site as this is the third development on the site within 5 years. An extension was approved in 2019 and the siting of a caravan was approved within the site in 2022. The siting of caravans in gardens of properties is an issue within the area and some are used for annexes. He noted that the caravan used as an annex on the site has received temporary permission which could be an issue in the future. Councillor Fowlie further said that there is lack of parking facilities on the site. He considered that the application does not comply with planning policy PCYFF 2.

Councillor Neville Evans, and a Local Member said that he shared the concerns of his fellow Local Member as regards to the parking issues in the area. He noted that there has been concerns as regards to the annex on the site as it has been classed as a caravan, but it is much higher than a caravan.

The Planning Development Manager responded that issues raised as regards to water services is a private issue and not a planning consideration. He noted that there is a Certificate of Lawfulness as regards to the annexe on the site and it is not for temporary use and not a material consideration whilst dealing with this application. He referred to the parking facilities on the site and as there is no increase in bedrooms as part of the application the Highways Authority have raised no objection to the application.

Councillor Jackie Lewis said that it was evident during the site visit that there is ample space to accommodate an extension to the property and the proposed extension is lower than dwelling to the back of the property. Councillor Jackie Lewis proposed that the application be approved. Councillor Robin Williams seconded the proposal of approval of the application.

It was RESOLVED to approve the application in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation, subject to the planning conditions contained within the written report.

Supporting documents:

Enclosure CH, item 7. PDF 4 MB