Pwyllgor Cynllunio Planning Committee Dyddiad: Date: 16/12/2013 Siambr Dafydd Orwig Chamber Caernarfon

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: SIAMBR DAFYDD ORWIG 16/12/2013 PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE : CHAMBER CAERNARFON

EITEM CAIS RHIF CYMUNED LLEOLIAD ITEM APPLICATION COMMUNITY LOCATION NUMBER

1 C13/0710/23/LL Llanrug Tir yn / Land at Parc Uchaf, Llanrug, 2 C13/0405/21/LL Llanllechid Ogwen Bank Caravan Park & Country Club, Bethesda 3 C13/0545/11/LL Bangor H M Revenue & Customs, Ty Glyn, High Street, Bangor 4 C13/0561/39/LL Llanengan Tir Gyferbyn / Land Opposite - Anhywel, Lon Pont Morgan, Abersoch 5 C13/0640/45/CR Pwllheli Whitehall, Stryd Moch, Pwllheli 6 C13/0667/45/LL Pwllheli Whitehall, Stryd Moch, Pwllheli 7 C13/0658/26/LL Waunfawr Adeiladau Allanol - Outbuildings, Pen y Cefn, Caeathro 8 C13/0693/38/LL Llanbedrog Mountain View, Trem y Mynydd, Llanbedrog 9 C13/0723/11/LL Bangor Cyn safle/Former Jewson Site, Penlon Works, Stryd Fawr/High Street, Bangor 10 C13/0765/25/LL Pentir Ty Coch, Glasinfryn, Bangor 11 C13/1028/11/LL Bangor 20 Trem Elidir, Maes Tryfan, Bangor

Number: 1

Number : 1

REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE REFER TO A COOLING OFF PERIOD

DATE OF THE 16 December 2013 PLANNING COMMITTEE:

DESCRIPTION AND Application No. C13/0710/23/LL – to erect two dwellings LOCATION OF and garages together with associated access, land at Parc APPLICATION: Uchaf, Llanrug.

REPORT BY: Head of Regulatory Department

RECOMMENDATION: To accept the recommendation, namely to refuse the application on the basis of the requirements of Policy CH1 and CH6 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan together with the Supplementary Planning Guidance: Development Briefs and Planning Policy Wales, Chapter 9 “Housing” as the applicant has not proven beyond doubt that circumstances have changed and there is no further requirement for affordable housing in Llanrug, and as no evidence has been submitted to justify why the site cannot be developed for a higher density of housing.

1. PURPOSE

1.1 This application was reported to the Planning Committee on 04.11.13 and the intention of the Committee was to approve it, contrary to the recommendation and the grounds that there was no need for further affordable housing in Llanrug, and there was a need for these houses in order to satisfy the applicant’s special need. To this end, the Members were of the view that these considerations supported a lower building density on the site. In the opinion of the Head of Regulatory Department, this decision represented a significant risk to the Council and therefore the matter was referred to a cooling off period in line with the Committee’s standing orders. The purpose of reporting back to the Committee is to highlight the planning policy issues, the possible risks and the possible options for the Committee before it reaches a final decision on the application.

1.2 In response to the above, further enquiries were made on the basis of the need for affordable housing in Llanrug by contacting the Joint Planning Policy Unit and the Council’s Strategic and Improvement Service. Briefly, the information and evidence received is based on the following:

(i) The investigation of the latest information by the Land Registry and Salaries indicates that affordability continues to be an issue that requires attention in the Llanrug ward together with neighbouring wards (within the Caernarfon catchment area).

(ii) Figures from a study conducted in 2012 reveal that the prices of houses sold in the Llanrug ward on average are approximately five times the average income of the ward and usually the affordability ratio is approximately 3.5 times the income average that is considered reasonable. It is also disclosed that approximately 57% of the households in the Llanrug ward have been priced out of the local housing market.

(iii) The investigation of the ‘Rightmove’ website in November 2013 indicates that the prices of detached houses with three and four bedrooms in Llanrug and the area and within one mile are very high (varying from £178,000 £332,000) and outside the ability of local families to buy.

(iv) The Gwynedd Common Housing Register on 22.11.13 (needs of Llanrug and neighbouring communities) reveals that 93 applications were registered for two bedroom houses and 51 applications received for three bedroom housing.

(v) Information included in the Tai Teg register indicates that 28 individuals have noted that Llanrug is their first choice for a house and from this figure 20 have noted that they need a three bedroom house with prices that would be affordable for them varying from £85,000£100,000 (12), £105,000 £120,000 (7), £125,000£140,000 (2) and two state £150,000 (it has to be noted that five applicants did not answer this part of the questionnaire).

1.3 The above figures undoubtedly confirm that it is necessary to provide more affordable housing in Llanrug and the neighbouring area and the current proposal does not contribute to satisfying this need. No robust evidence has been submitted with the application to confirm that there is no need for further affordable housing units in Llanrug or the neighbouring area.

1.4 In addition to the above, ‘intermediate’ housing is defined in planning terms as a specific type of affordable housing. Paragraph 5.1 of Technical Advice Note 2 ‘Planning and Affordable Housing’ states that affordable housing includes social rented housing and intermediate housing. Paragraph 5.2 states “Social rented housing is that provided by local authorities and registered social landlords. Intermediate housing is that where prices or rents are above those of social rent but below market housing prices or rents". In this case the applicant does not intend to provide an intermediate house but rather the intention is to provide two large houses on the open market which means that there is no planning mechanism to control occupancy or the prices of the houses initially, or in the future.

2. DESCRIPTION

2.1 The application is to construct two 2storey houses with four bedrooms with the floor area of house 1 being 181.15m2 with the floor area of the second house being 175.56m2, together with the two garages at the rear of the houses with a floor area of 36m2 each. In comparison, the maximum floor area for a four bedroom affordable house as included in the Supplementary Planning Guidance: Affordable Housing is 120m2 with 20m2 for an attached garage. The application also entails the creation of a new access to the nearby class III county highway that will be shared by the occupants of the two houses.

2.2 The site is on a plot of land within the development boundary of Llanrug and which has been earmarked for residential development in the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan (GUDP), in addition, a Development Brief (November 2009) has been prepared for the site. This site forms part of a larger site which has been earmarked for 12 houses in the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan. According to the requirements of the Development Brief which has been prepared specifically for the site, it will be a requirement to develop this site in its entirety for a density of 30 units per hectare and this equates to constructing six residential units on the site which is the subject of this application. There are six other remaining units on the site which has already been designated and received approval in September 2013 for six dwellings with two of these being affordable dwellings.

2.3 As part of the planning application pack a planning statement was submitted supporting the application on the grounds of relevant local and national policies. Briefly, the statement notes:

(i) Approving this application for two substantial houses would contribute towards a mixture of housing for local people on this site, along with the adjacent site which has already received permission for six houses which are smaller in size (including two affordable houses). (ii) This proposal would not have an adverse impact or undermine the GUDP strategy as a considerable number of new houses (most of them small houses and affordable houses), have already been provided by the development of undesignated sites (sites which become available at random, e.g. the site of the former Ysgol Glanmoelyn) and on sites which have been designated such as Parc Isaf and Pencae. To date, a total of 52 houses have been completed during the period of the GUDP (20012016). (iii) In addition to the above figure, there are several unexpected random sites in the village including a site for 10 two bedroom houses on the site of Cae’r Eglwys in the centre of the village, but is yet to be commenced. (iv) The proposal to reduce the number of houses on this site from six to two will not undermine the five year land supply for housing. Based on a recently published study, the loss of four houses would not reduce the supply below that of five years. Apart from this, the loss of four houses would not be material considering the total number of units needed within the five years, namely 2,200 residential units. At worst the application if approved would mean a reduction in the supply of 0.2% only. (v) The number of houses for sale in the village is comparatively low compared with the size of the village. (vi) Approving the application would mean supporting sustainable communities along with improving the choice of different types of houses in the village for the local population.

2.4 Information was submitted by the applicant that refers to the special needs of a child of the prospective occupiers of one of the proposed houses. The information was in the form of supporting letters from officers of the Council’s Integrated Disabled Children’s Team together with the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, the child’s GP, Tŷ Gobaith Children’s Hospice and the Vicepresident of Mencap Wales. There is no doubt that special needs exist, however, these special needs can be met in a housing scheme that would also conform with the policies.

2.5 The application was submitted to the Planning Committee on 04.11.13 with a recommendation for refusal on the basis:

(i) The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy CH1 and CH6 of the GUDP, Supplementary Planning Guidance: Development Briefs (2009) and Planning Policy Wales and TAN 2 “Planning and Affordable Housing” because the proposal does not include an element of affordable dwellings for local need and the applicant has been unable to prove beyond doubt that circumstances have changed so that the requirement for affordable dwellings in Llanrug no longer exists.

(ii) The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy CH1 of the GUDP, Supplementary Planning Guidance: Development Briefs (2009) and Planning Policy Wales, Chapter 9 on “Housing” as the development does not propose to build at a density of 30 houses per hectare on this designated site and it is not considered that building two houses on a site designated for six houses makes the most efficient use of resources particularly when no physical or environmental justification has been submitted to justify why this site will not be developed in accordance with the relevant SPG: Development Brief.

2.7 A copy of the report submitted to the Planning Committee on 04.11.13 is enclosed and explains the background of the application further.

3. POLICY CONTEXT

Planning Policy Wales (Edition 5, November 2012) and Technical Advice Note (TAN)

3.1 Prior to determining this application consideration will have to be given to National Planning Policy which is a material planning consideration when determining planning applications. It provides a policy framework for Local Planning Authorities in order that they prepare effective development plans and the Welsh Ministers and Planning Inspectors will consider these when determining planning applications that are called in and also in an appeal.

3.2 Paragraph 9.2.12 of Planning Policy Wales, Chapter 9 – Housing, encourages developments that make the most effective use of resources which includes land with high densities on easily accessible sites, where appropriate. This aim is reflected in the Development Brief (UDP) where a general building density of 30 units per hectare is expected on the site (which includes the site next door that has already received consent for six houses including two affordable houses) together with TAN 2 Planning and Affordable Housing, (2006) where paragraph 10.8 states that “local planning authorities may apply their policies on affordable housing to planning applications in respect of sites falling below the relevant sitecapacity threshold where they can demonstrate that those sites are capable of delivering more housing than proposed”. This policy document also states: “Local planning authorities may include indicative affordable housing targets for individual sites included in the development plan”. The Local Planning Authority and the Planning Inspectors have followed this advice by applying a building density of 30 units per hectare on sites that are designated for housing in the GUDP. 3.3 The high density of housing on sites designated in the GUDP assists to create sustainable, mixed and balanced communities by ensuring a mixture of different types and sizes of housing and affordability that satisfy local housing needs. In this case, erecting two large four bedroom houses does not respond to this aim and objective as it has been limited to responding to the applicant’s personal requirements rather than the housing needs of the local population. As has already been stated, there is no doubt that special requirements exist, however, it is considered that these special needs can be met in a housing scheme that would also conform with policy requirements.

3.4 The proposal is tantamount to building density of approximately 10 units per hectare although the GUDP applies a building density of 30 units per hectare. The applicant has been unable to prove beyond doubt (based on factors such as infrastructure and additional costs) why five or six houses cannot be erected on this particular site. In addition, it does not make the most efficient use of resources especially when there is no physical or amenity evidence submitted to justify why the site is not to be developed in accordance with the density of 30 units per hectare.

3.5 In the context of the policies and national planning advice the view is that the proposal does not conform with the requirements and the aim of these documents considering the lack of evidence submitted with the planning application to justify building two houses rather than building six houses to include two affordable dwellings.

Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan (GUDP) and Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG):-

3.6 A great many of the GUDP policies are relevant to this proposal and these have already been mentioned in the Committee Report on 04.11.13. However, the following policies set the planning background for the development of this site.

3.7 Policy CH1 of GUDP states that proposals to build new houses on sites allocated for housing will be approved provided that criteria relating to specific features of the development can be met. The explanation behind this policy confirms that allocated sites in the GUDP were chosen carefully in order to provide a source of new homes to meet with the need over the 15 years of the Plan’s lifetime. By assessing and undertaking research the Council has sought to ensure that these sites are suitable for housing and that there are no evident barriers to their development and that they are truly available. In addition to this, the principle of developing this site was supported by the Planning Inspector in the Local Public Inquiry.

3.8 In 2012, the Council published a study regarding monitoring the availability of land for housing and this indicated that supply was a little under 5 years which means that the County does not have a full supply of 5 years of land for housing. Although it is only a little under the target, low density developments (as has happened recently on sites allocated on the basis of infrastructure factors and additional costs) such as this case, without a physical or amenity reason may contribute to retaining the figure under five years without contributing to an additional reduction in the supply of land that is actually available for housing.

3.9 Policy CH6 o GUDP states that proposals for housing developments on sites allocated for housing will be approved as long as there is an element of affordable housing. In this case a target of 30% of the total number of houses on both sides should be affordable which equates to four of the twelve houses that should be affordable. Two affordable houses have already been given permission on the Parc Isaf site in September, 2013. However, the current application does not include any affordable house as part of the proposal. As has been referred to above, it is expected that allocated sites in the GUDP include a percentage of affordable housing, unless there is appropriate evidence to indicate otherwise. This aim of the Policy is supported by TAN 2 Planning and Affordable Housing (2006). In this particular case the applicant has not proven that circumstances have changed since the GUDP was adopted so that there is no further need for affordable housing in Llanrug and dependent catchment area of Caernarfon.

3.10 The applicant has not submitted evidence to show that providing affordable housing on the site would have an impact on the viability of the development and it appears that the desire and personal wish of the applicant is to provide housing rather than release the housing units on the open market. There is no local policy grounds to control housing occupancy to specific/local people unless they are affordable local need houses subject to a legal agreement under Section 106.

4. RISKS TO THE COUNCIL OF APPROVING THE APPLICATION

4.1 As has been outlined in the above assessment, granting the application will undermine planning policies at a local and national level. This is particularly true in terms of developing sites allocated in the GUDP that are part of the strategy and plan adopted by the Council to meet the need for an additional 1,384 housing units in the Caernarfon catchmentarea during the plan’s period (20012016). Underachieving would mean the need to allocate further land to meet the need for housing in the catchmentarea.

4.2 Granting the application would create inconsistency in terms of resolutions on applications to develop allocated housing sites in the GUDP where the Development Brief has been provided for the site.

4.3 It is also thought that granting the application would create a precedent for similar applications (i.e. no provision of affordable housing together with a low density of housing) on sites that have not been allocated which would together contribute towards retaining the figure to be under five years of land supply for housing in Gwynedd or contribute to an additional reduction in the supply of land that is actually available for housing.

4.4 It is also important to note that personal circumstances are not a relevant planning consideration as recorded in Planning Policy Wales, Chapter 3 Making Planning Decisions and Enforcing them, and such a reason for submitting the application initially cannot undermine and replace relevant policies and local and national plans. The Local Planning Authority has no doubt about the need to provide a suitable house for the health requirements of the child of one of the applicants and there is no objection to the internal layout of the proposed houses. However, this does not overcome the fact that it is expected that more than two houses are provided on a substantial site that has been allocated for more housing.

4.5 The view is that the information and additional evidence included in this latest assessment indicates clearly and without doubt that there is a need for affordable housing in Llanrug and the vicinity and there is no reason to grant the application contrary to the recommendation of the Officers on the grounds that there is no need for more affordable housing in Llanrug.

5. OPTIONS FOR THE COMMITTEE

5.1 If the Committee proposes to approve the application the options open to them include the following. The options have been noted according to the risk level to the Council with the level increasing as you go down the list:

a) Refuse the application in accordance with the recommendation.

b) Refuse the current application (and suggest the resubmission of an application for a development that makes more efficient use of the site and includes a provision of affordable housing).

c) Grant the application but that one of the houses is an affordable house (it would be necessary to ask for the right to act in order to agree on detailed plans that would meet with the definition of an affordable house).

ch) Grant the application as it has been submitted.

5.2 It must, therefore, be realised that there are genuine risks associated with granting this application for the Council. In order to ensure that the Council avoids the above risks and as the application does not comply with the Unitary Development Plan and national planning policies (on the grounds of a lack of evidence), the recommendation is:

(i) The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy CH1 and CH6 of the GUDP, Supplementary Planning Policy: Development Briefs, (2009) and TAN 2 Planning and Affordable Dwellings as the proposal does not include an element of affordable dwellings for local need and the applicant has been unable to prove beyond doubt that circumstances have changed so that requirements for affordable dwellings in Llanrug no longer exists.

(ii) The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy CH1 of GUDP, SPG: Development Briefs and Planning Policy Wales, chapter 9 on Housing, as the development does not propose to build at a density of 30 units per hectare on the designated site and it is not considered that building two houses on a site designated for six houses makes the most efficient use of resources particularly when no physical or environmental justification has been submitted to justify why this site will not be developed in accordance with the relevant SPG: Development Briefs.

6. APPENDIX

Appendix 1 – Copy of the report submitted to the Planning Committee 23.09.13.

APPENDIX 1

Number : 5

Application Number: C13/0710/23/LL Date Registered: 09/07/2013 Application Type: Full Planning Community: Llanrug Ward: Llanrug

Proposal: ERECT 2 DWELLINGS AND GARAGES TOGETHER WITH ASSOCIATED ACCESS Location: LAND AT PARC UCHAF , LLANRUG , CAERNARFON , GWYNEDD , LL554AW

Summary of the TO REFUSE Recommendation:

1. Description:

1.1 This is a full application to construct two twostorey houses on a plot of land within the development boundary of Llanrug and which has been earmarked for residential development in the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan (GUDP), in addition, a Development Brief (November 2009) has been prepared for the site. The proposal will also mean locating two garages at the rear of the houses and the new access to the adjacent class III county road would be shared between the occupants of the two houses. To the front of the site, the two proposed houses would have a front curtilage which would include a hard surface and a garden.

1.2 The house on plot 1 will include a lounge, living room, shower / utility room and a kitchen on the ground floor and four bedrooms (one of which has its use noted as a bedroom / office) and a bathroom on the first floor. It is proposed to install a natural slate roof, walls of natural stone facing and painted render with uPVC windows and doors. The house on plot 2 will include a lounge, living room, kitchen, utility room and a wet room on the ground floor and four bedrooms (one of which has its use noted as a bedroom / office) and a bathroom on the first floor. The exterior materials will match the fabrication of the house on plot 1.The internal area of the house on plot 1 will be 181.15m 2 and the internal area of the house on plot 2 will be 175.56m 2 excluding the two garages which have a floor area of 36m 2 each.

1.3 This site forms part of a larger site which has been earmarked for 12 houses in the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan. According to the requirements of the Development Brief which has been prepared specifically for the site, it will be a requirement to develop this site in its entirety for a density of 30 units per hectare and this equates to constructing six residential units on the site which is the subject of this application. The six other units have received permission on the remainder of the already earmarked site, two of which are affordable.

1.4 In accordance with the requirements of Technical Advice Note 12 on “Design” (June, 2009) a design and access statement was submitted with the application. Also submitted was a preassessment report demonstrating that level 3 could achieve with over 60 points of the Welsh Government’s code for sustainable homes 1.5 As part of the planning application pack a planning statement was submitted supporting the application on the grounds of relevant local and national policies. Briefly, the statement notes:

(vii) Approving this application for two substantial houses would contribute towards a mixture of housing for local people on this site, along with the adjacent site which has already received permission for six houses which are smaller in size (including two affordable houses). (viii) This proposal would not have an adverse impact or undermine the GUDP strategy as a considerable number of new houses (most of them small houses and affordable houses), have already been provided by the development of undesignated sites (sites which become available at random, e.g. the site of the former Ysgol Glanmoelyn) and on sites which have been designated such as Parc Isaf and Pencae. Thus far, a total of 52 houses have been completed during the period of the GUDP (20012016). (ix) In addition to the figure above, there are several unexpected or random sites in the village including a site for 10 two bedroom houses on the site of Cae’r Eglwys in the centre of the village but is yet to be commenced. (x) The proposal to reduce the number of houses on this site from six to two will not undermine the five year land supply for housing. Based on a recently published study, the loss of four houses would not reduce the supply below that of five years. Apart from this, the loss of four houses would not be material, considering the total number of units needed within the five years, namely 2,200 residential units. At worst the application if approved would mean a reduction in the supply of 0.2% only. (xi) The number of houses for sale in the village is comparatively low compared with the size of the village. (xii) Approving the application would mean supporting sustainable communities along with improving the choice of different types of houses in the village for the local population.

2. Relevant Policies:

2.1 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and paragraph 2.1.2 of Planning Policy Wales emphasise that planning decisions should be in accordance with the Development Plan, unless material planning considerations indicate otherwise. Planning considerations include National Planning Policy and the Unitary Development Plan.

2.2 Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan 2009:

POLICY B22 – BUILDING DESIGN Promote good building design by ensuring that proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at safeguarding the recognised features and character of the local landscape and environment.

POLICY B23 – AMENITIES Safeguard the amenities of the local neighbourhood by ensuring that proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the recognised features and amenities of the local area. POLICY B25 – BUILDING MATERIALS The distinctive visual character of the Plan area will be maintained by ensuring that only natural Welsh slates or slates that are similar in terms of appearance, colour and weathering properties are permitted, other than in circumstances in which the type of building or its particular setting, or the sustainability benefits, are such that another material would be appropriate. In respect of other building elements, development will be required to use high quality building materials that complement the character and appearance of the local area. Proposals that introduce substandard or intrusive materials will be refused.

POLICY B27 – LANDSCAPING SCHEMES Ensure that permitted proposals incorporate high quality soft/hard landscaping which is appropriate to the site and which takes into consideration a series of factors aimed at avoiding damage to recognised features.

POLICY C1 LOCATING NEW DEVELOPMENT Land within the development boundaries of towns and villages and the developed form of rural villages will be the main focus for new development. New buildings, structures and ancillary facilities in the countryside will be refused with the exception of development that is permitted by another policy of the Plan

POLICY C7 – BUILDING IN A SUSTAINABLE MANNER Proposals for new development or for the adaptation and change of use of land or buildings will be refused where consideration has not been given to specific environmental matters. Proposals must conform to specific criteria relating to building in a sustainable manner, unless it can be demonstrated that it is impractical to do so.

POLICY CH1 – NEW HOUSES ON ALLOCATED SITES Proposals to build houses on sites allocated for housing use will be approved provided that criteria relating to specific features of the development can be met.

POLICY CH2 – LAND SUPPLY FOR HOUSING Ensure through the monitoring and reviewing processes of the Plan that there is at least a five year genuine supply of land available for housing in the area of the Plan.

POLICY CH6 – AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON ALL ALLOCATED SITES IN THE PLAN AREA AND ON SITES THAT BECOME AVAILABLE AND ARE UNALLOCATED WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES OF THE SUBREGIONAL CENTRE AND THE URBAN CENTRES Approve proposals for housing developments on sites allocated for housing or on random sites for five or more units within the development boundaries of the subregional centre and the urban centres, which provide an appropriate element of affordable housing.

