Agenda item

7.1 14C135A – Glasfryn, Ty’n Lon

7.2 46C263M – Ty’n Towyn Caravan Park, Lôn St Ffraid, Trearddur Bay

7.1 14C135A – Full application for the erection of a dwelling and private garage, creation of a new vehicular access together with the installation of a package treatment plant on land adjacent to Glasfryn, Ty’n Lon

The application was presented to the Planning and Orders Committee at the request of a Local Member, Councillor R.G.Parry,OBE. The Committee at its meeting held on 6^th November, 2013 resolved to approve the application contrary to the Officer’s recommendation as it was of the view that it complied  with Policy PT2 in relation to rural clusters and Policy 50 of the Ynys Môn Local Plan. At the meeting of the Planning and Orders Committee held on 6^th December, 2013 the reasons for approving the application were discussed and it was subsequently resolved to defer determination of the application to allow Planning Officers to consult with the applicant regarding the provision of evidence of an affordable housing need. The consultation process has now been completed and additional information has been provided by the applicant.

The Planning Development Manager informed the Committee that since the written report was drafted the applicants have confirmed they are willing to accept a Section 106 agreement thus providing the mechanism to ensure the continued affordability of the proposed dwelling in accordance with Policy PT2 requirements. Therefore the sole objection to the application on planning grounds is the inadequacy of the visibility onto the public highway from the access serving the site which Highways Officers regard as substandard because it is only half of what is advised under current guidance. The Highways Authority’s view is that the increase in the use of the substandard access for residential users could be detrimental to road safety. The Officer said that in light of the Highways Officer’s professional advice, the recommendation remains to refuse the application but for reasons of highway safety.

Councillor Nicola Roberts, speaking as a Local Member pointed out that when the Committee approved the application in November, 2013 contrary to the Officer’s recommendation, and the reasons for doing so were discussed at the following meeting in December, the principal issue of objection was one of policy compliance on the grounds of affordability. That issue has now been addressed; Highways Officers have viewed the site – two officers have been out and have provided differing opinions. Councillor Roberts reminded the Committee that the applicants are a young couple who will contribute to the community. She emphasised that the site access is already in use by the residents of other dwellings in the vicinity and that it also serves a farm and more recently a shop. She said that one other dwelling is unlikely to have a fundamental effect on the highway situation and that in terms of highway considerations it is matter of differing professional views. She asked the Committee to consider the application carefully with a view to approval.

Councillor Victor Hughes drew attention to the applicants’ intention to remove the conifer hedge on the road side which will greatly improve visibility around the access and help current users Councillor Hughes said he supported the application.

Councillor Jeff Evans felt that the Committee had been put in an invidious position and that he found it difficult to reconcile the situation as at November when no pre-eminence was given to the visibility issue with the position now in March when the matter is put forward as a ground for refusal. He said that he believed it would be unfair to reject the application but that on the other hand he could not support it until he had had a satisfactory explanation for the change in position from November, to March.

The Senior Engineer (Development Control) said that there appeared to be a misunderstanding and that the stance taken by Highways Officers with regard to this proposal has been consistent from November to March. The visibility provided by the access which has been assessed on the current 40 mph speed restriction applicable to that part of the public highway is 50m and falls too far short of the 120m which the guidance states it should be. Although removing the conifer hedging around the access site will improve the situation, the visibility in the Highways Officer’s professional opinion remains insufficient in the context of the guidance. The Officer confirmed that there was no history of road accidents in the application area.

In the ensuing discussion, Members referred to the matter of consistency in the way applications are dealt with and they highlighted that based on the evidence, there is regular usage of the current access with no detrimental effect to road safety. On that basis they were minded to approve the application but were reluctant to do so contrary to the Highways Officer’s professional opinion regarding the substandard visibility provided by the access and the question of road safety which that raises. It was suggested that the application be again deferred to allow further discussions.

The Planning Development Manager suggested that it might be advisable for the Committee to consider viewing the site for itself. The Legal Services Manager concurred with this suggestion and advised that if Members are supportive of the application then viewing and assessing the site for themselves in light of the Highways Officer’s opinion as a basis to then determine the application would be helpful in terms of reducing the risk of challenge or of defending a challenge to the decision should it arise.

Councillor Richard Owain Jones proposed that a site visit be undertaken to enable Members to assess for themselves the application site access and the associated risk as regards road safety.Councillor Victor Hughes seconded the proposal.

It was resolved that a site visit be undertaken for the reasons given.

7.2  46C263M – Full application for the siting of 11 log cabins for holiday purposes, construction of a new access and landscaping at Ty’n Towyn Caravan Park, Lôn St.Ffraid, Trearddur Bay

The application is presented to the Planning and Orders Committee for determination at the request of a Local Member. The application site was visited by Members of the Committee on 19^th February, 2014.

The Planning Development Manager referred to the application site access and he confirmed that the access does conform to the appropriate standards for access onto the highway. The Officer’s recommendation is one of approval subject to a Section 106 agreement to deliver habitat management on the remainder of the land in the applicant’s ownership.  The Officer explained that following further discussions, Officers have come to the conclusion that should a financial contribution towards a footway on the part of the applicant be unforthcoming as part of the application, that is not a reason for refusing the application; therefore it is proposed that that stipulation is removed from the section 106 agreement. However, it is understood that the applicant has agreed in discussions with the Highways Authority to make such a contribution.

Councillor Jeff Evans said that having visited the site his personal opinion was that the access onto the highway is dangerous but that nevertheless he accepted the Highways Officer’s professional opinion and therefore proposed that the application be approved.

Councillor Kenneth Hughes said that whilst he was happy to second the proposal of approval he would like to see a provision via a planning condition to deter any link being made between the access road to the application site and the present access to the caravan site beyond. The Planning Development Manager said in response to the point raised and to a question about the continued use of the present access that there are no plans to dispense with the current access. The written report makes clear that no connection between the two sites is indicated. The Officer said however that such a provision could be incorporated within the consent.

It was resolved to approve the application in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation subject to a S106 agreement to deliver habitat management on the remainder of the land in the applicant’s ownership for the wider benefit of wildlife in the area over and above that offered within the application site together with the conditions listed in the written report and a condition to prevent connection of the new and existing access.