POLICY CH18 – AVAILABILITY OF INFRASTRUCTURE Development proposals will be refused if there is no adequate provision of necessary infrastructure for the development, unless they can conform to one of two specific criteria which require that appropriate arrangements are made to ensure adequate provision, or that the development is carried out in phases in order to conform to any proposed scheme for the provision of infrastructure.

POLICY CH29 – SAFEGUARDING AND IMPROVING LINKS FOR PEDESTRIANS Proposals within Centres and Villages will be refused unless they provide safe, attractive and direct footpaths for pedestrians across and out of the site where there is a clear opportunity to make such a provision.

POLICY CH30 – ACCESS FOR ALL Proposals for residential/business/commercial units or buildings/facilities for public use will be refused unless it can be shown that full consideration has been given to the provision of appropriate access for the widest possible range of individuals.

POLICY CH31 – PROVIDING FOR CYCLISTS Development proposals that do not provide specific facilities for cycling where there are obvious opportunities for doing so will be refused.

POLICY CH33 – SAFETY ON ROADS AND STREETS Development proposals will be approved provided they can conform to specific criteria relating to the vehicular entrance, the standard of the existing roads network and traffic calming measures.

POLICY CH36 – PRIVATE CAR PARKING FACILITIES Proposals for new developments, extensions to existing developments or change of use will be refused unless offstreet parking is provided in accordance with the Council’s current parking guidelines, and having given due consideration to the accessibility of public transport, the possibility of walking or cycling from the site and the proximity of the site to a public car park.

POLICY CH43 – PROVISION OF OPEN SPACES OF RECREATIONAL VALUE IN NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENT Expect that new housing developments of 10 or more dwellings, in areas where the existing open spaces provision cannot meet the needs of the development, provide suitable open spaces of recreational value as an integral part of the development.

Gwynedd Design Guidelines (April 2003).

Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG): Affordable Housing (November, 2009).

SPG: Planning Obligations (November, 2009).

SPG: Housing Developments and Open Spaces of Recreational Value (November 2009).

SPG: Development Briefs (November, 2009)

2.3 National Policies:

Technical Advice Note (TAN) 2 “Planning and Affordable Homes” (June, 2006).

TAN 12 on ‘Design’ (June 2009).

Planning Policy Wales (November 2012), Chapter 3 on “Making and Enforcing Planning Decisions” and Chapter 4 on “Planning for Sustainability” and Chapter 9 on “Housing”.

3. Relevant Planning History:

3.1 There is no formal planning history relating to this particular site although a pre application enquiry was made (under reference number Y13/001418) by the applicant's agent regarding the principle of building two houses on this site rather than building six houses on it. Concern was expressed by officers on the grounds that such an application would undermine local and national policies and advice.

3.2 Relevant to this application is an application approved in September 2013 under reference number C13/0732/23/MG for reserved matters to construct six houses including two affordable houses on a site adjacent to the application site and which forms part of the same allocation for 12 houses.

4. Consultations:

Community/Town Council: Glad to see local people building within the boundaries of the village – no objection but eager to express that a pavement should be constructed outside the site after completing the development.

Transportation Unit: No objection but, with relevant conditions.

Natural Resources Wales: No observations

Welsh Water: Conditions relating to the disposal of surface and foul water from the site.

Public Protection Unit: No observations Public Consultation: A notice was posted on site and neighbouring residents were notified. The advertising period ended on 08.08.13 and a letter of objection was received on the following grounds:

• Road safety – no provision has been made for pedestrians along the narrow adjacent road where vehicles drive past at speed. There is no pavement on the part of the road adjacent to the site. • The proposed houses, because of their design, materials, size and prominent location will have a substantial detrimental effect on the visual amenities of the area contrary to the requirements of the Development Brief. • Loss of privacy – as a consequence of the height of the houses on elevated ground, the first floor rooms will have views directly into the neighbouring houses, including Treflan, Argraig, Pant y Celyn and Erw Gain. • It is possible that parts of both houses will be used as commercial offices.

Four letters were received supporting the application on the following grounds:

• Larger houses with gardens are needed for professional young people and local families. • Constructing two houses here would be more in keeping with the street scene than constructing an estate of houses. • Too many affordable housing were being built in the village for housing associations. • The proposal will create a variety of houses in the village and provide an opportunity for people to move up the property ladder.

5. Assessment of the material planning considerations:

Principle of the development

5.1 The starting point in the context of assessing the principle of the proposed development is the GUDP and it can be seen from the above assessment that the site forms approximately 50% of a larger site which has been designated for housing in the Unitary Development Plan. Using the general density (30 houses per hectare), the GUDP predicts that the whole site could cope with 12 residential units and, therefore, the GUDP would be looking for six residential units on this site. Planning permission has already been approved for six houses in the northern part of the land which has been designated for housing and known as Parc Isaf.

5.2 Policy CH1, CH2 and CH6 of the Plan promotes housing development and deals with:

Type and size – the applicant intends to provide two large detached houses only on the site in question which equates to a building density of approximately 10 units per hectare and as referred to in paragraph 5.1 above, the GUDP applies a building density of 30 units per hectare and it is obvious from the applicant’s proposal that this density is far lower than that required by the GUDP. Planning Policy Wales, Chapter 9 “Housing”, encourages developments which make the most effective use of resources including land with high densities where appropriate on sites that are accessible to people.

The housing designations in the GUDP are located in accessible areas in the villages and towns and careful and detailed consideration should be given to a proposal to apply very low density building compared with the building density referred to in the GUDP, especially when there are no physical or amenity reasons or other restrictions on the site to justify this. To this end, it is not believed that sufficiently strong evidence has been received with the application to justify such a low density on a site which has been designated specifically for six houses where no physical or amenity reasons or other restrictions for development have been identified on the site.

The planning statement states that providing four fewer houses than expected on the site would not have a detrimental effect on the GUDP housing strategy because several houses have received planning permission or have been built in the village since the GUDP was adopted (most of these on random sites). It must be borne in mind that the GUDP expects the level of growth in housing (4,178) which was identified for the area of the Plan as a whole, to be supplied by a combination of types of sites: (i) those with extant planning permission in 2001; (ii) random developments on sites and by adapting buildings and (iii) land designations for housing.

With reference to the effect of reducing the number of houses on this site, the requirements of Policy CH2 of the GUDP must be considered, along with national policies and guidelines (e.g. Planning Policy Wales, Chapter 9 “Housing”) which state that the Council must ensure that there must be a permanent supply for at least five years of land which is actually available for housing in the area of the GUDP. In 2012, the Council published a study regarding monitoring the availability of land for housing and this study showed that the supply was a little under five years, i.e. Gwynedd does not have a full five years' supply of land for housing. Although only a few under the target are available in Gwynedd, approving low density developments (as has happened recently on a number of sites which have been designated on the basis of factors such as infrastructure and additional costs), as in this case, without physical or amenity reasons could contribute towards keeping the figure under five years or could contribute towards an additional reduction in the supply of land which is actually available for housing.

Affordability – Policy CH6 of the GUDP promotes the provision of affordable housing on designated sites for housing in the GUDP and as included in the SPG: Development Briefs (November, 2009). In this specific case, a target of 30% of the total houses on both sites must be affordable which is equal to 4 of the 12 houses being affordable housing. Two affordable houses have already been approved on the Parc Isaf site in September 2013. However, the current application does not include any affordable housing as part of the proposal on the grounds that the planning statement submitted with the application suggests that a sufficient supply of affordable housing has been provided in the village.

Policy CH6 expects that designated sites in the GUDP include a percentage of affordable houses unless there is appropriate evidence which indicates otherwise. This aim of the Policy is supported by TAN 2 “Planning and Affordable Housing”. The applicant has not proved that circumstances have changed since the GUDP was adopted so that there is no longer a need for affordable housing. The latest Housing Market Study shows the need for 828 affordable houses every year to remove the backlog which therefore confirms that the affordability of houses continues to be a matter to be addressed in the GUDP area, especially in Llanrug where affordability continues to be a problem there. This is supported on the basis of house prices compared with the median income of the local population, i.e. the supply of affordable houses is insufficient to satisfy the housing needs of Llanrug.

The applicant has not submitted evidence to show that providing affordable housing on the site would affect the viability of the development and it appears that the applicant’s aspiration and wish is to provide housing for members of his family rather than releasing the houses on the open market. There is no local policy basis to control the occupancy of houses for specific / local people unless they are affordable housing for local need which is the subject of a legal agreement under Section 106. It must also be emphasised that personal circumstances are not material planning considerations (Planning Policy Wales, Chapter 3 “Making and Enforcing Planning Decisions”) and such a reason for submitting the application cannot justify undermining relevant national and local policies and plans.

Therefore, the proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy CH1, CH2 and CH6 of the GUDP along with the advice included in the SPG: Development Briefs (November, 2009), SPG: Affordable Housing (November 2009) and Chapter 4 “Planning for Sustainability” and Chapter 9 “Housing” of Planning Policy Wales.

Visual amenities

5.3 The site is located adjacent to established residential houses which are of various designs and scales. The design of the proposed houses is modern and will use traditional materials such as natural slate and rough plaster for the walls. It is considered that the proposal will not have a negative impact on the street scene or the neighbourhood on the grounds of visual amenities. It is therefore considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of the requirements of Policies B22, B23, B25 and CH1 of the GLDP.

General and residential amenities

5.4 A letter was received objecting to the application (from the occupants of the dwelling known as “Y Dreflan” which is located adjacent to the application site), on the grounds of several concerns including the loss of privacy. Y Dreflan is located approximately 26m away from the front of the house on plot 2, with a county road separating them. The house on plot 2 has several clear glass windows facing the property of the objectors which include the kitchen and lounge on the ground floor and a bedroom window and stairs on the first floor (the other windows in the front of the property have opaque glass). Taking into consideration the number of windows, along with the distance between the proposed houses and the houses on the opposite side of the county road, it is believed that there would be no significant overlooking or loss of privacy as a result of this development. It is therefore considered that the proposal is acceptable in relation to the requirements of Policy B23 of the GUDP.

Transport and access matters

5.6 It is not considered that there is an objection to the proposal on highway grounds and following consultation with the Highways Unit, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable and in accordance with Policies CH33 and CH36 subject to relevant conditions.

Sustainability matters

5.7. A preassessment level 3 code report was submitted with the application which states that the relevant targets of the Welsh Government could be achieved regarding sustainable homes and, therefore, it is considered that the application is in accordance with Policy C7. Community benefit / 106 Agreement issues

5.8 . As the proposal is for two open market houses rather than for four open market houses and two affordable houses as designated in the GUDP and SPG: Development Briefs, the above is not relevant.

6. Conclusions:

Taking the above assessment into consideration and the fact that the site has been designated specifically for housing, it is not considered that the proposal as submitted is acceptable on the grounds of: • The number of houses forming part of the application; • No affordable housing being offered as part of the application; • The proposal is contrary to the requirements of relevant local and national policies and advice along with the SPG: Development Brief for the site.

7. Recommendation:

To refuse – reasons:

1. The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy CH1 and CH6 of the GUDP, Supplementary Planning Guidance: Development Briefs (2009) and TAN 2 “Planning and Affordable Dwellings” because the proposal does not include an element of affordable dwellings for local need and the applicant has been unable to prove beyond doubt that circumstances have changed so that the requirement for affordable dwellings in Llanrug no longer exists.

2. The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy CH1 of the GUDP, Supplementary Planning Guidance: Development Briefs (2009) and Planning Policy Wales, Chapter 9 on “Housing” as the development does not propose to build at a density of 30 houses per hectare on this designated site and it is not considered that building two houses on a site designated for six houses makes the most efficient use of resources particularly when no physical or environmental justification has been submitted to justify why this site will not be developed in accordance with the relevant SPG: Development Brief.

Number : 2

Application Number: C13/0405/21/LL Registration Date: 27/08/2013 Type of Application : Full - Planning Community: Llanllechid Ward: Arllechwedd

Proposal: APPLICATION TO EXTEND THE HOLIDAY SEASON FOR ALL YEAR ROUND USE Location: OGWEN BANK CARAVAN PARK & COUNTRY CLUB , BETHESDA , BANGOR , LL573LQ

Summary of the TO APPROVE Recommendation:

1. Description:

1.1 This is an application to delete condition 4 on planning permission C99A/0484/21/LL, and condition 1 on planning permission C07A/0118/21/LL to allow a holiday season of 12 months. Therefore, the proposal would extend the occupancy period of the static caravans on the site from 10½ months to 12 months. The existing permissions restrict the occupancy of the caravans from 1 March until 10 January the following year and restrict residing in any unit for a period of no more than three months in a year. It is not intended to add to the number of caravans on the site only to extend the occupancy period.

1.2 Neither will there be any changes or additions to the existing facilities on the site.

1.3 The site is located on the outskirts of the village of Bethesda between the A5 and Afon Ogwen. The site is located outside the development boundary of the village.

2. Relevant Policies:

2.2 Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan 2009:

POLICY A1 – ENVIRONMENTAL OR OTHER IMPACT ASSESSMENTS Ensure that sufficient information is provided with the planning application regarding any environmental impacts or other likely and substantial impact in the form of an environmental assessment or assessments of other impacts.

POLICY A2 – PROTECT THE SOCIAL, LINGUISTIC AND CULTURAL FABRIC OF COMMUNITIES Safeguard social, linguistic or cultural cohesion within communities against significant harm due to the size, scale or location of proposals.

POLICY B23 – AMENITIES - Safeguard the amenities of the local area by ensuring that proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the recognised features and amenities of the local area.

POLICY CH33 – SAFETY ON ROADS AND STREETS - Development proposals will be approved provided they can conform to specific criteria regarding the vehicular access, the standard of the existing roads network and traffic calming measures.

POLICY D18 - PROPOSALS FOR EXTENDING THE HOLIDAY SEASON OF STATIC HOLIDAY CARAVAN SITES (single and double units) and holiday chalet sites to ten and a half months will be approved provided the standard of the units is appropriate for human habitation during the winter period.

Supplementary Planning Guidance: Holiday Accommodation (July 2011).

Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning and the Welsh Language (November 2009)

2.3 National Policies:

Planning Policy Wales (Fifth edition, November 2012) Chapter 11 - Tourism, Sport and Recreation 11.3.3 Authorities must consider the impact of sports and leisure activities on any nearby facilities in terms of noise, light, traffic and, in the case of the largest developments, ease of access and the safety of residents, users and the public.

Technical Advice Note 13 – Tourism Paragraph 14 – Authorities should give sympathetic consideration to applications to extend the opening period allowed under existing permissions.

3. Relevant Planning History:

C99A/0484/21/LL – Siting 29 static holiday caravans of the ‘lodge’ type to replace 76 touring caravans (including removal of 46 portaloo units from the site together with siting 5 static holiday caravans of the ‘lodge’ type to replace seven static caravans (amend conditions number 2, 3, and 4 of planning permission number 3/21/28) tree felling and re-planting, APPROVED 01/12/1999.

C07A/0118/21/LL - Amend condition number 5 on planning permission C99A/0484/21/LL to permit a family to stay for three months a year rather than one month in a year, APPROVED 17.04.2007.

4. Consultations:

Town / Community Council: No response

Public Protection Unit: Offering observations regarding the site’s compliance with the site licence.

Public Consultation: A notice was posted on site and neighbouring residents were notified. The advertising period ended on 3.10.2013 and one letter supporting the application has been received.

5. Assessment of the relevant planning considerations:

Principle of the development

5.1 In order to assess this application, consideration should be given to National Planning Policy which is a material planning consideration when determining planning applications. Chapter 11 – ‘Tourism, Sports and Leisure’ from Planning Policy Wales (PPW) (Edition 5, 2012), includes the national Planning Policy guidance on the matter. PPW highlights that the planning system should try to promote a tourism sector which is sustainable in order to contribute towards economic development, conservation, rural diversification, urban regeneration and social inclusion – in undertaking this, consideration will have to be given to the needs of visitors and local communities.

11.1.7 “In rural areas tourist developments is a crucial element of providing for a health and diverse economy at both local and national levels. It can contribute towards providing and maintaining facilities for local communities. In this context also, every development must be in keeping with the character and scale of the local environment and match the needs of visitors and the local community”.

5.2 Planning Policy Wales is endorsed by a series of Technical Advice Notes (TANs). The TAN which involves tourism specifically is TAN 13: Tourism (1997) The TAN suggests that there are some specific cases where a holiday occupancy condition could be more appropriate than imposing a seasonal occupancy condition. The TAN provides guidance on national planning policy associated with development in rural communities. It is emphasised that the planning system could respond to changes in tourism without compromising policies to safeguard the countryside and there are cases where holiday occupancy conditions could reconcile these two aims. Although this is a reference to converting buildings to provide holiday or residential accommodation rather than caravans or chalets, the fact that priority is given to holiday use rather than residential use because of its contribution to the rural economy and recognition that it could reduce the pressure on the use of houses for holiday accommodation, is something to be noted in this context.

5.3 Therefore, from the perspective of national planning policy, developments which are important to the tourism sector are promoted, especially in rural areas, subject to reasonable and appropriate management. Furthermore, National Planning Policy does not refer to any specific period in connection with the holiday period for the use of caravan sites for the purpose of holiday use.

5.4 Policy D18 of the Unitary Development Plan is a specific policy which supports applications to extend the holiday season of holiday sites for up to a period of 10½ months, provided that the standard of the units are suitable for holiday use during the winter.

5.5 Historically, conditions were imposed on such sites to ensure holiday use and also historically the standard of the units were unsuitable for use in the winter. Now, the fabrication and standard of caravans are better which means that they are more suitable to be used for holiday use throughout the year. Also, the nature of holidays has become more varied in terms of location, season and length. Many more people take several holidays a year now, more frequently and for varying periods and not necessarily during the summer.

5.6 The UDP already acknowledges that the seasonal nature of tourism creates quite a variation in the demand for workers during the year and has a considerable impact on the economic prosperity of Gwynedd. Therefore, the Plan encourages spreading the demand for accommodation beyond the traditional holiday period. The Supplementary Planning Guidance: Holiday Accommodation (2011), also refers to using holiday occupancy conditions which enable the use of holiday units throughout the year for holiday use, but with relevant conditions which ensure that such units will not be used for permanent residential use.

5.7 Although Policy D18 of the UDP states that extending the occupancy period from 1 March until 1 January will be approved, there is no restriction or instructions in the condition which does not permit the extension of the period further. There is case law which is clear and specific about this matter. Furthermore, the SPG ‘Holiday Accommodation’ (2011) does not refer to any specific holiday period / season but rather places emphasis on supporting the principle of extending the holiday period with control of the use by means of a specific condition. The SPG reflects current national policy as it does not mention any specific holiday period / season.

5.8 On the basis of the above, it is therefore considered that the proposal is appropriate and complies with the vision of local and national policy in terms of holiday accommodation.

Visual amenities

5.9 This proposal will not worsen the current situation regarding the impact of the static caravans on the environment as they are already located on the site throughout the year and there is no intention to increase their numbers. Therefore, it is believed that the proposal is acceptable on the grounds of the requirements of Policy B23 of the UDP regarding safeguarding the amenities of the local neighbourhood

General and residential amenities

5.10 It is believed that extending the period of occupancy of the caravans will not have a significant effect on the amenities of neighbouring residents, taking into consideration that the site already has permission for its use for 10½ months and it is only an increase of a month and a half to the existing occupancy period. Since the site is not likely to be full to its capacity during this period it is not believed that the proposal would have a significant detrimental effect on the amenities of local residents and it is considered that the additional disturbance would be minimal if any at all. It must also be considered that there would be nothing from the perspective of planning control preventing owners of the caravans from going to the units to maintain them during the period of six weeks when they are prohibited from being occupied and, therefore, the potential for coming and going still exists. On this basis, it is believed that the proposal is acceptable on the grounds of the requirements of Policy B23 as above.

Transport and Access Matters

5.11 The application does not involve any addition to the numbers of static caravans only an extension to the occupancy period. It is believed that the increase of a month and a half in the occupancy period of the caravans will not mean a significant increase in the use of the roads network serving the site. The Transportation Unit had no concerns regarding the proposal. Therefore, it is considered that the proposal complies with policy CH33 of the GUDP.

Planning and the Welsh Language

5.12 Policy A1 of the Unitary Development Plan deals with Environmental Assessments or Assessments of Other Impacts, such as language, and it states that “proposals will be refused if insufficient information is provided with the planning application regarding any likely significant environmental or other impacts”.

5.13 Similarly, Policy A2 of the Unitary Development Plan deals with the Protection of the Social, Linguistic and Cultural Fabric of Communities. This policy requires the refusal of “proposals which because of their size, scale or location would cause significant harm to the social, linguistic or cultural cohesion of communities.”

5.14 The Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning and the Welsh Language (November 2009), states that the Planning Authority will request a Community and Linguistic Statement as part of a planning application for developments which fall into one or more of the following categories:

• A residential development of five or more residential units on a site / land that has not already been allocated for housing development in an unitary plan

• A commercial, industrial or tourist development of 1000m 2 or more

• A development that is likely to lead to the loss of community facilities and employment opportunities

• A tourist development which will create ten or more holiday units

5.15 The proposal does not intend to add to the number of holiday units which already have planning permission. The proposal is for holiday use only and not for permanent residential use. In accordance with local and national policy, it is proposed to impose appropriate conditions to ensure that the units are only to be used as holiday accommodation and not as the main residence. Therefore, it is not considered that the proposal falls within the above criteria and, therefore, there is no justification to request a Community and Linguistic Statement.

5.16 The SPG also states: “From time to time, developments which are substantial in their scale and likely impacts may be submitted unexpectedly to the Planning Authority. In this context it is difficult to anticipate the specific size or actual type of developments which are likely to come before the Planning Authority. However, it is reasonable to suggest, that developments which are likely to be on a larger scale and more significant in their likely impact on communities are likely to fall into one or more of the following categories, namely ones which:-

• are over and above the needs and aspirations of local communities • are on unallocated land and sites and contrary to the policies of the Development Plan • are not part of a local project or strategy • replicate past tendencies where a damaging effect has occurred on communities and language • are on a large scale in comparison with the level of demand in the local market • are not likely to contribute to communities in a sustainable manner

It will be a matter for the Planning Authority to assess every planning application and determine whether the application comes within the above definition. If this is the case, the developer must prepare a Community and Linguistic Impact Assessment which is far more robust than a Community Statement.

5.17 It is not considered that the proposal to extend the holiday period for six weeks (from 10 ½ months to 12 months, or from 46 weeks to 52 weeks), is substantial in terms of its scale or possible influence on the community compared with what already exists. The proposal cannot be reasonably considered to be a development which is ‘more in size’ than what is outlined in the above criteria which necessitates submitting a Community and Linguistic Statement. Therefore, it is not considered that these criteria are relevant and there is no justification for requesting a Community and Linguistic Impact Assessment. It is emphasised that there would be appropriate conditions to ensure that the units are to be used as holiday accommodation and not as a main residence and this will be a condition which can be enforced. A condition for keeping a register would facilitate monitoring and enforcement arrangements.

Case Law

5.18 Several similar cases have been recorded in the volumes of Development Control Practice (DCP) which also mentions Circular 35/95 (Wales) – The Use of Conditions in Planning Permissions. The Circular notes that planning conditions should only be imposed when:

1. They are ‘necessary’ 2. They are ‘relevant to planning’ 3. They are ‘relevant to the development to be permitted’ 4. They are enforceable 5. They are ‘precise’ 6. They are ‘reasonable in all other respects’

5.19 In accordance with this, the DCP notes that such a condition should state simply that the accommodation is only to be used as holiday accommodation only and a reference to a date(s) is only appropriate if the unit is unsuitable for holiday use throughout the year because of the light fabrication of its structure. Following from this, section 24.241 of the DCP states that for these reasons, a condition imposed today should be a version of: “The units are permitted to be used for holiday accommodation only and not as permanent residential accommodation.”

5.20 In the DCP, it is explained that “better standards of caravans and a year-round tourism pattern means that authorities should consider applications to extend the opening period which has been approved under an existing permission more sympathetically.” Legal opinion on similar applications confirms that it is acceptable for sites to be open throughout the year, subject to conditions which will ensure that the caravans will not be used as permanent residential units. This can be achieved by imposing a holiday use only condition and that is considered acceptable. Should it be considered that a register is necessary, that is, as a tool for gathering information about the main condition, it could be acceptable if it did not interfere too much.

Therefore, relevant conditions for control of the use should contain:

i) The units are permitted to be used as holiday accommodation only and not as permanent residential accommodation.

ii) Owners / operators of the site must keep a current register of the names of all owners / residents of every individual caravan on the site along with the addresses of their principal residence and this information must be available to the Local Planning Authority at any reasonable time.

5.21 Recent Appeals have been approved for the same type of applications:

5.22 Caerwys Caravan Park, Caerwys (June 2012) (APP/A6835/A/12/2169310) Appeal permitted to change the holiday period condition of a caravan park for a condition permitting the use of the caravans as holiday accommodation only and not as the main residence of any person. The Inspector was satisfied that the condition suggested was clear in its restriction and, therefore, the holiday period condition is deleted and amended for a condition that the caravans are to be used as holiday accommodation only and not as the principal residence of any person.

5.23 The appeal in Caerwys stated that there is no need to keep a register as undertaking that would be too cumbersome. Following receipt of legal advice, there is disagreement with the Inspector’s decision in the Caerwys case not to include a condition requesting that a register is kept. There have been several cases (see below) where the Planning Inspector used the condition of keeping a register in their decisions… It is considered that such a condition is reasonable and satisfies the six criteria referred to above regarding the use of planning conditions. In addition, it is believed that keeping a register is a tool for gathering information on the condition restricting the use for holiday purposes only. To this end, it is considered that such a condition is acceptable and it would not interfere too much and, therefore, it is appropriate to impose such a condition in the case of this application.

5.24 Coppice Leisure Park, Ockeridge, Wichenford, Worcester (March 2012) (APP/J1860/A/11/2165323) – the Inspector was of the opinion that holiday accommodation only and not any other residential use condition was sufficient and there was no need for a condition specifying dates or a specific period. Also, it was suggested that a condition regarding a register was retained.

5.25 The Croft, Upper Denbigh Rd, St Asaph (December 2010) (APP/R6830/A/10/2125079) Appeal approved to install 21 lodges together with associated works subject to relevant conditions including holiday accommodation only and not to use the units as the principal residence of any person. Also, to request that a current register is kept.

5.26 Llwyn Afon Caravan Park, Llanrhaeadr, Denbigh (June 2010) (APP/R6830/A/10/2125469) To approve an appeal for eight static units to replace 12 touring units without a 10½ month condition subject to conditions, including holiday use only, not to use the units as the principal residence of any person and to keep a current register.

5.27 The Nurseries Garden Centre, Stockton Rd, South Kilvington (July 2008) (APP/G2713/4/08/2064528) To approve an appeal for 18 caravans / timber chalets subject to conditions including holiday use only, not to use the units as the principal residence of any person and to keep a current register.

5.28 Following the appeal decision for Caerwys, the other Planning Authorities in north Wales were contacted to see how they intended to manage caravan sites. Those Authorities that expressed a specific opinion on the matter stated that they were considering continuing to use the condition of keeping a register.

5.29 Of relevance to Gwynedd Council is the decision of a recent appeal on application C12/1323/41/LL – Ocean Heights, Chwilog, which involved amending condition 5 of the previous planning permission (C11/0986/41/LL), which reads “none of the 94 holiday caravans on the site shall be occupied between 10 January and 1 March in the same year”. The application was refused by the Planning Committee as it was not compliant with policy D18 of the GUDP and as the proposal was contrary to Technical Advice Note 20: The Welsh Language – Unitary Development Plans and Planning Control since it was considered that approving the application would have a negative effect on the Welsh language and on the local community. The Inspector upheld the appeal with the following condition:

“The caravans will be used for holiday purposes only and they will not be occupied as the main or principal residence of an individual. The owners / operators of the caravan park will keep a current register, record and licence agreements of names of all the caravan owners / occupiers on the site and the addresses of their main residences and the owners / operators shall ensure that the information is available at all reasonable times to the Local Planning Authority. ”

5.30 The Inspector concluded that the development would not have a significant detrimental effect on the Welsh language and the proposal was not contrary to the amended Technical Advice Note 20 or Policy A2 of the GUDP which considers the impact of developments on language, social and cultural matters. The Inspector noted also that it was possible to impose the above condition in order to ensure that the proposal satisfies the aim of Policy D18 of the GUDP which deals with extending the holiday period and that the condition was sufficient to ensure occupancy for holiday purposes only and prevents permanent occupancy of the units.

6. Conclusions: 6.1 It is considered that this application, with the relevant conditions, is acceptable on policy grounds and on the grounds of any other possible impact on the amenities of neighbouring residents and the wider area. Every relevant consideration was considered when determining this application but the recommendation remains unchanged.

7. Recommendation:

7.1 To approve – to delete the relevant conditions in order to permit a holiday period of 12 months per annum subject to imposing the following condition on the site:

“The caravans will be used for holiday purposes only and they will not be occupied as the main or principal residence of an individual. The owners / operators of the caravan park will keep a current register, record and licence agreements of all the names of owners/ occupiers of the caravans on the site and the addresses of their principal residences and they must ensure that the information is available at all reasonable times to the Local Planning Authority.”

Number 3

Application Number: C13/0545/11/LL Date Registered: 30/05/2013 Application Type: Full - Planning Community: Bangor Ward: Hirael

Proposal: APPLICATION FOR THE CREATION OF 60 SELF CONTAINED UNITS AND COMMUNAL SPACES WITHIN EXISTING BUIDLING . Location: H M REVENUE & CUSTOMS , TY GLYN , STRYD FAWR , BANGOR , GWYNEDD , LL57 1YP

Summary of the APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS Recommendation:

1. Description:

1.1 This application is to convert the existing building to create 60 self-contained student units together with communal spaces.

1.2 The existing building is a substantial detached building and situated on the High Street in Bangor. The building is three-storey in a T shape with an additional underground floor. It stands within its own curtilage, which includes the existing parking areas. The building has been used in the past as a HM Revenue Tax office, however, this use ended over 12 months ago and the building has been marketed as an office for a period of over 12 months without any interest shown to continue the office use. The applicant has prepared a report to this end.

1.3 The proposal entails the conversion of the building to provide individual self-contained rooms for students with associated communal spaces. The proposal provides communal storage, gym, lounge and laundry with an equipment room on the underground floor as well as installing a new window and a lightwell in the lounge. It is proposed to provide 20 individual self-contained rooms on the lower floor together with a small office/reception near the entrance to the building. The plans show that it is proposed to close two external doors on the lower floor together with changes to the opening of the main entrance (that includes reducing the main door and installing an additional window). It is proposed to provide 19 individual self-contained rooms on the first floor as well as a communal lounge. It is proposed to add a new window on the south western gable end on the first floor and also to install the windows of the western elevation at an angle on this floor and the upper floor. In addition, it is proposed to install a ‘louvre’ system in front of the windows on the northern elevation on this floor and the upper floor. The ‘louvre’ system entails installing panels at an angle on poles in order to hide the direct view out of these windows. The system extends 1.5m away from the wall of the building for a distance of 8.5m. The proposal provides 21 individual self-contained rooms on the second floor and it is proposed to install a new window on the south western gable-end of the first floor, together with installing the windows of the western elevation at an angle and the ‘louvre’ system in front of the northern elevation windows.

1.4 The proposal provides 15 parking spaces within the curtilage of the site, a bin store measuring approximately 4.5m by 3.5m surrounded by 1.8m high timber fence. It also provides 8 bicycle parking spaces near the main entrance together with revamping the existing access ramp to the main entrance.

1.5 It is proposed to have a 1.8m high boundary wall between the site and the property known as 24 and 23 Maes y Dref. The proposal also provides a fence in the form of railings around the site to a height of 1.8m.

1.6 A design and access statement, a bat report, sale report and a report that highlights how the accommodation will be run together with a copy of the tenants' handbook have been included as part of the application.

2. Relevant Policies:

2.2 Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan 2009:

POLICY A2 – PROTECT THE SOCIAL LINGUISTIC AND CULTURAL FABRIC OF COMMUNITIES Safeguard social, linguistic or cultural solidarity within communities against significant harm due to the size, scale or location of the proposals.

POLICY B20 – SPECIES AND THEIR HABITATS THAT ARE INTERNATIONALLY AND NATIONALLY IMPORTANT Refuse proposals which are likely to cause disturbance or unacceptable damage to protected species and their habitats unless they conform to a series of criteria aimed at safeguarding the recognised features of the site.

POLICY B22 – BUILDING DESIGN Promote good building design by ensuring that proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the recognised features and character of the local landscape and environment.

POLICY B23 – AMENITIES Safeguard the amenities of the local area by ensuring that proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the character and amenity value of the local area.

POLICY B24 - ALTERATIONS AND BUILDING EXTENSIONS WITHIN DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES, RURAL VILLAGES AND THE COUNTRYSIDE Ensure that proposals for adaptations or extensions to buildings conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the character and amenity value of the local area.

POLICY B25 – BUILDING MATERIALS Safeguard the visual character by ensuring that building materials are of a high standard and are in keeping with the character and appearance of the local area. POLICY B26 – SHOP FRONTS AND COMMERCIAL UNITS IN THE TOWN CENTRES Ensure that approved proposals respect the scale, size, materials and architectural style of the building and the local area.

POLICY C1 – LOCATING NEW DEVELOPMENTS Land within town and village boundaries and the developed form of rural villages will be the main focus for new developments. New buildings, structures and ancillary facilities in the countryside will be refused with the exception of development that is permitted by another policy of the Plan.

POLICY C4 – ADAPTING BUILDINGS FOR RE-USE Proposals to adapt buildings for re-use rather than demolition will be approved provided they can conform to specific criteria relating to the suitability of the building, visual considerations, design and the impact on the vitality of neighbouring towns and villages.

POLICY CH15 – CONVERSION OF FLOORS ABOVE SHOPS AND COMMERCIAL UNITS INTO FLATS OR RESIDENTIAL UNITS Approve proposals to convert and use the upper floors above shops and other commercial units for residential use (where planning permission is required).

POLICY CH30 – ACCESS FOR ALL Refuse proposals for residential/business/ commercial units or buildings/facilities for public use unless it can be shown that full consideration has been given to the provision of appropriate access for the widest possible range of individuals.

POLICY C33 – SAFETY ON ROADS AND STREETS Development proposals will be approved provided they can conform to specific criteria regarding the vehicular access, the standard of the existing roads network and traffic calming measures.

POLICY CH36 - PRIVATE CAR PARKING FACILITIES Proposals for new developments, extension of existing developments or change of use will be refused unless off-street parking is provided in accordance with the Council’s current parking guidelines, and having given due consideration to accessibility of public transport, the possibility of walking or cycling from the site and the distance from the site to a public car park.

POLICY CH39 – FURTHER AND HIGHER EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT Proposals for specific developments on further or higher education sites will be permitted if they conform with specific criteria related to amenity and highways and also the character of the area and accessibility of the site for different modes of travel.

POLICY D23 – CHANGE OF USE OF GROUND FLOOR UNITS IN THE FOLLOWING TOWN CENTRES – BANGOR, CAERNARFON, PORTHMADOG AND PWLLHELI Protect the use of ground level shop units in order to maintain the existing attractiveness of town centres by considering proposals to change the use of ground floor shop units for other uses (with the exception of hot food to take away) within the defined town centres of Bangor, Caernarfon, Porthmadog and Pwllheli following a number of specific considerations.

2.3 National Policies:

Planning Policy Wales – (Edition 5)

TAN 12: Design

3. Relevant Planning History:

3.1 Nothing that is relevant.

4. Consultations:

Town/Community Council: Refuse because of over-development, lack of parking and amenity areas, bin store not sufficient, too much student accommodation in this part of Bangor.

Transportation Unit: No objection to the revised plans. The proposal to keep the additional parking provision from Maes y Dref is useful and likely to be of assistance to take the pressure off the nearby streets at busy periods.

Natural Resources Wales: No objection.

Welsh Water: No objection - relevant conditions.

Biodiversity: No objection following the receipt of the report on bats.

Conservation Officer: No impact on listed buildings

Waste Management: Sufficient bin provision for the proposal.

Policy Unit: Offer general observations and confirm the need for student accommodation.

University of Wales Bangor: No response.

Public Consultation: A notice was posted on the site and nearby residents were notified. The advertising period ended on 29.10.2013 and four letters / items of correspondence were received objecting to the application on the grounds of:

• over-development • impact on the amenities of nearby residents • overlooking • parking • no proof that retailing was not suitable for the building • not enough communal areas.

5. Assessment of the material planning considerations:

Principle of the development

5.1 Policy C1 of the Unitary Development Plan refers to locating new developments and states that land within town and village boundaries and the developed form of rural villages will be the main focus for new developments. New buildings, structures and ancillary facilities in the countryside will be refused with the exception of development that is permitted by another policy of the Plan. In this case, the proposal entails the conversion of an existing building located within the development boundary of the regional centre of Bangor city and therefore the proposal conforms to this specific policy.

5.2 Policy C4 of the UDP deals with adapting buildings for re-use and approves proposals to adapt buildings for re-use rather than to demolish them provided they conform to specific criteria regarding the aptness of the building, visual considerations, design and the effect on the vitality of neighbouring towns and villages. It is considered that the existing building is suitable for the proposed residential use and the design, including the necessary changes/alterations; it respects the structure, form and character of the original building and the surrounding area and retains any intrinsic traditional features of value.

5.3 The proposed external changes are minimal especially on the main elevations that face the High Street and Glynne Road and the changes shown on the elevations facing towards the elevation of Maes y Dref are vital to safeguard the privacy and amenities of nearby houses. The proposal provides a bin store within the compound constructed of a 1.8m high timber fence. This compound is located at the Glynne Road side of the site, however, it is considered that the location in the corner near the boundary is suitable and would not cause significant harm to the visual quality and character of the surrounding area. It is therefore considered that the proposal conforms to all the requirements of policy C4 above.

5.4 Policy CH15 of the UDP deals with the conversion of floors above shops and commercial units into flats or residential units and approves proposals to convert and use the upper floors above shops and other commercial units for residential use (where planning permission is required). Policy D23 of the UDP deals with the change of use of ground floor units in the centre of towns and protects the use of ground level shop units in order to maintain the existing attractiveness of town centres. In this case, the building is located in the defined town centre of Bangor, and the proposal includes the change of use of the whole commercial building and therefore it is considered that the above two policies are relevant.

5.5 Although the main aim of policy D23 is to protect the existing shops in the main shopping area, the policy also refers to units outside the main shopping area but within the defined town centre. The policy states that this area is an opportunity to use alternative uses and it is necessary to consider the suitability of other uses bearing in mind the impact that that use has on the retail function, character or vitality of the area defined as the town centre. In this case, the building has never been used as a shop and it is not suitable for retail use due to its design and openings.

5.6 The latest and historical use made of this building was as HM Revenue offices and the size, setting and design of the building reflects this. The applicant has provided a sales report to prove that there is no need for this type of commercial building by now and officers accept its contents. Therefore, based on the above it is considered that the proposal for the lower floor is suitable for this specific building and it is unlikely to cause a detrimental impact on the function of the main shopping area nor on the character or vitality of the defined town centre. The existing building does not offer a shop front and therefore it will not add a dead frontage on the High Street in this case. It is therefore considered that the proposal conforms to all the requirements of policy D23 above.

5.7 Policy CH15 approves proposals to convert and use the upper floors above shops and other commercial units for residential use and it stresses that empty floors such as this is an opportunity to provide homes for some groups within the community. In this case the proposal is to provide accommodation for students. The building that is the subject of this application is situated close to two specific residential properties and close to the entrance to the Maes y Dref cul-de-sac. There have been extensive discussions between the officers and the agent in order to make every effort to reduce any impact on these houses and this has been done by installing windows at an angle together with a system of louvres that overcome any significant overlooking. It is also proposed to install windows with three glass panels to reduce any possible noise impact. It is proposed to provide a bin store located away from the existing residential dwellings and the waste management unit has confirmed that the provision shown is sufficient. It is therefore considered that the proposal conforms to all the requirements of policy CH15 above.

5.8 Policy CH39 of the UDP deals with further and higher education development and permits proposals for new facilities or extensions to buildings if they conform with specific criteria related to safeguarding the area's amenities and highway issues including the accessibility of the site for different modes of transport. This policy refers specifically to further or higher education developments. In this case, the proposal is not located on a higher or further education site and there is no specific link between the University and the development, except for the fact that the proposal provides student accommodation and to this end it is considered that the requirements of the policy are relevant.

5.9 The area near the site is popular for students with many of the conventional housing units used by students rather than local families. The Joint Planning Policy Unit has been gathering evidence in order to facilitate the work of drafting policy in the proposed Joint Local Development Plan. The table below gives information about how many units are used by students, the number of houses in multiple occupation and the number of specific student accommodation that exists in the wards of Hirael, Garth and Deiniol. The application site is within the Hirael ward. We also looked at the Garth ward as it is also a residential area that borders on Hirael. It is noted that the application site borders with the Deiniol ward, namely the ward that includes Bangor city centre.

Conventional Houses in Multiple Specific student Housing with Occupation accommodation students 1 Hirael 160 (21%) 132 (18%) 0 rooms Garth 47 (14%) 42 (13%) 140 rooms Deiniol 130 (21%) 120 (20%) 96 rooms

5.10 The University’s current arrangements for the accommodation of students entails letting University halls to undergraduates during the first year which means that there are some places for second and third year students. This means that the majority of students in the second and third years are totally dependent on houses that have been bought or adapted by private sector landlords. In addition, by now there are several purpose built halls of residence by the private sector which also satisfy this need. According to the Students

1 It is presumed that Council Tax is not paid as the houses are occupied by students. Accommodation Strategy (2012) fewer than a third of overseas students are able to get accommodation in the University’s halls of residence.

5.11 It is anticipated that the University will support numbers of approximately 9000 students in the future, although there might be changes in the type of students who attend University (fewer undergraduates and more post-graduate students and some from overseas). Currently, the University can offer accommodation to approximately 2400 students within specific student accommodation in the University itself. The University has a Students Accommodation Strategy that outlines how to deal with the needs of students. According to the Students Accommodation Strategy it is necessary to provide up to 800 rooms from 2015-2016. This means that the University itself can help to deal with the need that has not been achieved and contribute to the strategic plans for the growth in internationalism and post-graduate numbers. This will enable the University to support its intention to provide accommodation in a hall during the first year for every student and to provide for more post-graduate and international students and provide a little for second and third year students.

5.12 Given the above figures and the University’s possible plans to revamp the existing halls of residence and construct new accommodation, it is therefore likely that it is expected that the private sector will continue to fill the gap. In addition, the evidence shows that the need for student accommodation in Bangor will continue as the University does not anticipate that it will move from Bangor and continues to envisage that there will be a need to deal with the needs of the same total number of students over the coming years. It appears that the University does not intend to build its own purpose built accommodation to deal with all the need. Therefore, it seems that there will be a continuous role for the private sector to provide such accommodation.

5.13 There is therefore clear evidence to prove the need for specific student accommodation and it is considered that it is reasonable to consider that providing purposeful accommodation with modern rooms, amenities, security arrangements, litter collection arrangements etc., will mean that students will choose to live in the specific accommodation rather than in conventional housing, In the end, this can enable the return of houses to the rental or for sale market with year long occupation. It is also considered that it is reasonable that approving the proposal would not cause an imbalance in the local population.

5.14 As a result of the above and given the existing building, and that every effort has been made to reduce any impact on nearby houses in terms of overlooking and noise, it is considered that the development will not cause significant harm to the character or the amenities of the local area. The Transportation Unit has no objection to the proposal and therefore it is considered that the development is acceptable in terms of parking, traffic and road safety. The site is located on the High Street and within a suitable distance to the University, bus sites, road network and walking and the train station and therefore it is considered that the site is truly accessible via different modes of travel. It is therefore considered that the proposal conforms to all the requirements of policy CH39 above.

Visual amenities

5.15 Policies B22, B24 and B26 of the UDP deal with making changes to buildings and the frontages of commercial units and also the design of buildings. They promote good building design by ensuring that proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the recognised features and character of the local landscape and environment. It is necessary to ensure that proposals to make changes or to extend a building, conform with a series of criteria that aim to safeguard the character and the amenity value of the local area and ensure that the proposals approved respect the scale, size, materials and architectural style of the building and the local area.

5.16 Policy B25 of the UDP deals with assessing external materials and safeguarding the visual character by ensuring that the building materials are of high standard and in keeping with the character and appearance of the local area.

5.17 The proposal includes minimal external changes, especially on the main elevations that face the High Street and Glynne Road. The changes mean that some of the existing openings will be closed as well as opening some additional openings and it is considered that they are all in keeping with the original building. The main external changes are on the western elevation that faces a property located at Maes y Dref and these changes are completely necessary to safeguard the amenities of nearby residents. It is considered that every effort has been made to ensure that the changes are also in keeping with the building. It is also proposed to construct a new railing fence around the site and erect a timber fence around the bin store. It is considered that it is reasonable to attach a condition to the consent to ensure the construction and finish of the changes and the railings.

5.18 It is therefore considered that the proposal conforms with the requirements of policies B22, B24 and B26 above.

General and residential amenities

5.19 Policy B23 of the Unitary Development Plan deals with safeguarding the amenities of the local neighbourhood by ensuring that proposals must conform to a series of criteria aimed at safeguarding the recognised features and amenities of the local area.

5.20 The proposal has been amended following the first submission to include measures to reduce the impact on the nearby residents in the Maes y Dref estate. These measures include replacing individual rooms with a communal lounge on the first floor together with installing windows at an angle and a louvres system to ensure that there is no direct overlooking into private gardens at 23 and 24 Maes y Dref. It is also proposed to install windows with 3 panes of glass on this elevation to reduce noise. It is therefore considered that the proposal will ensure the reasonable privacy of the residents of nearby properties. As a result of providing measures to safeguard the amenities of nearby residents, as well as providing parking that is more than sufficient for the proposal together with a bin store and as there is no intention to extend the building to provide the proposed accommodation, it is considered that the proposal does not entail an over-development of the site and that every effort has been made to ensure that the site plan reduces the opportunities for individuals to behave in an anti-social manner.

5.21 The building has been used in the past as an office and it is substantial. It is not considered that the proposal would be likely to cause a significant addition in traffic or noise linked to traffic in a manner that is likely to cause significant harm to local amenities. The design and external plan of the development consider the needs of all the possible users as much as possible. 5.22 As a result of the above it is considered that the proposal conforms with the requirements of policy B23 above.

Transport and access matters

5.23 Policy CH30 of the UDP deals with ensuring access to all and refuses proposals for residential/business/ commercial units or buildings/facilities for public use unless it can be shown that full consideration has been given to the provision of appropriate access for the widest possible range of individuals. There is no intention to install a lift in this building because of its existing structure. It is proposed to provide a ramp to the main entrance and provide rooms that are suitable for the disabled on the lower floor. It is therefore considered that the proposal conforms to all the requirements of policy CH30 above.

5.24 Policy CH33 of the UDP ensures safety on roads and streets and approves development proposals if they can conform with specific criteria regarding the vehicular entrance, standard of the existing road network and traffic calming measures. Policy CH36 of the UDP ensures private parking facilities and proposals for new developments, extension of existing developments or change of use will be refused unless off-street parking is provided in accordance with the Council’s current parking guidelines, and having given due consideration to accessibility of public transport, the possibility of walking or cycling from the site and the distance from the site to a public car park. It is proposed to use the existing vehicular openings to the site together with the current parking provision (except for losing one bay for providing a bin storage). The parking provision is more than sufficient for the proposal in terms of parking standards and the provision for bicycle storage and an accessible location for the town centre means that travelling on a bus, bicycle and on foot will be convenient. The Transportation Unit has no objection to the proposal and therefore it is considered that the proposal conforms with all the policy requirements of CH33 and CH36 of the Unitary Development Plan.

Biodiversity Matters

5.25 Policy B20 of the UDP safeguards species and their habitats that are internationally and nationally important and refuses proposals which are likely to cause disturbance or unacceptable damage to protected species and their habitats, unless they conform to a series of criteria aimed at safeguarding the recognised features of the site. Following the response of the Biodiversity Unit to the original consultation a bats survey was submitted for the proposal. Consequently, the Biodiversity Unit has no objection. It is therefore considered that the proposal is not likely to cause unacceptable harm to protected species and their habitats and therefore the proposal conforms with the requirements of policy B20 above.

Language and Culture Matters

5.26 Policy A2 of the UDP protects the social, linguistic and cultural fabric of communities by safeguarding social, linguistic or cultural cohesion against significant harm due to the size, scale or location of proposals.

5.27 A linguistic and community statement has been submitted as part of the application and it states that the proposal will satisfy the need for specific student accommodation and an opportunity to reduce the number of residential homes within the community that are rented by students. It is considered that the proposal will not attract an additional population to the area as the students would live within an area of Bangor anyway. It is therefore considered that the social, linguistic and cultural fabric would continue as it is currently and that the proposal therefore conforms with the requirements of policy A2 above.

Response to public consultation

5.28 A notice was posted on the site and nearby residents were informed. The advertising period ended on 29.10.2013 and four letters / items of correspondence were received objecting to the application on the grounds of:

• over-development • impact on the amenities of nearby residents • overlooking • parking • no proof that retailing was not suitable for the building • not enough communal areas.

It is considered that full consideration has been given to the points in the relevant sections of the above report.

6. Conclusions:

6.1 Following the above assessment, it is considered that the proposal is a scheme that ensures the future of this substantial and prominent building on Bangor High Street and it conforms with all the relevant policies in the Unitary Development Plan and the proposal is not likely to have a substantial detrimental impact on the local area or on any nearby property. Neither is it considered that any other relevant planning issue states to the contrary.

7. Recommendation:

7.1 To approve – conditions – 5 years, ensure that the development is completed in accordance with the plans, receipt of detailed plan of the ‘louvres’ system to be approved, external materials to be agreed, bin store to be completed prior to the occupation of the building.

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/ 2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Number : 4

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/ 2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Application Number: C13/0561/39/LL Date Registered: 07/06/2013 Application Type: Full Planning Community: Llanengan Ward: Abersoch

Proposal: A NEW HOUSE AND ASSOCIATED WORKS Location: LAND OPPOSITE ANHYWEL , LON PONT MORGAN , ABERSOCH , PWLLHELI , GWYNEDD , LL537AD

Summary of the TO A PPROVE WITH CONDITIONS Recommendation:

1. Description:

1.1 A full application to construct a modern twostorey dwelling house designed to include three ensuite bedrooms, a living room / kitchen, two front balconies, landscaping and create a parking/turning space for two vehicles near the entrance. The plans have been revised following discussions between the applicant’s agent and officers. The development would involve substantial ground work in order to respond to the steep site, meaning that the roof level of the house would be similar to that of nearby houses (0.85m higher than the nearest house) with the elevation facing the nearby main road (the A499) appearing to be a singlestorey house, approximately 3.5m in height, whilst the elevation facing the sea will be around 6.5m high. This will be achieved by setting the bedroom at the back of the ground floor underground with the vehicle parking/turning space on top of it.

1.2 It is intended to cover most of the building’s external walls with white coloured render, whilst the southeastern elevation (towards the sea) will consist of glass mainly. The roof would be slate with solar panels covering around 3.7m 2 of the southwestern roof. A Design and Access Statement was submitted with the application and details of the Code for Sustainable Homes which confirm that the plan meets level 3 of the code.

1.3 The site is located within the development boundary of the village of Abersoch and is within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). It forms part of the existing garden of Anhywel (the applicant’s property) which is located on the other side of the main road (A499) and the site is untidy and has overgrown. There are existing trees and hedges on the site and it is intended to retain them and add to them in order to keep the site fairly concealed.

2. Relevant Policies:

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/ 2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

2.2 Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan 2009:

Policy B8 – Safeguard, maintain and enhance the character of the Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty by ensuring that proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the recognised features of the site.

Policy B22 – Building Design Promote good building design by ensuring that proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the recognised features and character of the local landscape and environment.

Policy B23 – Amenities Safeguard the amenities of the local neighbourhood by ensuring that proposals must conform to a series of criteria aimed at safeguarding the recognised features and amenities of the local area.

Policy B25 – Building Materials Safeguard the visual character by ensuring that building materials are of a high standard and are in keeping with the character and appearance of the local area.

Policy B27 – Landscaping Schemes – Ensure that permitted proposals incorporate high quality soft/hard landscaping which is appropriate to the site and which takes into account a series of factors aimed at avoiding damage to recognised features.

Policy C1 – Locating New Development – Land within town and village development boundaries and the developed form of rural villages will be the main focus for new developments. New buildings, structures and ancillary facilities in the countryside will be refused with the exception of development that is permitted by another policy of the Plan.

Policy C7 – Building in a Sustainable Manner Proposals for new developments or for adapting and changing the use of land or buildings will be refused unless consideration is given to specific environmental matters. Proposals must conform to specific criteria relating to building in a sustainable manner, unless it can be demonstrated that it is impractical to do so.

Policy CH4 – New Dwellings on Unallocated Sites within the Development Boundaries of Local Centres and Villages – Approve proposals for the construction of new dwellings on unallocated sites within the development boundaries of Local Centres and Villages if they conform to criteria aimed at ensuring an affordable element within the development

Policy CH30 – Access for All – Refuse proposals for residential/business/commercial units or buildings/facilities for public use unless it can be shown that full consideration has been given to the provision of appropriate access for the widest possible range of individuals.

Policy CH33 – Safety on Roads and Streets Development proposals will be approved provided they can conform to specific criteria regarding the vehicular access, the standard of the existing roads network and traffic calming measures.

Policy CH36 – Private Car Parking Facilities Proposals for new developments, extension of existing developments or change of use will e refused unless offstreet parking is provided in accordance with the Council’s current parking guidelines, and having given due consideration to accessibility of public transport, the possibility of walking or cycling from the site and the proximity of the site to a public car park.

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/ 2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

2.3 National Policies:

Planning Policy Wales – (Edition 5, November 2012)

Part 9.3.4 refers to considerations in determining applications for new housing, and states that local planning authorities should ensure that the proposed development does not damage an area’s character and amenity. Part 4.10 – Promoting sustainability through good design. Part 4.11 – Planning for sustainable buildings. Part 8.7.1 – Development control and transport.

Technical Advice Note 12: Design (2009) Technical Advice Note 18: Transport (2007) Technical Advice Note 22: Planning for Sustainable Buildings

3. Relevant Planning History:

3.1 The site has no recent relevant planning history.

4. Consultations:

Town Council: Objection – overdevelopment.

Transportation Unit: No objection – suggest conditions.

Welsh Water: Suggest conditions.

AONB Unit: Observations: • The site is prominent from the beach and from other places within the AONB. • It cannot be guaranteed that the trees and shrubs will be retained. • Concern about a development being squeezed into a sensitive site. • Concern about the design, particularly the substantial glass element which creates a character that is unlike a dwelling.

Biodiversity Unit: The small trees and the wilderness growing on this plot are attractive for birds to nest. Should the application be approved a condition should be included to ensure that the site will not be cleared of growth during the nesting period (1 March until 30 September). Additional observations were also received stating: The pine trees that are near the site on the land of Carrog were assessed and it was decided that they are not worthy of being protected under a Trees Preservation Order. It is suggested that the developer should try and avoid affecting the roots of the pine trees and that any work should comply with BS3998:2010. A landscaping scheme should be submitted to be approved by the Council.

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/ 2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Public Consultation: A notice was posted on the site and nearby residents were informed. The advertising period ended on 21 August 2013 and letters / items of correspondence were received from three objectors on the grounds of: • Overdevelopment on a small site. • Creating a danger on the main road. • Effect on neighbours’ privacy. • Damage to tree roots and lack of information about the effect on trees. • Incorrect plans. • Loss of light from next door’s window. • Loss of privacy in next door’s garden. • Deterioration in the area’s character – not in keeping with the nearby houses. • Effect on the AONB and the Heritage Coast. • No details with regard to increasing the ground level and how adjacent land will be protected.

As well as the above objections, an objection was received that was not a valid planning objection:

• That a legal covenant prevents building on the site.

Re-consultation after receiving revised plans

The previous objections were restated. A plan was also received from an objector showing corrections to the cross section that had been submitted as part of the application, and which is incorrect and misleading in the objector’s view.

The following points were also raised: • That the level of the application site is much higher than Carrog and therefore much more excavation work would be required to reach the levels suggested in the application. • Additional supporting walls will be required where there is digging and filling work. • The pine trees beside the site (on the land of Carrog) are a feature of the promontory. A detailed topography survey and a detailed roots study are required in order to assess the effect on the trees. • The development would be an overdevelopment of the site with very little practical external space. • There will be overlooking on Carrog from the parking / turning area because of the raised ground level. • The pine trees are much closer to the boundary than what is shown in the application. • The application should not be approved without full details of the proposed boundary treatment.

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/ 2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

5. Assessment of the material planning considerations:

Principle of the development

5.1 The proposal involves constructing a single twostorey house on a site within the development boundary of Abersoch, and there are residential dwellings located on land adjacent to the site on three sides. The site is not earmarked for any particular use or as protected open land. From the perspective of housing policies, the site falls within the definition of infill land and policies C1 and CH4 are relevant to this application.

5.2 Policy C1, ‘Locating new development’ states that ‘within the development boundaries of towns and villages… will be the main focus for new developments’.

5.3 Policy CH4 is relevant and states in principle that proposals for the construction of new dwellings on unallocated sites within the development boundaries of villages will be approved provided they conform to all the relevant policies of the Plan and the three criteria that form part of the Policy. Criterion 1 relates to having a proportion of all the units on the site as affordable units unless it is inappropriate to provide affordable housing on the site. In respect of this policy it is not considered that it would be reasonable to request an application for one property to be affordable, as the policy refers to a ‘proportion of the units on all sites’, therefore referring to more than one house. The second and third criteria relate to arrangements for providing affordable housing (if more than one house is part of the application) and for the reasons already noted it is not considered that these are relevant. Based on the above it is considered that the application is in accordance with the principles of policies C1 and CH4 of the GUDP.

Design and visual amenities

5.4 Policies B22, B23 and B25 of the GUDP are relevant to this application and relate to: design, finishes, elevations and visual amenities. It is considered that the design would offer a modern house located on a site near the sea which is fairly restricted but acceptable for development. It is in an area characterised by detached houses of a variety of designs and sizes with fairly large gardens and a number of mature trees. There is no definite pattern or a common theme to the existing houses. However, it is considered that any new development must be designed in a compatible manner that would not detract from the existing character of the area.

5.5 It is acknowledged that difference of opinion on a modern design is an objective matter, and it is seen that different opinions have been conveyed in relation to the design of the proposed scheme. It is noted that there is a reference to design in paragraph 9.3.1 of Planning Policy Wales, which states that “new housing developments should be well integrated with and connected to the existing pattern of settlements”. The proposal offers a house of a size, scale and form that would on the whole correspond with the context of the site, and the design of the house on a restricted site responds positively to the shape and slope of the site.

5.6 The development would be located amongst existing trees and vegetation and the applicant intends to plant hedges of indigenous shrubs to protect neighbours’ privacy.

5.7 It is not considered that the proposed development would have a harmful effect on the character or appearance of the area, and although it is a modern design, it is

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/ 2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

considered that it would suit the area surrounding it. Consequently, it is considered that the proposal is in accordance with policies B22, B23 and B25.

Effect on the AONB

5.8 Although the site is within the AONB, it is also an infill site within the development boundary of the village of Abersoch, and is surrounded by other residential developments. As is acknowledged above, there are many different designs to the area’s houses, and there isn’t a single typical building pattern. This design, although modern, is of a scale, and uses materials that would suit the site. Some of the current vegetation can be protected, and it can also be ensured that additional trees and shrubs will be planted, by insisting on having a landscaping scheme before work commences on the site. Having considered the above it is not considered that this development would have a harmful effect on the AONB.

Sustainability Matters

5.9 The national Code for Sustainable Homes (“the Code”) is a means of assessing and improving the sustainability of new homes by satisfying the required three star standard, namely ‘Level 3 of the Code’. The site has been registered with a sustainability code assessor and the applicant has submitted a preassessment report to show that the dwelling could surpass the required standard and reach a score of 58.67 within the ‘Level 3 Code’ scale of the Code for Sustainable Homes. It is intended to reach the standards of the Code by incorporating design features that are environmentally sustainable, and planning conditions will have to be imposed in order to ensure compliance. The application therefore satisfies policy C7 and TAN 22.

General and residential amenities

5.10 Policy B23 requests that consideration is given to the effect of the proposal on nearby residential amenities. Furthermore, concern has been expressed by objectors regarding overlooking and loss of privacy. There are two properties adjoining the application site: the Glyn Dŵr Chalet and Carrog, which are the two properties next door on both sides. No observations have been received from the owners of the Glyn Dŵr Chalet (or from the owners of Glyn Dŵr house nearby). The owners of Carrog strongly object to the proposed development, and the effect on their amenities is assessed below:

• The northeastern elevation of the proposed property would be approximately 10.2m from the southwestern elevation of Carrog house. • There would be no windows on this elevation in the new house and therefore there would be no effect on privacy from the house itself. • It would be possible to see into parts of the garden of Carrog from the house’s firstfloor balcony and from the vehicle parking/turning area, however, there would be opaque glass in the side windows of the balcony and there is existing vegetation between the two gardens and it is intended to reinforce planting here. • The proposed building would be approximately 0.85m higher than Carrog, but it is not considered that this would cause excessive overshadowing which would have an unacceptable impact on the light reaching the windows of Carrog.

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/ 2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

• There are no details about the proposed treatment for the site’s boundaries – full details of the landscaping works will need to be agreed before commencing any work on the site in order to protect neighbours’ amenities and the area in general.

5.11 It is not considered that the proposal would cause unacceptable harm to the amenities of the residents of nearby dwellings or the local neighbourhood, and it is therefore considered that the proposal is acceptable in respect of Policy B23.

Transport and access matters

5.12 It is considered that the proposal would meet road safety requirements and the Transportation Officer proposes standard roads conditions. The parking, turning and roads provision would be in line with the objectives of policies CH33 and CH36 which require that road safety and vehicle parking and turning considerations are addressed in plans for new developments.

Response to the public consultation

5.13 It has been noted by an objector that the site is located within a Heritage Coast designation, but we can confirm that the Heritage Coast is around 2km from the site.

5.14 As well as the matters that have already been discussed under ‘General and residential amenities’ above, it is noted from the consultations that there is a difference of opinion between the applicant and the objectors regarding the accuracy of the plans submitted, particularly with respect to the existing ground levels and how much excavation or filling work would be necessary and the implications of that for the site’s boundaries. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that the plans they submit are accurate and that it is possible in practice to execute the plan as submitted. Matters such as protecting boundaries and reaching an agreement with neighbours in order to undertake necessary work are civil / private matters which relate to carrying out a planning permission rather than the acceptability of the development in planning terms. Whilst acknowledging the concerns of the objectors regarding the accuracy of the plans, this application was considered based on the plans submitted by the agent and it is considered that sufficient information and detail are shown on the plans and as part of the application to be able to assess the effect of the development and propose a recommendation.

5.15 Full consideration was given to the objections in the assessment of this application and it is considered that there are no matters that outweigh the material policy considerations and that the application is acceptable and complies with the requirements of the local and national policies and guidelines, subject to including relevant conditions.

6. Conclusions:

6.1 It is considered that the development of a new house on this site is acceptable in relation to the relevant policies noted above and it is not considered that it would have a detrimental, harmful effect on the area’s amenities (including the AONB) or on neighbouring residents. Furthermore, it is considered that the location, design, finish and form of the development are acceptable and are in keeping with the context of its location. Having given full consideration to all the relevant planning matters and the

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/ 2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

objections received, it is considered that the development is suitable and acceptable for the site and that it conforms to the local and national policies and guidelines noted.

7. Recommendation:

To approve – conditions 1. 5 years 2. Work in accordance with the plans 3. Materials / Slates 5. Solar panels condition 6. Highways / parking 5. Code for Sustainable Homes 7. Landscaping / trees 8. Water 9. Withdrawal of general permitted rights 10. Finished floor levels

Note: Party walls

Number: 5

Application Number: C13/0640/45/CR Date Registered: 27/06/2013 Application Type: Listed Building Consent Community: Pwllheli Ward: Pwllheli North

Proposal: RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION TO RETAIN CHANGES FROM APPLICATION C12/0960/45/CR TO INCLUDE EXCTRACTORS TO REAR OF THE BUILDING Location: WHITEHALL , GAOL STREET , PWLLHELI , GWYNEDD , LL535RG

Summary of the Recommendation: APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS

1. Description:

1.1 This is a retrospective application for listed building consent to retain alterations which are currently unauthorised and which involve two extractors to the rear of the building to serve the new kitchen along with alterations to an internal staircase. A previous application, C12/0960/45/CR, was approved in 2012 in order to carry out improvements and alterations to the public house, and the elements involving this application are elements of that development which have been carried out contrary to the consent.

1.2 Lengthy discussions have been held with the applicant in order to try to overcome concerns about the two extractors of silver galvanised stainless steel. Consequently, the proposal involves creating a dormer window over one extractor and lowering the second extractor for it not to be visible past the dormer window. Simply, the proposal of erecting a dormer window over the first extractor involves concealing the extractor within the structure which will be of the same size and design as the adjacent dormer door. The dormer window will have a slate pitched roof with louvres on the front in order for air to circulate around the extractor. The second extractor which is currently located higher than the first one would be lowered so as not to be visible when the dormer window is installed.

1.3 Other alterations include a new turned staircase within the building and in a different location to the traditional timber staircase shown on the original plans. In addition, the external render on the building is also contrary to the original consent – it was intended to undertake the work with lime but in reality lime has not been used in some places, but rather sand and cement.

1.4 The building lies within the development boundary of Pwllheli and adjacent to a third class junction. The building is Grade II listed and within the Pwllheli Conservation Area.

2. Relevant Policies:

2.2 Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan 2009:

B2 – ALTERATIONS TO LISTED BUILDINGS OR BUILDINGS IN THEIR CURTILAGE - Ensure that proposals do not cause substantial damage to the special architectural or historical character of Listed Buildings

B3 – DEVELOPMENTS AFFECTING THE SETTING OF LISTED BUILDINGS – Ensure that proposals have no adverse effect on the setting of Listed Buildings and that they conform to a number of criteria aimed at safeguarding the special character of the Listed Building and the local environment.

B4 – DEVELOPMENTS IN OR AFFECTING THE SETTING OF CONSERVATION AREAS – Refuse proposals within conservation areas or which affect the setting of conservation areas unless they aim to support or enrich the character or appearance of the conservation area and its setting.

2.3 National Policies:

Welsh Office Circular 61/96 Planning and the Historic Environment: Historic Buildings and Conservations Areas

3. Relevant Planning History:

3.1 C12/0959/45/LL Alterations and improvements to public house - Approved 19-12-12 C12/0960/45/CR Alterations and improvements to public house - Approved 17-12-12

4. Consultations:

Town/Community Council: Object to the application on the following grounds: • Concern about retrospective application being submitted • Impact on the amenities of neighbouring residents • Completely out of place for a listed building • The extractor is not seen to scale on the plan • Visible from Gaol Street and High Street • Concern that other buildings within the town affect the plans

British Archaeological Council: Not received

Ancient Monuments Society: Not received

The Georgian Group: It is considered that the Council will require a suitable resolution where any unauthorised works have compromised the interest of the building.

Society for Protection of Not received Ancient Buildings

Victorian Society Not received

Royal Commission on the No observations Ancient and Historic Monuments of Wales

Gwynedd Archaeological Object on grounds of non-compliance with previous requirements Planning Service and conditions along with historical characteristics which could have been lost by not undertaking recording work in accordance with the requirements of the previous consent.

Public Consultation: A notice was posted on the site and nearby residents were informed. The original advertising period ended on 1-8-2013 and six objections were received including:- • The effect of the work on the listed building • Noise and odour matters • Amenities

Following receipt of amended plans dated 13-9-2013 and a re-consultation period, four objections were received outlining the same concerns as above.

5. Assessment of the material planning considerations:

5.1 Since this is a listed building application, the only matters assessed are the Conservation matters, namely the effect on the appearance and historical and architectural character of the listed building. Any other matters, which include noise and odour are assessed in the full planning application. The full planning application is also submitted before this Planning Committee.

5.2 Paragraph 68 of Welsh Office Circular 61/96 “Planning and the Historic Environment: Historic Buildings and Conservation Areas” states that Local Planning Authorities should specifically address the desirability of retaining the listed building or its background or any characteristics of architectural or historic interest it may have. Policy B2 of the GUDP echoes this and states that proposals for external or internal alterations, additions, or change of use of Listed Buildings will only be approved provided that the proposal will not cause significant harm to the special architectural or historical character of the Listed Building.

5.3 Internal work which has already been undertaken includes installing a staircase of a different kind and in a different location within the building. There are no implications on any historical matters in this case and the new staircase which has been installed is acceptable in terms of design and material. The external render work has been undertaken with sand and cement rather than lime; however, the agent has explained in this case that it was mainly sand and cement render on the building and rather than re-render the whole building they have undertaken work in sections and have therefore used the same type of render as the existing on the building. Despite not being ideal, in this case it is considered acceptable. It is considered that the work noted above is acceptable and has not had a detrimental effect on the character or integrity of the listed building and is therefore acceptable in terms of policies B2 and B3 of the GUDP.

5.4 Having received the amended plans, it is considered that one extractor will to all intents and purposes be covered by the dormer window and by lowering the second extractor, it will not be visible from any public location. In this case, it is considered that it will be acceptable in terms of the effect on the appearance and character of the listed building. Other options of relocating the extractor through an existing chimney were discussed but it was not possible in this case due to its size. The extractor could be painted if required in order to ensure that it is in keeping with the chimney to the rear. The dormer window will be of the same size and design to be in keeping with the existing door which has a slate pitched roof.

5.5 Having considered the above, it is believed in this case that the dormer window is acceptable in terms of the effect on the appearance and character of the listed building and that it is an effective way of concealing the two extractors. Therefore, it is considered acceptable to be approved in accordance with policies B2, B3 and B4 of the GUDP. As the application is retrospective, unofficial input has been received from CADW on the application and following the receipt of amended plans they are supportive of the application in its current form.

6. Conclusions:

6.1 Following extensive discussions and amended plans, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of the effect on the historic building and conservation area. The dormer window is traditional and is in keeping with the existing dormer door at the rear of the site. It is not considered that approving the application would have a detrimental effect on the appearance or historical character of the listed building or the amenities of the wider area and, therefore, it is considered that the proposal complies with relevant local and national policies.

7. Recommendation:

7.1 To approve – conditions 1. Work to be completed within three months of the date of this consent. 2. Slate on the roof 3. Finish to be in keeping

Number: 6

Application Number: C13/0667/45/LL Date Registered: 27/06/2013 Application Type: Full - Planning Community: Pwllheli Ward: Pwllheli North

Proposal: RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION TO RETAIN EXTRACTOR UNITS TO REAR OF BUILDING Location: WHITEHALL , GAOL STREET , PWLLHELI , GWYNEDD , LL535RG

Summary of the Recommendation: APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS

1. Description:

1.1 This is a retrospective application for planning consent to retain changes which are currently unauthorised and which involve two extractors to the rear of the building to serve the new kitchen along with alterations to an internal staircase. A previous application, C12/0959/45/LL, was approved in 2012 in order to carry out improvements and alterations to the public house, and the elements involving this application are elements of that development which have been carried out contrary to the consent.

1.4 The building lies within the development boundary of Pwllheli and adjacent to a third class junction. The building is Grade II listed and within the Pwllheli Conservation Area. The site also lies within zone B flooding.

2. Relevant Policies:

B2 – ALTERATIONS TO LISTED BUILDINGS OR BUILDINGS IN THEIR CURTILAGE - Ensure that proposals do not cause substantial damage to the special architectural or historical character of Listed Buildings

B22 – BUILDING DESIGN – Promote good building design by ensuring that proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the recognised features and character of the local landscape and environment.

B23 – AMENITIES – Safeguard the amenities of the local neighbourhood by ensuring that proposals must conform to a series of criteria aimed at safeguarding the recognised features and amenities of the local area.

B24 - ALTERATIONS AND BUILDING EXTENSIONS WITHIN DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES, RURAL VILLAGES AND THE COUNTRYSIDE - Ensure that proposals for adaptations or extensions to buildings conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the character and amenity value of the local area.

B25 – BUILDING MATERIALS – Safeguard the visual character by ensuring that building materials are of a high standard and are in keeping with the character and appearance of the local area.

B33 – DEVELOPMENTS THAT CREATE POLLUTION OR NUISANCE – Protect human amenities, health quality and the natural or built environment from high levels of pollution.

2.3 National Policies:

Planning Policy Wales (Edition 5, November 2012) Technical Advice Note 12: Design 2009

3. Relevant Planning History:

3.1 C12/0959/45/LL Alterations and improvements to public house - Approved 19-12-12 C12/0960/45/CR Alterations and improvements to public house - Approved 17-12-12

4. Consultations:

Natural Resources Wales Application assessed to be low risk and therefore to include the standard advice.

Public Protection Due to the location of the extractor details will be required in terms of noise and odour control.

Following receipt of the noise and odour assessment on 11/11/2013, recommend approving the application subject to including conditions which will restrict the type and level of noise.

Gwynedd Archaeological Object on grounds of non-compliance with previous requirements Planning Service and conditions along with historic characteristics which could have been lost by not undertaking recording work in accordance with the requirements of the previous consent.

Public Consultation: A notice was posted on the site and nearby residents were informed. The original advertising period ended on 1-8-2013 and four objections were received including:- • The effect of the work on the listed building • Noise and odour matters • Amenities

Following receipt of amended plans dated 13-9-2013 and a re-consultation period, four objections were received outlining the same concerns as above.

5. Assessment of the material planning considerations:

Principle of the proposal

5.1 The property is already used as a public house and therefore it is reasonable to consider that some sort of extraction system is required along with other alterations. The two new extractors have been installed at the rear of the building and without planning consent. It was stated in this case that it was not possible to use the existing chimney for providing an extractor system. It is considered that the proposal could be acceptable in principle provided that the design, noise and odour matters and the amenities of the area and neighbouring residents are also acceptable. It is also considered that the other alterations involving the internal staircase and the external render is acceptable in principle.

Design

5.2 It is intended to cover one extractor with a dormer window which will be of simple design and will reflect the dormer door which is already on the site. It will have a slate pitched roof and will be of the same size as the neighbouring dormer door, and therefore it is not considered that it will look out of place in the building and it will be in keeping with the design of the building. It is considered that the scale, type and size of the proposal reflects the existing building pattern and that it maintains the character of the Conservation Area. It is therefore considered that the proposal complies with the requirements of policies B4, B22, B24 and B25 of the GUDP.

Noise and odour matters

5.3 Having received a noise and odour assessment, the observations of the Public Protection Unit were received expressing its satisfaction with the extractor system in the current location subject to relevant conditions to control any relevant noise. The objections to the proposal have been considered but it is believed that the proposal could be acceptable by means of relevant conditions as noted by the Public Protection Unit. Therefore, it is considered that the proposal satisfies the criteria of policy B33 of the GUDP subject to relevant conditions.

Amenities

5.4 By installing the dormer window and lowering the extractor, the extractor will not be visible from any public place and it is considered that the design of the proposal is acceptable in terms of protecting the character of the Conservation Area as well as protecting the amenities of the area in general. It will also be possible to paint the extractor in order to be in keeping with the chimney pot at the rear and it is not considered that it would have a detrimental effect on the Conservation Area. Given this and the noise and odour assessment noted above, and also by imposing relevant planning conditions, it is not considered that the proposal would have a detrimental effect on the visual amenities of the area or on the amenities of neighbouring residents and therefore the proposal would comply with the requirements of policies B4 and B23 of the GUDP.

The effect of the proposal on the listed building

5.5 Given the alterations to the extractor it is considered that it would be acceptable in terms of its impact on the appearance and setting of the listed building and it is not considered that it would have a detrimental effect on the character or historical and architectural fabric of the building. There are no implications on historical matters in terms of the alterations to the internal staircase and the new staircase which has been installed is acceptable in terms of design and material.

5.6 The external render work has been undertaken with sand and cement rather than lime; however, the agent has explained in this case that it was mainly sand and cement render on the building and rather than re-render the whole building they have undertaken work in sections and have therefore used the same type of render as the existing on the building. Despite not being ideal, in this case it is considered acceptable. It is considered that the work noted above is acceptable and has not had a detrimental effect on the character or integrity of the listed building and is therefore acceptable in terms of policies B2 and B3 of the GUDP.

6. Conclusions:

6.1 Given the above, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of the visual amenities and amenities of neighbouring residents and that it is in accordance with local and national policies. Therefore, it is recommended that the application is approved subject to relevant conditions.

7. Recommendation:

7.1 To approve – conditions 1. Work to be completed within three months of the date of this consent 2. Slate on the roof 3. Finish to be in keeping with the existing property 4. Noise condition 5. Noise condition 6. Hours of use of extractor

Number : 7

Application Number: C13/0658/26/LL Date Registered: 02/07/2013 Application Type : Full - Planning Community : Waunfawr Ward: Waunfawr

Proposal: CONVERT EXISTING VACANT BUILDINGS TO CREATE SEVEN HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION UNITS AND NEW ACCESS (AMENDED SCHEME TO THAT REFUSED UNDER REFERENCE NO. C12/1164/26/LL). Location: OUTBUILDINGS , PEN Y CEFN , CAEATHRO , CAERNARFON , GWYNEDD , LL552TE

Summary of the Recommendation TO REFUSE

1. Description:

1.1 This is an application to convert existing derelict buildings to create seven holiday accommodation units and a new access is a resubmission of a previous application that was refused in December 2012 to create six holiday accommodation units and a residential unit for the manager, together with improvements to the access.

1.2 The site is located in open countryside. It is located off the A4085 highway between Caeathro and Waunfawr. There is an existing access and track to the site which leads to vacant buildings that are in a poor condition. The nearest property to the site (Tyddyn Whisgin) is over 208m away to the north-western direction.

1.3 There are three buildings in this application. Building no. 1 is a single storey building measuring 20m long by 7m wide (at its widest point). There is no roof on the existing building (there were no slates on the roof back in 2003 although the timber frame was in place) and vegetation is growing throughout the building. The existing openings of the building vary from an arched entrance to simple openings, some have been closed either with boards or bricks. It is intended to convert this building into two holiday units, with one and two bedrooms each. The openings remain the same as the original, and a roof will be placed on the building. There is no proposed extension to the building. At its highest point the building will measure 5m. The structural report (updated with an additional assessment) is based on a visual inspection and states that the brick walls are in an acceptable condition and that the roof needs to be replaced. However, once again it is believed that the report is insufficient to prove that the buildings are structurally suitable for conversion without the need for any substantial construction work.

1.4 Building no. 2 is a single storey building made from timber frame and corrugated steel sheets on the walls and the roof. The building measures 32.2 metres long at its longest point, and 12m wide at its widest point. The building is 5.5m high at its highest point. It is intended to convert this building into 4 one-bedroom and two- bedroom holiday units. It appears that all of the openings on the rear and side of the building will be changed along with some of the front openings. The building will not be extended. It appears from the plans that the building is to be finished with green steel cladding on the walls and roof. It appears that the timber frame behind the cladding will be repaired and restored as necessary. The latest structural report is based on a visual inspection, as mentioned above, and it suggests that the timber structure should be surveyed and replaced during construction if it is found that the structure is inadequate for conversion. It also suggests that the buildings’ condition has deteriorated since the previous inspection in June 2012. The original report and the latest assessment are insufficient to prove that the building is structurally sound for conversion into four holiday units.

1.5 Building no. 3 measures 9.1m by 7.1m and 5m high to the ridge, and there is one large door opening on the front elevation and window openings on one side and the rear of the building. The building was built in 1949. It is intended to convert this building into a two-bedroom holiday unit. It is proposed to close all the existing openings and create several new openings, including domestic windows and doors, and it is proposed to install a doorway on the front of the building. It is intended to install a sedum roof along with timber cladding on the first floor and render on ground floor level. The structural report is based on a visual inspection as mentioned above, and it states that the building is made of a metal frame with metal sheets cladding. The report and the latest assessment state that the frame is sufficient to bear the relevant load of the proposed holiday unit and that there is no movement in the ground around the foundations of the existing building. The report is insufficient to prove beyond doubt that the building is structurally sound for conversion into a holiday unit.

1.6 It is proposed to close the existing access and create a new vehicular access in the north-western corner of the site and create a new track to serve the development. It is intended to fell three trees in order to provide the new track and access.

1.7 A bat survey has been conducted on the site and it proposes mitigation measures, however, the plans do not show that the mitigation measures have been incorporated into this recent development.

1.8 This application is a follow-up from a previous application that was submitted and refused under reference number C12/1164/26/LL in November, 2012 for converting the existing buildings to create six holiday accommodation units along with accommodation for the manager and creating a new vehicular access.

2. Relevant Policies:

2.1 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and paragraph 2.1.2 of Planning Policy Wales emphasise that planning decisions should be in accordance with the Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Planning considerations include National Planning Policy and the Unitary Development Plan.

2.2 Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan 2009:

POLICY B20 – SPECIES AND THEIR HABITATS THAT ARE OF INTERNATIONAL AND NATIONAL IMPORTANCE Proposals that are likely to cause unacceptable disturbance or harm to protected species and their habitats will be refused unless they can conform to a series of criteria aimed at safeguarding the recognised features of the site.

POLICY B24 – ALTERATIONS AND BUILDING EXTENSIONS WITHIN DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES, RURAL VILLAGES AND THE COUNTRYSIDE Ensure that proposals for alterations or extensions to buildings conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the character and amenity value of the local area.

POLICY B25 – BUILDING MATERIALS Safeguard the visual character by ensuring that building materials are of a high standard and are in keeping with the character and appearance of the local area.

POLICY CH36 – PRIVATE CAR PARKING FACILITIES Proposals for new development, extensions to existing development or change of use will be refused unless off-street parking is provided in accordance with the Council’s current parking guidelines, and having given due consideration to the accessibility of public transport, the possibility of walking or cycling from the site and the proximity of the site to a public car park.

POLICY D15 – SELF-SERVICED HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION Proposals for developing new, permanent self-catering holiday accommodation and adaptation of existing buildings or extension of existing establishments will be approved provided the design, setting and appearance of the development is of high standard and if it conforms to criteria relevant to the location and scale of the development, impact on the permanent housing stock and on residential areas and the availability of this type of holiday accommodation.

In addition to GUDP policies, full consideration is given to the Authority’s adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG), which are material and relevant considerations. The following are relevant in this case:

SPG: “Converting buildings in open countryside and in rural villages”, (November, 2009).

SPG: “Holiday Accommodation”, (July, 2011).

Gwynedd Design Guidelines, (April, 2003)

2.3 National Policies:

Planning Policy Wales (Edition 5, November 2012)

TAN 12: Design, (June, 2009).

3. Relevant Planning History:

3.1 Application number C12/1164/26/LL – convert existing vacant buildings to create six holiday accommodation units and a residential unit for the manager together with improvements to the existing access – Refused 05.11.12

3.2 Application number C03A/0128/26/LL - convert the former council storage depot to a worm farm and create a new access, two polytunnels, a water tank, solar panels on the roof and a wind powered generator - Approved 04.06.2003 and has now expired as the applicant is no longer operating the worm farm from the site.

3.3 Application number 3/26/GC62B – change of use from a storage yard into a coal yard – Approved in 1978.

3.4 Application number 3/26/GC26A – change of use from the storage yard to a coal yard - Approved in 1977.

3.5 Application number 3/26/62 – caravan park – Refused in 1976.

3.6 Application number 133A – convert Ysbyty Glanrafon into workshops – Approved in 1949.

3.7 It is also noted that the applicant’s agent had contacted the Local Planning Authority prior to submitting the application in February 2012 (however the applicant had already bought the plot of land from the Council in 2011). The Authority’s response was to confirm that the highest section of the site alone could be described as previously developed land, and the lower part of the site should remain as it is. It was also confirmed that the structures on the site must be of a good structural condition to be converted into holiday units.

4. Consultations:

Community/Town Council: No response

Transportation Unit: No objection subject to imposing relevant conditions and creating acceptable visibility splays towards to west.

Welsh Water: No response

Biodiversity: The bat survey states that there are no bats on the site, but there were a number of bats present around the site and using the trees. There is insufficient information to confirm how many trees will be felled. If it is intended to fell the trees an additional bat survey would have to be submitted. A condition should be imposed to ensure that nesting boxes are placed on the site, in particular for the Freckled Owl. No demolition work or construction work should be commenced during the nesting season (1 March – 30 September).

Trees Officer: I cannot comment on the development from the perspective of trees as there is not enough information. I would like more information on the impact of the development on trees on the site – a report which complies with BS 5837.

Natural Resources Wales: No objection but note that an owl box should be placed on the site.

Public Protection Unit: No objection on the basis that any development would not cause pollution or have a detrimental impact on surface water and/or ground water, the environment, amenity or public health. Any septic tank and supplementary system will have to comply with Construction Standard BS6297:1983

Public Consultation: A notice was placed on the site and neighbouring residents were informed. The advertising period ended on 14 August 2013 and no letters / items of correspondence responding to this proposal had been received following this consultation period.

5. Assessment of the material planning considerations:

Principle of the development

5.1 Policy C4 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan (GUDP) approves plans to convert buildings for re-use subject to compliance with criteria, which include ensuring that the building is of permanent construction and is structurally sound and that it can be converted without major reconstruction work; that the building is suitable for the proposed use; that the design respects the structure, form and character of the original building and its surroundings; ensuring that no additional buildings or external work will cause significant harm to the visual quality and character of the surrounding area and that the development will not lead to dispersing activities on a scale that would harm the vitality of towns and villages.

5.2 In this case, the information submitted as part of the application does not confirm beyond doubt that the buildings are structurally sound and are suitable for conversion without any minor or major reconstruction work that would be tantamount to erecting a new building. The structural assessment submitted is in addition to the structural statement that was submitted as part of the previous application under application number C12/1164/26/LL. The original structural statement was vague, and noted that the buildings’ foundations were suitable for bearing a building load. The additional assessment that was submitted as part of latest application continues to be a visual inspection and it does not convince us that the buildings are structurally sound and appropriate to be converted with out significant ref-construction work. Rather, the statement confirms that the condition of parts of the buildings have deteriorated since the original statement and the condition of the buildings’ frames and the walls will be assessed and repaired as the work progresses. The nature and construction of the buildings (mostly a timber or metal structure with a cladding of corrugated metal sheeting, or a brickwork building in poor repair) is unsuitable for conversion, as they are not structurally sound buildings at present because of their construction/temporary/light materials and their current condition. The ‘repair’ work and the internal construction work within the frames (even if they are retained) are tantamount to a new construction and is not a conversion. To this end, it is considered that the buildings are inappropriate for the proposed use due to their construction and their condition.

5.3 With the exception of building number 1 there are substantial changes to the buildings’ existing openings and it is not considered that the number and type of openings respect the form and character of the buildings. Also, new openings could lead to a structural change that could further undermine the building’s condition. It is proposed to change the openings of building number 3 entirely along with changing the roof and wall materials and installing a doorway on the front. It is not considered that the proposed changes and conversions generally respect the structure, form and character of the original building or the surrounding area and it would be a new building to some degree. It is considered that once completed the proposal, as well as the associated work such as the new access and any possible additional work to fell trees, would likely cause significant harm to the visual quality and character of the surrounding area which is open countryside. Therefore it is considered that the proposal is contrary to policy C4 of the GUDP which relates to reusing buildings.

5.4 Policy D15 of the GUDP approves proposals to convert existing buildings into selfcatering holiday accommodation, provided that the design, layout and appearance of the development are of a high standard and that the proposal will not lead to a loss of permanent housing stock and that the development would not be within a residential area and would not lead to an excessive concentration of accommodation units of this type within the area.

5.5 The proposal involves converting existing buildings to create seven holiday units. As mentioned above, the proposal does not comply with policy C4 of the GUDP which relates to converting vacant buildings, mainly because of the structural conditions of the buildings and the scale of the reconstruction work that is needed, therefore the proposal cannot be considered as a conversion. In terms of constructing new holiday accommodation Policy D15 of the GUDP clearly states that this can only be acceptable within a development boundary or on an appropriate previously developed site, and this site does not fall within either of these definitions. Therefore the proposal does not meet the requirements of Policy D15 of the GUDP. Although the proposal has been submitted with all the relevant associated reports (although they are deficient) to support the proposal for conversion it is considered that the proposal is tantamount to a new construction due to the existing condition and structure of the buildings and that the scale of the necessary changes/adaptions are tantamount to reconstruction.

5.6 The Supplementary Planning Guidance document: “Converting buildings in open countryside and in rural villages” (November, 2009) supports what is noted in Policy C4 and D15 of the GUDP. Reference is made to buildings that are not appropriate to be converted in open countryside, including buildings that are not structurally sound and ruins. In order to comply with the contents of this document, necessary structural elements are required if applications to convert buildings are to be approved, for example, the structure of the walls should be robust up to the level of the eaves, obvious windows and openings should be used, appropriate steps have been taken to ensure that the condition of the walls and the roof of the building(s) are protected and should the conversion work involve undertaking restoration work on the roof, no more than 10% of the total of the walls would need to be reconstructed.

5.7 In this case, and taking into account the assessment noted above it is believed a proposal like this to create seven holiday units would involve undertaking vast structural work in order for the construction to meet a high standard. Paragraph 2.6 of the Supplementary Planning Guidance states “As well as the structural survey the planning application is required to include the details and plans of the application in order to ensure that the applicant intends to restore the building in question and ensure that the building will not collapse during the conversion work...It will be a requirement to show with photographs which sections will be replaced, strengthened and restored.” To this end the necessary information does not form part of the application or the previous application and the Local Planning Authority cannot state, without any doubt, that the existing buildings on the site are structurally sound to be converted into seven holiday units without carrying out demolition work or substantial reconstruction work that would be tantamount to a new construction. Therefore, there is no doubt that the proposal does not meet the requirements of Policy C4, D15 and the relevant SPG.

Visual, general and residential amenities 5.8 Policies B22, B24 and B25 of the GUDP relate to assessing proposals to make alterations to existing buildings, together with ensuring a suitable design and materials for the site.

5.9 Policy B22 involves building design, and promotes good building design by ensuring that proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the recognised features and character of the local landscape and environment. In this case, it is proposed to convert existing outbuildings. It is not considered that the buildings are suitable for conversion because of their structural condition and their current construction. Also, it is considered that the changes and alterations to the buildings are unsuitable as they do no respect the site and the surrounding area in terms of their scale, density and layout. It is therefore considered that the proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy B22 on this basis.

5.10 Policy B24 relates to making alterations and extensions to buildings, and it ensures that proposals for alterations or extensions to buildings conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the character and amenity value of the local area. It is considered that the changes and alterations to the buildings, which include a vast change in terms of openings and creating an extension are not in keeping with the main building and its original character. It is considered that all the proposed changes (including removing the cladding and re-erecting the frames) are tantamount to erecting new buildings of a size and design that is not in keeping with the local area and the site which is located in open countryside. Therefore, it is considered that the proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy B24 of the GUDP.

5.11 Policy B25 of the GUDP relates to building materials, and it safeguards the visual character by ensuring that building materials must be of a high standard that complement the character and appearance of the local area.

5.12 The proposal involves converting existing buildings that are in a poor state of repair at present. It is considered that the original structural statement and the recent assessment are insufficient to prove that the buildings are suitable for conversion, and the likelihood is that major reconstruction of the buildings would be necessary.

5.13 Building no. 1 is an existing brickwork building, in a poor and sub-standard condition. It is proposed to install a slate roof and finish it with render to match the existing building. The building is currently covered with concrete render, and it is unclear whether or not this finish is also intended for the conversion.

5.14 Building no. 2 is made of timber frame, and is covered with steel sheets. The building as it stands is typical, and it is unclear whether the building is likely to be demolished and reconstructed but it is considered that removing the existing cladding and replacing the timber frame together with erecting an internal brick wall would be tantamount to reconstructing the building. It is proposed to install green-coloured metal sheets on the roof and the walls in the form of cladding in order to be in keeping with the existing appearance.

5.15 Building number three has been erected using a combination of red brick on the bottom and metal cladding over a metal frame on the walls above the red bricks. It is proposed to cover the bricks with render and install stained timber cladding on the wall above the bricks and install a sedum roof. It is unclear if there is an intention to re-erect the existing metal frame. The proposed external materials do not reflect the character of the original building.

5.16 Subsequent to the above, it is not considered that the proposed materials are appropriate and are in keeping with the site and do not reflect the character of the original buildings which are unsuitable to be converted. It is considered that the proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy B25 of the GUDP.

5.17 Policy B23 of the GUDP relates to protecting the amenities of residents. Concerns have already been discussed above regarding the suitability of the buildings to be converted, and consequently it is considered that the proposal is tantamount to erecting a new building in open countryside. On this basis, it is considered that the proposal to provide seven holiday units is tantamount to an over-development of the site and therefore contrary to the requirements of Policy B23 of the GUDP.

Transport and access matters 5.18 Policy CH33 of the GUDP involves ensuring safety on roads and streets, and it permits development proposals provided they can conform to specific criteria relating to the vehicular entrance, the standard of the existing roads network and traffic calming measures.

5.19 It is proposed here to close the existing access and open a new access to the north of the old access. In the previous application under reference number C12/01164/26/LL there was concern in relation to closing the old access and opening another access (in the same location as this application) as insufficient information had been submitted as part of the application which ensures sufficient visibility from the new access. Also, the Transportation Unit believed that it was not possible to provide sufficient visibility and it would possibly depend on land which is outside the application site and the applicant’s ownership. Following the decision that was made on this first application, discussions were held between the applicant and the Transportation Unit in order to confirm the exact visibility splays for an appropriate and safe access.

5.20 The plan submitted as part of this application and for the proposed access provides visibility splays to the east and to the west and satisfying this need will involve demolishing part of the existing stone wall along the front of the site and reducing the height of a nearby clawdd which is owned by a neighbouring landowner. To this end, the applicant has sent the relevant notice to the landowner informing him of this recent application but there is no certainty that the landowner will allow the necessary work to be undertaken on his land and therefore there is no certainty that the proposal could comply with Policy CH33.

5.21 Policy CH36 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan relates to the provision of private car parking facilities, and proposals for new developments, extension of existing developments or change of use will be refused unless off-street parking is provided in accordance with the Council’s current parking guidelines, giving due consideration to the accessibility of public transport, the possibility of walking or cycling from the site and the proximity of the site to a public car park.

5.22 The application intends to provide 14 parking spaces as well as two additional disabled parking spaces, and 14 bicycle parking spaces. Although it is considered that this number is sufficient for the number of proposed units, the block plan does not show the location of the parking spaces. It is considered that the proposal complies with policy CH36 in terms of numbers, but confirmation is needed of the location of the parking spaces in order to assess the impact of any hard standings on the site.

Biodiversity matters 5.23 A species survey has been completed on the site, and it includes suggestions and advice in order to deal with the species that have been discovered on the site and which use the site, including bats and owls. The survey contains methods of mitigating any impact on the species, but the plans submitted do not reflect the contents of the survey. In addition, the Biodiversity Unit considered that there are bats in the trees on this site and the application does not include a trees survey to ensure which trees will be felled and which will be retained and the impact of this on the bats. Therefore, it is considered that there is insufficient information to be able to assess and ensure that the mitigation measures are likely to be implemented and integrated into the development. It is therefore considered that the information submitted is insufficient for ensuring that the proposal is not likely to affect protected species in accordance with policy B20 of the GUDP, which relates to ensuring the protection of species and their habitats that are of international and national importance.

6. Conclusions: 6.1 As a result of what has been discussed above, it is considered that the proposal is unacceptable because the information submitted as part of the application does not confirm that the buildings are structurally sound and are suitable for conversion without substantial reconstruction work, the proposed design and materials are not in keeping with the area and the original buildings and not enough information has been submitted for ensuring that the proposal is unlikely to impact on protected species. There is also no certainty that necessary improvements can be carried out to the proposed access within the application site.

6.2 Therefore it is considered that the proposal is contrary to the requirements of policies B20, B22, B24, B25, C4, D15 and CH33 of the GUDP.

7. Recommendation:

7.1 To refuse on the following grounds:-

1. The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy B20 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan as insufficient information has been submitted as part of the application in relation to which trees will be felled and the impact this will have on protected species.

2. The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policies C4, D15, B22, B23, B24 and B25 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan as well as Supplementary Planning Guidance: “Converting buildings in open countryside and in rural villages”, as it is considered that the buildings are unsuitable to be converted into holiday units without carrying out substantial reconstruction work which is tantamount to constructing a new building in the countryside.

3. The application is contrary to the requirements of Policy CH33 as there is no certainty that it will be possible to create acceptable visibility splays to the west of the access and within the application site.

Number: 8

Application Number: C13/0693/38/LL Date Registered: 30/09/2013 Application Type: Full - Planning Community: Llanbedrog Ward: Llanbedrog

Proposal: NEW DWELLING AND ACCESS Location: MOUNTAIN VIEW , TREM Y MYNYDD , LLANBEDROG , PWLLHELI , GWYNEDD , LL53 7NU

Summary of the TO DELEGATE THE RIGHT TO APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS Recommendation:

1. Description:

1.1 This is a full application to construct a dwelling house and create a new access and parking spaces for the existing house and the proposed house. The development involves building a two-storey house with three bedrooms. The house would measure approximately 10 metres wide by 10 metres high and would take an L-shape form. Its height would be approximately 6.4m to the ridge. It is intended to cover the external walls of the proposal with stone on the corners and the rest with render. It would have a slate roof and it is proposed to install solar panels on part of the southern facing roof. Two parking spaces would be provided for the proposed property and another two for the existing property. It is also intended to have a turning space within the site which would serve the current and proposed properties. This part of the proposal has been revised since the application was submitted. The proposal originally had two entrances and a separate parking area for the existing property and the proposed property, and it did not include a turning space within the site which would have meant that it would be impossible for vehicles to enter and leave the site in a forward gear.

1.2 The site is located within the development boundary of the village of Llanbedrog and is located within a Landscape Conservation Area. The application site forms part of the existing garden of Mountain View which is owned by the applicant. The site is served by a class 2 road (the B4413). The site is located in an area that is mainly residential in nature. There is a caravan park opposite the site. There are a number of trees and hedges surrounding the site.

1.3 A Design and Access Statement and details of the Code for Sustainable Homes were submitted with the application.

2. Relevant Policies:

2.2 Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan 2009: POLICY B10 – PROTECTING AND ENHANCING LANDSCAPE CONSERVATION AREAS – Safeguard and enhance Landscape Conservation Areas by ensuring that proposals must conform to a series of criteria aimed at avoiding significant harm to recognised features.

POLICY B22 – BUILDING DESIGN – Promote good building design by ensuring that proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the recognised features and character of the local landscape and environment.

POLICY B23 – AMENITIES – Safeguard the amenities of the local neighbourhood by ensuring that proposals must conform to a series of criteria aimed at safeguarding the recognised features and amenities of the local area.

POLICY B25 – BUILDING MATERIALS – Safeguard the visual character by ensuring that building materials are of a high standard and are in keeping with the character and appearance of the local area.

POLICY C1 – LOCATING NEW DEVELOPMENT – Land within town and village development boundaries and the developed form of rural villages will be the main focus for new developments. New buildings, structures and ancillary facilities in the countryside will be refused with the exception of development that is permitted by another policy of the Plan.

POLICY C7 – BUILDING IN A SUSTAINABLE MANNER – Proposals for new developments or for adapting and changing the use of land or buildings will be refused unless consideration is given to specific environmental matters. Proposals must conform to specific criteria relating to building in a sustainable manner, unless it can be demonstrated that it is impractical to do so.

POLICY CH4 – NEW DWELLINGS ON UNALLOCATED SITES WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES OF LOCAL CENTRES AND VILLAGES – Approve proposals for the construction of new dwellings on unallocated sites within the development boundaries of Local Centres and Villages if they conform to criteria aimed at ensuring an affordable element within the development.

POLICY CH10 – SECOND HOMES – Refuse proposals for a new dwelling(s) that would lead to an increase in the number of second homes in a community where they already form a high percentage of the housing stock.

POLICY CH30 – ACCESS FOR ALL – Refuse proposals for residential/business/ commercial units or buildings/facilities for public use unless it can be shown that full consideration has been given to the provision of appropriate access for the widest possible range of individuals.

POLICY CH33 – SAFETY ON ROADS AND STREETS – Development proposals will be approved provided they can conform to specific criteria regarding the vehicular access, the standard of the existing roads network and traffic calming measures.

POLICY CH36 – PRIVATE CAR PARKING FACILITIES – Proposals for new developments, extensions to existing developments or change of use will be refused unless off-street parking is provided in accordance with the Council’s current parking guidelines, giving consideration to the accessibility of public transport services, the possibility of walking or cycling from the site and the proximity of the site to a public car park.

2.3 National Policies: Planning Policy Wales – (Edition 5, November 2012) Technical Advice Note 12: Design (2009) Technical Advice Note 18: Transport (2007) Technical Advice Note 22: Planning for Sustainable Buildings (2010)

3. Relevant Planning History: 3.1 The site has no relevant planning history.

4. Consultations:

Town Council: Observations have not been received on the revised proposal.

The observations on the original plans expressed objection for the following reasons:- • Overdevelopment of the site. • An additional entrance is unacceptable since the site is on a dangerous corner of the B4413. • There is no turning space within the site which means that vehicles will have to reverse either into or out of the site onto a busy road. • The site is opposite a caravan park which means there is much coming and going from the site. • Creating an additional entrance and having to reverse out causes a danger for pedestrians using the pavement, including school children. • The design is unacceptable for the site. • The existing house is used as a holiday home, and will the new house also be a holiday home? • Building in the garden sets a precedent for the rest of the village, given how scarce building land is in Llanbedrog. • The boundaries of the new house are close to neighbouring houses. • Object to changing the name of the house from Trem y Mynydd to Mountain View.

Transportation Unit: Awaiting observations on the revised proposal.

The original observations suggest that either the parking provision is improved by perhaps providing more spaces in front of the two houses, or that the layout of the site is amended so that one wide entrance can be shared from the centre of the site.

Natural Resources Wales: Do not object to the proposal. Do not consider that the development would have a substantial impact on any protected landscapes.

Welsh Water: Propose standard conditions. Public Consultation: A notice was posted on the site and nearby residents were informed. The re-consultation period ended on 27 November 2013 and two letters / items of correspondence were received objecting on the grounds of: • The size of the garden is too small to contain a house and a parking space. • Overdevelopment. • The proposed house will be very visible from the higher floors of adjacent properties. • The entrance is close to a corner and near a ramp for slowing down traffic. • A shared access may encourage cars to park on the pavement / street in front of the property. • It adds to the number of holiday homes in Llanbedrog. • The Welsh name of the property has been replaced.

5. Assessment of the material planning considerations:

Principle of the development 5.1 The proposal involves building a single three-bedroom house on a site within the existing garden of the property known as Mountain View, and there are residential dwellings located on land adjacent to the site. The site lies within the development boundary of the village of Llanbedrog but it has not been earmarked for any particular use. From the perspective of housing policies, the site falls within the definition of infill land and policies C1 and CH4 are relevant to this application.

5.2 Policy C1, ‘Locating new development’ states that ‘within the development boundaries of towns and villages… will be the main focus for new developments’.

5.4 From a community perspective Policy CH10 of the UDP that relates to second homes is relevant to the application. Reference has been made in the observations received on the application that the proposed house would be a second home / holiday home. However, it is essential to note that the Planning Inspectorate has afforded very little weight to this policy when determining appeals that have been based on this policy. What comes over in the appeals is that is cannot be proved with robust evidence that the residential units would be holiday homes or second homes. Although there is a substantial percentage of second homes in Llanbedrog, an appeal on the site of the Power Boat Club in Abersoch has been approved, contrary to the Council’s decision. The appeal related to deleting a condition which restricted the occupancy of the open market housing to be developed on the site for use as permanent homes only. As a result of such appeal decisions, we cannot lend much weight to this policy when considering planning applications.

Design and visual amenities 5.5 Policies B10, B22 and B25 of the GUDP are relevant to this application and relate to: design, finishes, elevations and visual amenities. The adjacent dwellings vary in terms of size, design and finishes. There is no definite pattern or a common theme to them. However, it is considered that any new development must be designed in a compatible manner that would not detract from the existing character of the area. It is noted that there is a reference to design in paragraph 9.3.1 of Planning Policy Wales, which states that “new housing developments should be well integrated with and connected to the existing pattern of settlements”. The proposal offers a house of a size, scale and form that would on the whole correspond with the context of the site and the surrounding area. It is considered that it is possible to locate a dwelling on the site without it being an overdevelopment of the site, and there would be enough of the garden left for the proposed house and the existing house. It is also considered that the size of the house in relation to the land surrounding it would not be incompatible with the other houses in the area. It is intended for the external walls of the development to be finished in render mainly, with stone on the corners. It is intended to have a slate roof for the development. It is considered that the materials proposed are suitable for the location. The proposal would be located amongst the built form of the village and it would not stand out in the landscape, and it is therefore considered that it would not have a detrimental impact on the Landscape Conservation Area.

5.6 It is not considered that the proposed development would have a harmful effect on the character or appearance of the area, and it is considered that it would suit the area around it. Consequently, it is considered that the proposal is in accordance with policies B10, B22 and B25.

General and residential amenities 5.7 Policy B23 requests that consideration is given to the effect of the proposal on nearby residential amenities. There are dwelling houses around the site but because of the growth of trees and shrubs around the site, it is not considered that there would be overlooking between the proposed house and neighbouring houses from ground-floor windows. It is likely that there would be an element of overlooking from first-floor windows on gardens that are located to the south of the site. However, because of the distances and the growth of trees and shrubs between the proposed house and the adjacent properties, it is not considered that the proposal would significantly affect the amenities and privacy of the occupants of the nearby houses. It is not considered therefore that the proposal would cause significant harm to the amenities of the residents of nearby dwellings or the local neighbourhood, and it is therefore considered that the proposal is acceptable in respect of Policy B23.

Transport and access matters 5.8 As part of the application it is intended to make changes to the existing entrance which would include widening it to 4.8 metres. It is intended to locate a total of four parking spaces within the application site which would include two parking spaces for the proposed house and two spaces for the existing house. It is also intended to have a vehicle turning area within the site, which would be for use by the proposed house and the existing house. This arrangement is different to what was proposed originally as part of the application, where the original proposal would have meant that it would be impossible to enter and leave the parking spaces in a forward gear. The Transportation Unit was concerned about the original plan in terms of road safety, which is why a revised entrance and parking plan was submitted. The Transportation Unit was re- consulted on the revised plan and their response is awaited. The response of the Transportation Unit is awaited with respect to the entrance and road safety in order to see whether the proposal complies with Policy CH33. In terms of the parking spaces, it is considered that the number of parking spaces proposed is sufficient in respect of Policy CH36.

Sustainability Matters 5.9 The Code for Sustainable Homes is a means of assessing and improving the sustainability of new homes by satisfying the required three star standard, namely ‘Level 3 of the Code’. The site has been registered with a sustainability code assessor and the applicant has submitted a pre-assessment report to show that the dwelling could reach a score of 57.18% which would be within the ‘Level 3 Code’ scale of the Code for Sustainable Homes. It is intended to reach the standards of the Code by incorporating design features that are environmentally sustainable, and planning conditions will have to be imposed in order to ensure compliance. The application therefore satisfies policy C7 and TAN 22.

Response to the public consultation 5.10 Full consideration was given to the objections and concerns of the local community in the assessment of this application and it is considered that there are no matters that outweigh the material policy considerations and that the application is acceptable and complies with the requirements of the local and national policies and guidelines, subject to including relevant conditions.

6. Conclusions:

6.1 It is considered that the development of a new house on this site is acceptable in relation to the relevant policies noted above and it is not considered that it would have a detrimental, harmful effect on the area’s amenities or the neighbouring residents. Furthermore, it is considered that the location, design, finish and form of the development are acceptable and are in keeping with the context of its location. Having given full consideration to all the relevant planning matters and all the objections received, it is considered that the development is suitable for the site and that it conforms to the local and national policies and guidelines noted.

7. Recommendation:

7.1 To delegate the right to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the application subject to receiving the observations of the Transportation Unit on the revised plan – conditions

1. 5 years 2. Work in accordance with the plans 3. Materials / Slates 4. Highways / parking 5. Code for Sustainable Homes 6. Welsh Water conditions 7. The solar panels frame to be grey coloured

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Number : 9

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Application Number: C13/0723/11/LL Date Registered: 11/07/2013 Application Type: Full - Planning Community: Bangor Ward: Hirael

Proposal: AMENDED APPLICATION TO A PREVIOUSLY REFUSED APPLICATION (REFERENCE NO . C10A/0614/11/LL) FOR THE RE -DEVELOPMENT OF THE FORMER JEWSONS SITE BY ERECTING FOUR SEPARATE BUILDINGS TO INCLUDE 109 STUDENT LIVING UNITS , CREATION OF A NEW VEHICULAR ACCESS , CREATION OF PARKING FACILITIES , AND SITE LANDSCAPING. Location: FORMER JEWSON SITE , PENLON WORKS , HIGH STREET , BANGOR , GWYNEDD , LL571PJ

Summary of the TO REFUSE Recommendation:

1. Description:

1.1 Amended application to a previously refused application (reference C10A/0614/11/LL) for full planning permission to erect four new buildings providing living units for 109 students, creating a new vehicular access, creating parking spaces and landscaping the site.

1.2 To remind the members, the previously refused application was intended for the same use but included seven buildings and provided 161 living units and all the work associated with developing the site.

1.3 The site is located within the development boundaries of the city of Bangor that is designated as a sub-regional centre in the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan (July 2009). It is in a comparatively prominent location near the lower part of the High Street that leads out of the city, in the area known as Hirael.

1.4 The High Street runs past the southern boundary of the site, Strand Street lies to the east, Penlon Gardens to the west, Fountain Street to the north and Ambrose Street to the north-west. The site is surrounded by residential houses, which are mainly terraced or semi-detached dwellings.

1.5 The site has been used most recently as a builders’ merchant; this use has now ended, the buildings have been demolished and the site itself remains unused. Historically, the use of the site has predominantly been industrial including substantial slate treatment works in the eighteenth century.

1.6 The plans included with this committee report show the proposed development, and it can be seen from these details that the scale of the buildings vary in size and they will be finished with a combination of brick, render and timber cladding with slate roofs. A warden's flat will also be included in building 1 near the site access.

1.7 In brief, the proposal will include the following works: • installation of infrastructure and services • creating a new vehicular access from Strand Street • creating an estate road and parking spaces PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

• creating refuse / recycling bin storage areas and bicycle storage areas • constructing the living units • landscaping

1.8 The living units will be self-contained as they will have their own living/sleeping area and bathroom, with a communal kitchen / dining room / lounge on each floor.

1.9 The Council refused the previous application for the following reasons: • Overdevelopment of the site, the development was discordant with the form of the surrounding area and would adversly affect the general character of the area. • will adversly affect the residential amenities of nearby residents by reason of the size, location of buildings and general intrusion.

1.10 The applicant lodged an Appeal against the decision to the Planning Inspectorate. The Planning Inspectorate decided that the proposal would not be acceptable due to the significant harm to the amenities of nearby residents in terms of visual impact, overlooking, noise and disturbance.

2. Relevant Policies :

Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and paragraph 2.1.2 of Planning Policy Wales emphasise that decisions should be made in accordance with the Development Plan, unless material planning considerations indicate otherwise. Planning considerations include National Planning Policy and the Unitary Development Plan.

2.2 Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan 2009:

Land Redevelopment and Reuse – Strategic Policy 6 - High priority will be given to making appropriate and suitable use of previously developed land, which is suitable for development, or buildings that are vacant or not used to their full potential. Development should make the most efficient and practicable use of land or buildings in terms of density, siting and layout

Policy A1 – Environmental or Other Impact Assessments - Ensuring that sufficient information is provided with the planning application regarding any environmental impacts or other likely and substantial impact in the form of an environmental assessment or other impact assessments.

Policy A2 – Protecting the Social, Linguistic and Cultural Fabric of Communities - Proposals that would, because of their size, scale or location cause significant harm to the social, linguistic or cultural cohesion of communities will be refused.

Policy A3 – Precautionary Principle - Refuse proposals if there is any possibility of serious or irreversible damage to the environment or the community unless the relevant impact assessment can show beyond doubt ultimately that the impact can be avoided or alleviated.

Policy B7 – Sites of Archaeological Importance - Refuse proposals which will damage or destroy archaeological remains which are of national importance (whether they are registered or not) or their setting. Also refuse any development which will affect other archaeological remains unless the need for the development is greater than the significance of the archaeological remains. PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Policy B22 – Building Design - Promote good building design by ensuring that proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the recognised features and character of the local landscape and environment.

Policy B23 – Amenities - Safeguard the amenities of the local neighbourhood by ensuring that proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the recognised features and amenities of the local area.

Policy B25 – Building Materials – Protect the visual character by ensuring that building materials are of high standard and in keeping with the character and appearance of the local area.

Policy B27 – Landscaping Plans - Ensure that permitted proposals incorporate soft/hard landscaping of high standard which is appropriate for the site and which takes into consideration a series of factors aimed at avoiding damage to recognised features.

Policy C1 - Locating New Developments – Land within town and village boundaries and the developed form of rural villages will be the main focus for new developments. New buildings, structures and supplementary facilities in open countryside will be refused with the exception of a development which is permitted under another policy within the Plan.

Policy C3 – Re-using Previously Developed Sites - Proposals which give priority to the use of land or buildings previously developed and located within or adjacent to development boundaries will be permitted if the site or the building and use are appropriate.

Policy C7 – Building in a Sustainable Manner - Proposals for new development, or for the adaptation and change of use of land or buildings, which have not demonstrated that consideration has been given to specific environmental matters will be refused. Proposals must comply with specific criteria relating to building in a sustainable manner, unless it is impractical to do so.

Policy CH33 – Safety on Roads and Streets - Development proposals will be approved if they can conform to specific criteria regarding the vehicular access, standard of the existing road network and traffic calming measures.

Policy CH36 – Private Car Parking Facilities - Proposals for new developments, extension of existing developments or change of use will be refused unless off-street parking is provided in accordance with the Council’s current parking guidelines, and having given due consideration to the accessibility of public transport, the possibility of walking or cycling from the site and the distance from the site to a public car park.

Policy CH39 – Further and Higher Education Development – Proposals for specific developments on a further or higher education site will be permitted providing they conform to specific criteria relating to amenity and highway matters and to the character of the area and the accessibility of the site for different modes of transport.

2.3 In addition to the GUDP policies, full consideration is given to the Authority’s adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG), which are material and relevant considerations. PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

The following are relevant in this case:

• Planning for sustainable building • Planning obligations • Planning and the Welsh language

2.4 Gwynedd Design Guidelines

2.5 National Policies:

Planning Policy Wales (edition 5 2012) Chapter 3 – determining planning decisions and enforcing them Chapter 4 – planning for sustainability Chapter 8 - transport Chapter 9 - housing

Technical Advice Note (TAN) TAN 12: Design. TAN 18: Transport TAN 20: Planning and the Welsh language TAN 22: Planning for Sustainable Buildings

3. Relevant Planning History:

3.1 C10A/0614/11/LL – Demolition of buildings, erection of seven new buildings creating 161 student living units (with one warden’s accommodation unit), creation of new vehicular access and landscaping work – refused 29.11.11 – An appeal against the decision was refused on 13 July 2012 due to the significant harm to residential amenity, arising from the effect of blocks 2,3,4 and 5 on the living conditions of residents adjoining the site in terms of visual impact, overlooking, noise and disturbance and it would not therefore comply with the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan.

3.2 C09A/0502/11/HD – Notice of intent to demolish three buildings within the site – approved without conditions – 12.11.2009

3.3 3/11/158B – Erection of a building to be used as a storage area – approved 10.03.1980

3.4 3/11/158 – Demolition of existing buildings and erection of storage area / display room – approved 08.07.1975

3.5 21/64/58C – Erection of a cement storage area – approved 20.03.1973

3.6 21/64/58A – Improvements to access – approved 01.09.1972

4. Consultations:

Town/Community Council: Object to the application for the following reasons: • It would be out of character with the Hirael residential area in terms of form and size of the buildings and the use would be discordant with adjacent residential dwellings • There is need for residential housing in the area • It would place additional pressure on public services PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

• The development is unsustainable due to the distance between the site and the main university campus, it would add to transport problems in the city and due to the lack of parking spaces within the site, it would also create parking problems within the Hirael area. • No transport links which raises concerns regarding the safety of students when walking to the area late at night. • A development of this form needs to be nearer to the university campus in the Upper Bangor area. • The council is concerned there are student accommodation developments throughout the city that have not been planned or controlled, they cause problems to local residents on grounds of noise, disturbance, refuse, parking and other matters and threaten local communities with an influx of student population in these areas during the university terms. Gwynedd Council needs to provide Supplementary Planning Guidance on student accommodation in Bangor in order to control the matter.

Transportation Unit: No objection to the proposal, it is comparative to the previous application but on a smaller scale, the changes and the location of the access are acceptable, propose standard conditions as part of the application. See further comments regarding this matter.

Natural Resources Wales: Acknowledge there is no known history of flooding problems on the site, however; due to the scale of the development, a condition is suggested to agree on surface water management plans. There is no impact on protected sites or species and we recommend compiling a Waste Management Plan before the development commences in order to comply with the duty of care towards supervising any waste that is moved from this site for reuse or for disposal.

Welsh Water: Not received

Waste Management Service: No observations as it is intended to use private contractors for waste management and disposal.

Fire Service: Not received

Public Protection Unit: A request was made for the previous land contamination report that was submitted with this application to be updated as regulatory requirements have now changed. Accept the findings and suggest appropriate conditions.

Joint Policy Unit: The unit’s observations are included further on in this report.

Design Commission for Wales: Not received at the time of writing this report however a verbal discussion was held and the observations are awaited and will be included separately.

Archaeology Service: Standard condition to ensure that an archaeological survey is undertaken.

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Public Consultation: The application was advertised extensively, by placing an advertisement in the local press, placing notices in prominent positions surrounding the site and sending consultation letters to neighbours. The consultation period ended on 15 August 2013.

A number of letters and e-mails objecting to the application were received from local residents. The relevant reasons for objection are noted as follows: • harmful impact on the area’s visual character • impact on a Welsh speaking community • pressure on existing facilities • development of the wrong size in the wrong location • misleading information • blocks 2 and 3 are nearer to Penlon Gardens than the previous application which increases the impact on residents, and is contrary to what was said by the Inspector. • no demand for this type of development • more need for affordable housing • unacceptable access • the development is out of character with the established residential use in the area • insufficient parking provision • antisocial behaviour of users • unacceptable site in terms of its location and its distance from the university’s sites • detrimental impact on the residential amenities of nearby residents because of overlooking, loss of light, loss of privacy, noise, etc. • overdevelopment of the site • detrimental impact on highways issues including increased parking on nearby streets and increased car usage due to its location • concerns regarding refuse • the appeal inspector stated that the previous development would have a significant impact on the living conditions of nearby residents, the proposal remains contrary to policies B23 and CH39 as blocks 2 and 3 are now closer than the location of the blocks proposed in the previous application.

In addition to the above, approximately 80 letters/ general petitions were received stating an objection to the proposal on grounds of reasons that concur with the abovementioned observations.

5. Assessment of the material planning considerations:

5.1 Principle of the development

5.1.1 This site is located within the development boundaries of the city of Bangor on a site that is considered to be a Brownfield site, a term used to describe previously developed land as opposed to a Greenfield site that has never been developed. The principle of developing such sites located within development boundaries is acceptable in the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan.

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

5.1.2 Paragraph 4.9.1 of Planning Policy Wales states that “Previously developed (or Brownfield) land should, wherever possible, be used in preference to Greenfield sites…”

5.1.3 This is consistent with some of the general requirements of policies C1, C3 and strategic policy 6 of the UDP which encourages and supports applications within development boundaries and on previously used sites.

5.1.4 The appointed Inspector who determined the appeal for the previous application (C10A/0614/11/LL) states in paragraph 29 of his written statement “As regards the principle of managed student accommodation in this location, I have not been directed to any in-principle objection to development of site for the use concerned…I find no substantive objection to the principle of the use, which is broadly compatible with the uses in the surrounding area...”

5.1.5 Relevant reports and assessment have been submitted to support this application as is required and expected by current regulatory requirements.

5.1.6 Based on the above, it is believed that the proposal does comply with the policies noted here and is acceptable in principle, subject to the consideration and assessment of all material planning matters and compliance with other relevant policy requirements.

5.2 Visual amenities

5.2.1 The site is located in a comparatively prominent location, adjacent to the lower end of Bangor High Street. The site is mainly surrounded by residential housing that varies in size, design and finish and on varying land levels. The form of the site itself varies in terms of land levels as there is a difference of approximately 6 metres between the current access into the site from the High Street and the lower part of the site which is located nearer to the rear of the houses of Ambrose Street.

5.2.2 It is inevitable that developing this site will have a degree of impact on the area’s visual amenities and it is fair to say that any development on this site, be it an application such as this one or a residential development for example, would have an impact on the area’s visual amenities. This is based on a comparison of the physical scale, with what used to exist on the site in the past (a series of relatively low-rise buildings) and the time lapse since its last use came to an end and the buildings on the site were demolished.

5. 2.3 The scale of the proposed development is smaller than what was submitted as part of the previous application, by removing three of the proposed buildings from the site. This involves an obvious reduction in the number of residents, which is now 109 compared to the original number of 161 residents.

5.2.4 The proposed buildings vary in height and in form, to some degree. The heights are as follows: • Block 1: Two-storey building, 9.6 metres to roof ridge • Block 2: Two-storey building, 12.3 metres to roof ridge (roof space used) • Block 3: Two-storey building, 12.2 metres to roof ridge (roof space used) • Block 4: Two/three-storey building, 15 metres to roof ridge (roof space used)

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

5.2.5 The setting of the buildings within the site is intentional to seek to overcome the concerns of the inspector and the authority’s officers regarding the impact of the buildings on the amenities of nearby residents. However, it is true to say that this application shows that some proposed buildings near the site boundary with Penlon Gardens will be nearer than those previously refused. The obvious difference in this case is that there will be a total of three buildings on this part of the site as opposed to four in the previous application. Under the new application, the gable ends of the proposed buildings would face Penlon Gardens where previously, two buildings (although located further away) faced them with a number of windows along the elevations of two of the buildings. The proposed windows on the gable ends are corridor windows rather than living room windows. There is now substantial space between these buildings which enables relatively open views from Penlon Gardens. The setting of some of the buildings in the previous application was much closer to the houses of Fountain Street and Ambrose Street. There is now more space between the buildings and these streets which is an improvement on the previous application in terms of setting and location.

5.2.6 The finishes of the buildings within the site will be a combination of render, brick and timber cladding and they will all have slate roofs. These elevations reflect the general finishes of the nearby area to a degree, however it is not considered that other common aspects are sufficiently reflected in the buildings, such as bay windows, hipped roofs, roof pitch etc. Although landscaping measures are recommended, namely a combination of soft and hard landscaping, and more open green spaces within the site following the deletion of three buildings from the proposal, this in itself is not considered sufficient to ensure that views of the site would be acceptable and fully protected from public views.

5.2.7 There have been strong concerns in the past, before and after submitting the application formally, regarding the standard and accuracy of some of the submitted plans. This means that it is difficult to fully assess the actual impact of the development on the appearance and character of the area, the street scene and on nearby houses. This defect in the available plans, along with the naivety of the plans means that the plans do not truly reflect what is being proposed in terms of the size of the proposal and its relationship with the current built form of the area.

5.2.8 The success of developing the site is dependant on the highest standard of architectural input and it is considered that it is possible to create suitable and striking buildings on the site, especially to the front of the site and near the access. Observations from the Design Commission for Wales in the past reiterate this comment when discussing the development of the site:

“The site and townscape analysis is a good start and has moved the project considerably but there are still some major issues to be resolved…the architecture lacks conviction…serious professional architect input is now sought, so that the built form and landscape can evolve together and the site planning can be improved…its implications now need to be taken further to deliver a scheme with an appropriate sense of place…professional architectural expertise is needed to ensure the desired quality and to give confidence that the scheme will respond well to its context”.

5.2.9 It is accepted that a townscape assessment has been submitted and that amendments have been included with the plans to convey the likely finish of the buildings, however it is not considered that this is a strong architectural response to what is expected and to what was suggested by the officers and by the Design Commission. The buildings need to better reflect and complement the local area’s existing PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

character, detail and interest to enable the development to contribute to the character of the area in addition to enabling it to integrate with the pattern and character of the local area. It is not considered that the current design and information convey this and therefore the development in its submitted form cannot be supported. It is therefore considered that the proposal is contrary to policies B22 and B25.

5.3 General and residential amenities

5.3.1 A number of objections have been received by local neighbours concerned about the impact of the proposed development on their residential amenities. This was also clearly the Inspector’s main concern and reason for refusing the appeal.

5.3.2 We must compare this proposal with the previously refused proposal and consider whether or not this proposal has been amended to the degree that it is now acceptable, and also the consideration given to previous observations in redesigning what is now proposed for the site.

5.3.3 The objections continue to refer to the appropriateness of the site for the proposed use, but it can be seen from the Inspector’s comments on the appeal of the previous application, that the principle of use was not considered unacceptable. Albeit, the Inspector referred to the fact that noise and disturbance was likely to emanate from the occupation and use of the buildings. This, in the authority’s opinion, was a matter of concern due to the proximity, the number and the orientation of the buildings of the previous application. It is now felt that the number of buildings, their orientation and the internal layout of living/communal rooms reduces the potential for unacceptable disturbance. By redesigning the orientation of the buildings with their gable ends facing the most sensitive houses and including internal corridor windows, the ‘living’ areas, namely the areas the occupants of the buildings are most likely to congregate in, have been moved further away from the most sensitive locations.

5.3.4 In his report, the Inspector refers to the impact on local community amenities on grounds of noise and disturbance. The Authority is of the opinion that the scale of what is considered harmful in relation to these matters is difficult to define, however; it acknowledges that the location of the number of buildings and the number of rooms, namely 161 in the previous application would have created an unacceptable impact on local amenities. By now, the location and orientation of the buildings has been changed, the number of buildings, and consequently the number of residents has been reduced, from 161 students to 109 students.

5.3.5 Traditionally, the area of Hirael has not included residential or academic buildings associated with the University. However, the distance between the site and the nearest sites or even the main University campus is not too unreasonable. There are now houses in the area that are let to students, therefore students are not completely uncommon in the area.

5.3.6 It is accepted that there will be a degree of disturbance for nearby residents during he construction phase and occasionally in operating the proposed use, however this is also likely to happen should residential housing be erected on the site or if an industrial/commercial use were to recommence and intensify its operations on site. There can be no guarantee that any new development would not affect the area’s amenities.

5.3.7 Historically, the site has been used for industrial/commercial use, and is located adjacent to a busy road. It is acknowledged that it is not in a town centre location as PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

claimed however; it is part of a suburban/urban settlement and is therefore within a dense and diverse built form. The area is not one of low building density and these areas are the priority for development rather than extending beyond the traditional and established boundaries of our towns. It is considered that there is some improvement to the application in its current form in terms of the number of buildings, their locations within the site, their orientation and the number of prospective users. However, it is not considered that it is acceptable in terms of the standard of the design or in terms of the presentation itself. Therefore, it is not believed that this development, because of the reasons already stated, is fully acceptable in terms of complying will all the requirements of policy B23.

5.3.8 Concern was raised regarding matters relating to refuse and arrangements for storing and disposing of the refuse created within the site. The following confirmation of the proposed arrangements was received: • The site’s refuse will be collected by private contractors on a weekly basis or more often if required • The refuse from the individual blocks will be collected by suitable vehicles enabling refuse to be sorted and recycled on the site. It will then be transported to purpose built collection/storage points within the site

5.3.9 Therefore, as the intention is to use private contractors and there will be no additional requirements on public services in terns of refuse collection despite the concerns raised.

5.4 Transport and access matters

5.4.1 Concerns have been highlighted relating to the location of the proposed site access and the parking provision proposed within the site for the residents of the buildings.

5.4.2 The Transportation Unit continues (as with the previous application) to consider the proposal acceptable in terms of the location, form and setting of the new access to the site and the changes and any work undertaken on the public highway (they will have to be agreed separately through a formal agreement under the Highways Act).

5.4.3 The parking provision within the site is acceptable, there is a reduction in the numbers compared with the previous application meaning that the impact on the road network is also reduced.

5.4.4 The site has been used previously for commercial / industrial use, where heavy vehicles visited the site not only at specific times, but also regularly throughout the working day. Approving a development such as this would not involve such a dense use and the number of spaces provided for vehicles in the site, along with forming an accommodation agreement (similar to what has been provided by private residential development for students in other parts of the city) to bind the signatory not to bring a vehicle to the city in order to avoid vehicles from being kept on the streets outside the site, the number of movements in and out of the site will be low.

5.4.5 The existing bus stops are very close to the site with an established transport network for prospective users, additionally; the distance from the site and the main university building is relatively small (approximately ½ mile as the crow flies).

5.4.6 It is considered that the development is acceptable in terms of transportation and access matters and that is meets the requirements of policies CH30, CH33 and CH36.

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

5.5 Archaeological Matters

5.5.1 It was suggested that a condition be included to secure an arrangement regarding undertaking an archaeological survey of the site, and in doing so, it is considered that the requirements of policy B7 are met.

5.6 Safety and crime prevention

5.6.1 Reference is made to a concern regarding matters relating to safety and crime prevention in some of the observations received. It is a sensitive matter that obviously may cause concern for residents that are affected by such incidents.

5.6.2 It is considered that the presence of a permanent warden within the site ensures that order is maintained and vehicle movements to and from the site will be controlled via a management system.

5.6.3 Boundary and landscaping arrangements within the site means that an additional element of protection will be provided.

5.7 Sustainability Matters

5.7.1 A BREEAM assessment was submitted as is required by current regulations which confirms that the building will reach the ‘excellent’ building standard and it is considered that this meets the requirements of policy C7.

5.8 Linguistic Matters

5.8.1 A Linguistic Statement was submitted with the application which summarises the current requirements and explains how the proposed development would affect (if at all) the status of the language within the application area. To summarise, the document states that the proposed development is unlikely to have a harmful effect on the Welsh language as the proposal meets existing demand for accommodation rather than increasing and attracting additional numbers of students to the city. The report goes on to note that developing such specific sites for students could lead to a reduction in the demand for converting residential houses for use as houses of multiple occupancy.

5.8.2 The Planning Inspector referred to this matter during the previous appeal, he confirmed that there was no evidence available to question the contents and the conclusions of the linguistic report submitted with the previous application or the impact of the development on the Welsh language.

5.8.3 Therefore, it is considered that the circumstances are the same in terms of the consideration given to the impact of the development on the Welsh language. »The submitted statement conveys the current situation and with fewer numbers than previously refused; it is felt that the proposal would not be contrary to the requirement of policies and relevant guidance relating to the Welsh language.

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

5.9 The need for student accommodation

5.9.1 It is seen that a number of objectors refer to the lack of demand for student accommodation given that there are so many ‘To Let’ signs on houses in the city at the moment. No evidence has been submitted that relates specifically to this matter, it is not known whether the houses are available to be let today or in future.

5.9.2 The Joint Planning Policy Unit has assessed the application for its compliance with relevant policies and has specifically investigated the question of ‘demand’. They refer to the popularity of the Hirael area (and the nearby area of Garth) in terms of the number of students currently living in conventional housing units. The unit gathered evidence to form a policy in the prospective Joint Local Development Plan which states the number of students who use residential houses in the area:

Conventional Multiple occupation Specific student Housing with Housing accommodation students Hirael 160 (21%) 132 (18%) 0 rooms Garth 47 (14%) 42 (13%) 140 rooms

5.9.3 The response further summarises the situation in Bangor in terms of the University’s current accommodation arrangements which is to let University halls to undergraduates during the first year which means that there are fewer places available for second and third year students. Until the relatively recent practice of building private sector halls, the second and third year students were totally dependent on houses had been bought or adapted by private sector landlords. According to the Students Accommodation Strategy (2012) fewer than a third of foreign students are able to get accommodation in the University’s halls of residence.

5.9.4 The current situation is that the University is able to offer accommodation to approximately 2,400 students within their halls, the number of students currently at University is approximately 9,000 a year and this is likely to be the case in future. The University’s Student Accommodation Strategy confirms that it is necessary to provide up to 800 rooms from 2015-2016. This means that the University itself can help to address the unmet need and contribute to the strategic plans for internationalism and post-graduate growth. This will enable the University to support its intention to provide accommodation in a hall during the first year for every student and to provide for more post-graduate and international students and provide a little for second and third year students. In looking at information regarding the current situation (bearing in mind work to revamp the existing halls and the intention of redeveloping the Saint Mary’s site) it is likely that it is expected that the private sector will continue to fill the gap.

5.9.5 In terms of compliance with the Council’s adopted policies, the Unit refers to the importance of reusing previously developed sites located within the development boundaries and the principle of developing student accommodation on the site was not unacceptable according to the Planning Inspector.

5.9.6 Although the Planning Authority did not refer to this in the context of the previous application, the Planning Inspector did refer to policy CH39 and therefore the policy is considered in terms of the factors that are common between this development and what the policy refers to, namely developments that maintain higher and further education establishments. PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

5.10 Planning History

5.10.1 We must obviously give serious consideration to the findings of the Planning Inspector’s report who decided to refuse the appeal lodged against the authority’s decision to refuse the previous application.

5.10.2 It is felt that the opinion of the inspector is clear in terms of defining the form of the local townscape, namely that it is not within a town centre of mixed use. This is therefore confirmation that the local area is a suburban/urban residential area.

5.10.3 He confirms that the previous application’s buildings in terms of volume and spacing between the blocks were not too excessive when the site was seen from a broader range and on the grounds of other public views, that the development would not overdevelop the site in relation to the surrounding built form and that it would not be incompatible neither would it harm the area’s character or appearance.

5.10.4 However, he was obviously of the opinion that the development would cause significant harm to the living conditions of nearby residents especially on the north- east side of Penlon Gardens, the south-east side of Ambrose Street, the southern end of Fountain Street and 30-32 Strand Street. The setting of the buildings has been changed and of course the number of buildings has been reduced from what was refused previously.

5.10.5 Redeveloping this site will inevitably have some degree of impact on the amenities of nearby residents, in the same way that an application for residential houses such as town houses would have an impact on aspects such as overlooking and the building height. The difference in levels between the site and nearby streets means that any development of a reasonable size would have an impact on nearby houses.

5.10.6 The Inspector had no objection in principle to developing the site for the use in question, neither did he have any concerns in terms of highway matters and the impact on the Welsh language.

5.10.7 As already noted, the obvious concern was the impact of the development on the residential amenities of some of the houses located nearest to the site, and this was the reason that ultimately outweighed all the other considerations. This obviously was the starting point for any re-submission, namely how the buildings could be relocated and designed to avoid such a serious and significant impact on the amenities of nearby residents. The reduction in the number of buildings, their location and their orientation has taken these observation into consideration. Consequently it is believed that the application offers a development that would not have an unacceptable impact on the amenities of local residents to the same degree as the refused proposal. Nevertheless, it is not considered that the standard of the plans is sufficiently clear to confirm without doubt how the development will overcome the concerns outlined above, which were also the reasons for refusing the previous application.

5.11 Response to the public consultation

5.11.1 Concerns were highlighted regarding the impact of the proposed development on the amenities of local residents, and obviously, this was also the Inspector’s main concern in determining the Appeal. PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

5.11.2 Paragraph 3.1.8 of Planning Policy Wales states: “When determining planning applications local planning authorities must take into account any relevant view on planning matters expressed by neighbouring occupiers, local residents and any other third parties. While the substance of local views must be considered , the duty is to decide each case on its planning merits. As a general principle, local opposition or support for a proposal is not, on its own, a reasonable ground for refusing or granting planning permission; objections, or support, must be based on valid planning considerations. There may be cases where the development proposed may give rise to public concern. The Courts have held that perceived fears of the public are a material planning consideration that should be taken into account in determining whether a proposed development would affect the amenity of an area and could amount to a good reason for a refusal of planning permission. It is for the local planning authority to decide whether, upon the facts of the particular case, the perceived fears are of such limited weight that a refusal of planning permission on those grounds would be unreasonable ”.

5.11.3 Full consideration was given to the observations received in response to the consultation period and a number of the matters raised are relevant and material to planning. Given all the relevant matters including the Inspector’s observations, the amendments to the application and the requirements of local and national policies and guidelines, it is considered that this latest application remains unacceptable on the grounds of insufficient design and plans as already discussed under ‘Visual Amenities’.

6. Conclusions:

6.1 This site is located within the development boundaries of the city of Bangor, and is a site that is considered to be a Brownfield site due to its previous and historical use. Planning Policy Wales strongly encourages developments on this type of land, rather than using Greenfield sites. Therefore, it is believed that the development is acceptable in principle.

6.2 Despite discussions held with the applicant and his agent prior and following submitting this application, the application in terms of the standard of the drawings and designs is note acceptable as they continue to fail to address the important matters relating to visual amenities as noted previously by the Local Planning Authority and also to a degree by the Planning Inspector.

6.3 These matters are material considerations and form part of the considerations for refusing the previous application. This latest application continues to fail to provide plans of a sufficient standard to truly convey the suggestions of the Planning Authority, the Design Commission for Wales and the Planning Inspector.

6.4 The reasons for refusing this application are based on material planning policies and guidelines along with the observations received as part of the consultation process. The assessment of this proposal in terms of its suitability and its relationship with the nearby area is a material consideration and this element will receive due consideration in determining the application.

6.5 As already noted, the principle of the development it not unacceptable, however further amendments are required in terms of the design of the buildings and the standard of the submitted plans in order to create a proposal that is suitable an PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

acceptable for this site and which responds to the concerns of the officers and reflects the advice given.

6.5 Given the above, and having given full consideration to all the relevant planning matters and the letters of objection received, it is considered that the proposal is unacceptable as it does not comply with the requirements of local and national policies and guidelines.

7. Recommendation:

To refuse -

The proposal is contrary to Policy B22 and B23 of the GUDP as the design does not incorporate good design principles by using methods that are in keeping with the nature, location and scale of the development and as the submitted plans are not of an acceptable standard to convey clearly and sufficiently what is intended to enable the impact of the proposal on the amenities of the local neighbourhood to be assessed.

Number: 10

Application Number: C13/0765/25/LL Date Registered: 13/08/2013 Application Type: Full Planning Community: Pentir Ward: Pentir

Proposal: CONVERSION OF OUTBUILDINGS INTO FOUR HOLIDAY UNITS TOGETHER WITH THE INSTALLATION OF A SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEM AND SOAKAWAY AND PROVISION OF PASSING BAY AND ALTERATIONS TO THE ACCESS Location: TŶ COCH , GLASINFRYN , BANGOR , LL574UB

Summary of the Recommendation: APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS

1. Description:

1.1 This is an application for the conversion of vacant outbuildings into four holiday units, together with the installation of a sewage treatment system and associated soakaway, the creation of a passing bay on the access track and alterations to the access track entrance.

1.2 The site includes substantial outbuildings that have been located in open countryside. The access track to the site (which also serves two other properties, namely the ‘Lodge’, which is located at the junction near the highway, and Neuadd Tŷ Coch which has its own track), branches off from the main track leading to the outbuildings which are the subject of this application.

1.3 The buildings which are the subject of this application are substantial, the main building is Lshaped and the southern building is a single storey building and the western building has two storeys. There is an extension in the form of a leanto (to be demolished) made out of zinc sheets at the rear of the two storey building. The northern ancillary buildings vary in terms of size and condition from being one and a half storey stone buildings with a pitched slate roof, a single storey stone building with a hipped slate roof, single storey buildings in the form of a leanto made out of half stone half zinc sheets, and ruins of stone pigsties.

1.4 The existing openings on the main building vary from small square and rectangular windows to stable doors and traditional barn openings. The existing openings on the ancillary buildings include a number of small square openings, along with traditional doors in the main building, and large openings in the section made out of zinc sheets.

1.5 The proposal includes converting the main building into three holiday units, which includes dividing the two storey section of the main building to create 2 two bedroom units, and another separate two bedroom unit in the single storey section of the main building. There is also an intention to retain use of one of the ancillary buildings as a storage, and demolish the pigsties entirely, together with the construction of an extension to the existing building to create an additional holiday unit which would provide two bedrooms. On the whole, the number and size of the openings will remain as they currently are on the main elevations of the main building, with the exception of adding one window on the first floor and one window on the ground floor of the two storey building. There are no openings on the elevation facing Neuadd Tŷ Coch except for conservation rooflights. Rooflights have been added to each elevation. There are changes to the form and number of openings on the ancillary buildings, however, they are traditional in terms of their symmetry and size.

1.6 A planning application under reference number C11/0543/25/LL to convert the buildings into two holiday units and a manager’s house has already been refused by the Planning Authority for road safety reasons and the creation of a living unit without justification within open countryside. Following submission of an appeal, the same plan was refused by the Planning Inspectorate as there was no justification for the creation of a living unit in open countryside without any evidence to prove the site was not suitable for economic use. The decision of the appeal confirms that the proposal submitted to the inspector was not likely to cause a detrimental impact on road safety as it was possible to improve the entrance and create a passing bay by using land within the applicant’s ownership, and that the proposal was not likely to cause a significant harm to the living conditions of any neighbouring residents.

2. Relevant Policies:

2.2 Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan 2009:

POLICY B23 – AMENITIES Safeguard the amenities of the local neighbourhood by ensuring that proposals must conform to a series of criteria aimed at safeguarding the recognised features and amenities of the local area.

POLICY B24 – ALTERATIONS AND BUILDING EXTENSIONS WITHIN DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES, RURAL VILLAGES AND THE COUNTRYSIDE Ensure that proposals for adaptations or extensions to buildings conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the character and amenity value of the local area.

POLICY B25 – BUILDING MATERIALS Safeguard the visual character by ensuring that building materials are of a high standard and are in keeping with the character and appearance of the local area.

POLICY C4 – ADAPTING BUILDINGS FOR REUSE Proposals to adapt buildings for reuse rather than demolition will be approved provided they can conform to specific criteria relating to the suitability of the building, visual considerations, design and the impact on the vitality of neighbouring towns and villages.

POLICY CH33 – SAFETY ON ROADS AND STREETS Development proposals will be approved provided they can conform to specific criteria regarding the vehicular access, the standard of the existing roads network and traffic calming measures.

POLICY CH34 – RURAL LANES Development proposals will be refused if they create an unacceptable increase in traffic on Rural Lanes where pedestrians, cyclists or horse riders are expected to be the main users.

POLICY D15 – SELFSERVICED HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION Proposals for developing new, permanent selfcatering holiday accommodation and adaptation of existing buildings or existing establishments will be approved if the design, setting and appearance of the development is of high standard and if it conforms to criteria relevant to the location and scale of the development, impact on the permanent housing stock and on residential areas and availability of this type of holiday accommodation.

• Conversion of buildings in open countryside and in rural villages.

Gwynedd Design Guidelines

2.3 National Policies:

Planning Policy Wales (edition 5) 2012 TAN 12: Design

3. Relevant Planning History:

3/25/272 Change of use of agricultural buildings to a restaurant and club APPROVED 1/6/1983

3/25/272A Conversion of vacant agricultural buildings into holiday units. APPROVED 4/09/1984

3/25/272B Change of use of part of the farmhouse as an allergy treatment plant APPROVED 5/11/1986

3/25/272C Construction of ten holiday units APPROVED 6/6/1990

C11/0543/25/LL Application to convert vacant outbuildings into one dwelling and two holiday units along with associated soakaways. REFUSED 27.02.12 An appeal against this decision was also refused on 28.08.12.

4. Consultations:

Town/Community Council: Refuse as the proposal is contrary to strategic policies 1 and 17, Policies D15, CH33, B15, B16, B17 and C7 which involve taking precautionary measures, tourism, holiday accommodation, road safety, protected species and building in a sustainable manner. There is also a concern that the holiday units will be used as full time dwellings.

Transportation Unit: No objection. It must be ensured that there is no surface water discharge on the road. The new part of the access would remain on private land and it would not be adopted. It must be ensured that the access and passing bay are completed before the units are used for holiday use. Permission must be obtained from the Street Works Manager.

Natural Resources Wales: No objection subject to imposing a condition to manage the location of external lights.

Welsh Water: No observations to offer.

Gwynedd Archaeological A condition to keep a photographic record. Trust:

Biodiversity: No objection to the proposal provided the developer complies with the amended plans and including the recent ecological report that no trees should be felled without the permission of the Council, and that a replanting plan should be submitted to compensate for the hedgerow that is affected when widening the access and creating a passing bay.

Land Drainage Officer: No response.

Public Protection Unit: Suggestion to impose a condition to ensure that no setting would cause pollution or detrimentally affect surface water and/or ground water, the environment, amenities or public health. Sewage tanks and the ancillary system must conform to building standard BS6297, and it is not permitted to locate any part of the system within 10m of a stream, land drain or trench.

Public Consultation: A notice was posted on the site and nearby residents were informed. The original advertising period ended on 4.9.2013 and three letters / items of correspondence objecting to the application were received. Following receipt of amended plans, a second consultation was undertaken on the application and response was received from the three original objectors stating that the original objections still stood. The objections involve: • Increased traffic which could involve damage to property as vehicles would have to reverse. • Increased traffic on the highway which is narrow and winding. • The track has already been damaged as a result of overflow from the trenches; approving the proposal would exacerbate the situation as it is possible for more water to flow from the trenches. • A concern that the units will be used as permanent dwellings. • Assurance required that the units will not be sold separately. • No information regarding the proposed work on the access. The existing access track is unsuitable for new development. There is currently a dispute regarding the track and therefore there is no intention to repair the track during this dispute. • Impact of the development on a bat roost which is located outside the application site. • No proof that there is demand for this type of holiday accommodation development in the area. • The location of the development is unsuitable as it is directly next door to a dwelling house that is not within the same ownership.

• The proposal does not provide a suitable way to drain surface water from the application site. • The southern side of the access is dangerous when driving onto the highway, and there is no intention to improve this side. • Matters involving ownership of the track. • A consideration that approving the proposal would cause a nuisance to the residents of Tŷ Coch and therefore that the development would not comply with the requirements of the covenants of the deeds.

5. Assessment of the material planning considerations:

Principle of the development

5.1 Policy C4 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan approves plans to adapt buildings for reuse provided they can conform to criteria which include ensuring that the building is of permanent construction, structurally sound and is capable of being adapted without substantial reconstruction work; that the building is suitable for the proposed use; that the design respects the structure, form and character of the existing building and its surroundings; ensures that any additional buildings or external operations do not cause significant harm to the visual quality and character of its surroundings, and that the development will not lead to a dispersal of activity on such a scale as to prejudice town or village activity.

5.2 The buildings which are the subject of this application are substantial vacant agricultural buildings built out of natural stone, with a pitched slate roof. The openings are of a traditional size and character to the buildings, and parts of the building have two storeys. There are other ancillary agricultural buildings that have been built out of half natural stone, half zinc sheets. A structural survey has been submitted as part of this application which confirms that the buildings are suitable to be converted although it is possible that some strengthening, maintenance and repair work is required, including local reconstruction where relevant, as well as strengthening the roof. The plan includes constructing one extension measuring approximately 5m by 7m and this would be on a site where there is currently a shed. Given the size of the buildings, the percentage of reconstruction for the entire plan is not deemed as substantial or contrary to the requirements of Policy C4.

5.3 In terms of size, the buildings are more than sufficient for the proposal and are suitable in terms of location and design by respecting the original building in terms of openings, materials and design (including the proposed extension), and no additional ancillary buildings are proposed as part of the application. The scale of the proposal for the four holiday units is not likely to damage the vitality of towns and villages.

5.4 As a result of the above, it is considered that the proposal complies with all requirements of policy C4 which involve the reuse of buildings.

5.5 Policy D15 of the Unitary Development Plan approves proposals to convert existing buildings into selfserviced holiday accommodation provided that the development is of a high quality in terms of design, layout and appearance and that the proposal will not result in a loss of permanent housing stock, that the development is not sited within a residential area and that the development does not lead to an excessive concentration of such accommodation within an area.

5.6 The proposal involves converting the existing buildings into four holiday units with associated storage. The design respects the original buildings by retaining the traditional character and the construction work is minimal. The proposal is located within open countryside with two nearby residential houses, this is characteristic of this type of substantial farm buildings that have been located within a dispersed pattern of rural dwellings. It is not considered that the site is located within a residential area with a specific built form (e.g. village or rural village), and the proposal does not involve the loss of permanent housing stock. The site is located between the city of Bangor and the village of Glasinfryn, and this area does not typically include a concentration of this type of accommodation. In addition, having searched the internet, it appears that no self catering accommodation is available in this area between the A424 and the city of Bangor. Therefore, by now it is considered that the proposal complies with all the requirements of policy D15 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan.

Visual, general and residential amenities

5.7 Policies B22, B24 and B25 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan involve assessing the proposal to undertake modifications on existing buildings, along with ensuring that the design and materials are suitable to the site.

5.8 The proposal offers to retain the original main buildings without having to undertake any demolition or reconstruction work, and the original openings are more or less being retained as they are on the main elevations – with traditional doors made out of timber and symmetrical glass panels that fit within existing openings. There are new openings on the front and rear elevations of the main twostorey building which are in keeping with the existing openings. It is also intended to install conservation rooflights in the roof of the two storey section and also in the roof of the building that abuts Neuadd Tŷ Coch with some of them being installed on the elevation facing this property.

5.9 It is proposed to construct an extension on one part of the development, together with installing some new openings in this building, but the nature of the openings and the extension are in keeping with what currently exists.

5.10 It is proposed to demolish parts of the existing buildings that are not required for this plan, namely a leanto extension made out of zinc sheets at the rear of the main building, and the old pigsties near the site access.

5.11 It is proposed to use the same materials as those currently at the site, namely stone and slates. It is proposed to install timber doors and windows.

5.12 As a result of the above, it is considered that the proposal complies with policies B22, B24 and B25 as described above, as the plan respects and maintains the original character of the site in terms of its design, size, density, form and materials.

5.13 Policy B23 of the Local Development Plan involves safeguarding the amenities of neighbouring residents. In this case, one property is located directly parallel to the application site, and one elevation of the main building (single storey section which is to be converted into one of the holiday units) is located on the boundary between both properties. Despite this, full consideration has been given to the amenities of the neighbouring property. The elevation facing this property is a solid stone wall but windows would be installed in the roof, however, this is considered acceptable in terms of safeguarding amenities and ensuring the privacy for both properties.

The track leading to the site and towards a more modern agricultural shed on agricultural fields is shared with the neighbouring property, along with another property which is located directly near the access of the track onto the highway. The development proposes four holiday units, but it is not considered that this addition would have a detrimental impact on the amenities or privacy of the residents of any existing properties, especially as it is already possible to use this track for agricultural purposes.

5.14 A previous application was submitted for the site under reference number C11/0543/25/LL which involved converting the buildings to provide two holiday units and one residential unit. Following refusal of the application at the Planning Committee, the applicant submitted an appeal to the Planning Inspectorate. Although the appeal was refused on the grounds that the proposal did not comply with policy CH12 of converting buildings in open countryside into residential houses, the Inspector’s report confirmed that he had noted the concerns of the occupiers of the neighbouring residential properties (Neuadd Tŷ Coch) and concluded that the proposal would not cause unacceptable harm to their living conditions. When comparing the proposal that was the subject of the appeal (permanent living unit and two holiday units) with the proposal in hand (four holiday units) and considering that there is no difference between both applications in terms of the number and type of openings on the elevation facing the property of Neuadd Tŷ Coch, it is not considered that this application creates any additional material feature that could cause a detrimental impact to the amenities and living conditions of Neuadd Tŷ Coch residents.

5.15 As a result of all the above points, including the decision of the appeal, it is considered that the proposal complies with all requirements of policy B23, and that the development is not likely to cause any detrimental impact on the amenities of the local area or any adjacent properties.

Transport and access matters

5.16 The proposal includes widening the existing entrance in a northerly direction, along with providing a passing bay on the access track that leads from the highway onto the site. The applicant does not own the access or the section of the access track that leads up to the point where it branches off towards Neuadd Tŷ Coch. But the land used to widen the track and create the passing bay is within the applicant’s ownership. The access is located on a single public carriageway.

5.17 Policies CH33 and CH34 of the Unitary Development Plan are involved with ensuring safety on roads and streets, including rural lanes. The Transportation Unit has confirmed that the proposal to improve the access is suitable for the number and type of proposed units. Consequently, there is no concern regarding the use of the existing access or the road network that leads to the site, even though the highway is a single track. It is not considered that the proposal of four holiday units is likely to create an unacceptable increase in traffic flow in the area, especially in considering the agricultural nature of the area and existing use of the road network.

5.18 The decision of the appeal on the previous application accepts that current visibility for drivers who exit the access track towards a northerly direction is far beneath the current standards. However, the Inspector considered that the land required to improve this visibility was under the control of the applicant and that it would be possible to secure safe access by means of appropriate conditions, along with securing a passing bay along the track in order to overcome the possibility of vehicles travelling from the other direction having to reverse out onto the public carriageway. On that basis, the Inspector considered that the proposal before the appeal would not endanger road safety and that it would be in accordance with Policy CH33 above.

5.19 Although the development proposes four holiday units instead of one dwelling and two holiday units, the Transportation Unit continues to be of the opinion that the improvements are sufficient for providing a safe access and that the proposal will not endanger road safety in this case. Therefore, the proposal complies with all the requirements of policy CH33 above.

5.20 Policy CH36 of the Local Development Plan is involved with securing sufficient parking facilities for proposed developments. The application form and block plan confirm that there is sufficient space in the yard in front of the units to park eight vehicles and this is sufficient for the number of units being proposed. It is therefore considered that the proposal conforms with all the requirements of the above policy.

Biodiversity matters

5.21 A recent species survey has been submitted as part of the application and this is in addition to the species survey completed on the site when the previous application was submitted in 2011. The survey includes clear methods in order to mitigate any impact on the protected species and detailed plans indicating how the mitigating measures will be provided on the site. The Biodiversity Unit and Natural Resources Wales are now satisfied subject to conditions ensuring that trees will not be felled, ensuring the location and type of external lights, and ensuring a landscaping plan to compensate for the hedgerows that will be lost as a result of changes to the access and passing bay. It is therefore considered that the proposal is not contrary to the requirements of policy B20 of the Unitary Development Plan which is involved with ensuring the protection of species and their habitats that are internationally and nationally important.

Response to the public consultation

5.22 As a result of the original public consultation and the second consultation, three letters were received objecting to the proposal (and three further letters from the same objectors confirming that the original objections still applied).

5.23 In response to the points raised, it is considered that all the information necessary to assess the application has been submitted. Detailed plans of amendments to the access together with a recent bat survey have been submitted as part of the application.

5.24 The impact of the proposal on traffic and road safety has already been discussed above, and the Transportation Unit confirms that the amendments to the access as well as provision of a passing bay are sufficient to ensure safe access into – and out of – the site.

5.25 It appears that a dispute exists between the applicant and the owner of the access track and the adjacent property of Neuadd Tŷ Coch and that this dispute is related to the condition of the access track as well as damage to/maintenance work to the trenches at either side of the access track. It appears that this work is currently not being undertaken and that this is the cause of surface water and water runoff problems in this location. Part of the access track is not within the ownership of the applicant, but land required for the improvements is within the ownership of the applicant (i.e. the field to the north of the track). Whilst the applicant will be required to discuss and agree on this work with the owners of the access track, this is not a planning matter to be considered in determining this application. In addition, who is responsible for maintaining the track or trenches is not a planning matter. There is currently no evidence that more water will flow to these trenches at either side of the track, or that an increase in water volume is likely to cause any overflow. Porosity tests have been received and are acceptable.

5.26 The application is for the conversion of buildings into holiday units, therefore there will be relevant conditions to ensure that the units are used for holiday purposes only as use of the units as permanent dwellings will not be acceptable from a policy perspective. It is not considered that there is justification in terms of planning perspective to restrict the sale of the units separately and it is not considered that selling the units individually would cause any detrimental impact to the area. It is possible to impose conditions to ensure that two parking spaces are attached to each holiday unit. An assessment of the site’s suitability for holiday units has already been discussed as part of this report.

5.27 The impact of the proposal on the amenities of the area and nearby residents has already been discussed.

6. Conclusions:

6.1 In light of the above, and also considering the recent appeal decision which is a material consideration in assessing this application, it is not considered that the proposal is contrary to any relevant policies noted above and there is no other relevant planning matter that states otherwise.

7. Recommendation:

7.1 To approve

1. Commence permission within five years. 2. Complete development in agreement with the plans. 3. Complete the mitigating measures in agreement with the submitted plans and survey. 4. Cover the roofs of the holiday units with slates to be agreed with LPA. 5. Type and colour of doors and windows to be confirmed. 6. Remove permitted rights. 7. Use the holiday units for holiday purposes only and not as anyone’s main residence. 8. A visitor’s register must be kept. 9. The improvements to the access and passing bay must be completed prior to commencing work on the rest of the permitted development. 10. The applicant must take every care to prevent surface water from the curtilage of the site from discharging onto the highway. 11. It must be ensured that two parking spaces are available for each holiday unit at all times. 12. Any installed lights that are associated with the permitted development should be low voltage lighting. 13. The proposed septic tank/prospective sewage treatment and the associated water run off system must comply with BS 6297 and no part of the system is to be located within 10 metres of any water course. 14. Conservation rooflights must be used in the roof. 15. Nothing higher than 1m within the visibility splay. 16. Submit and agree on a landscaping plan. 17. It is not permitted to fell any trees without first obtaining written confirmation from the LPA.

Notes 1. In order to undertake work on the access, permission must be obtained from the Street Works Manager.

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Number: 11

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Application Number: C13/1028/11/LL Date Registered: 14/10/2013 Application Type: Full - Planning Community: Bangor Ward: Glyder

Proposal: APPLICATION FOR THE ERECTION OF A TWO STOREY PITCHED ROOF EXTENSION ON THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY . Location: 20, TREM ELIDIR , MAES TRYFAN , BANGOR , LL572UF

Summary of the Recommendation: APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS

1. Description:

1.1 This application is for erecting a two-storey extension with a pitched roof to the rear of the property.

1.2 The property is an end-of-terrace two-storey house which is located amongst other similar terraces within the residential area in Bangor. The existing property has a small lean-to extension to the rear of the property, which measures approximately 3m x 2m and 2m high to the eaves and 3m at its highest point, and it is intended to demolish it in order to provide a two-storey pitched roof extension to the rear of the property. The proposed extension measures 4.5m x 5m and 5m to the eaves (which reflects the existing eaves on the two-storey part of the property) and 7m to the ridge (which is lower than the original ridge of the property) with a hip pitched roof. The extension provides a kitchen/dining room as well as a bedroom, bathroom and shower room. It is intended to finish the extension to be in keeping with the original dwelling as well as laying slate on the roof.

2. Relevant Policies:

2.2 Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan 2009:

POLICY B24 - ALTERATIONS AND BUILDING EXTENSIONS WITHIN DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES, RURAL VILLAGES AND THE COUNTRYSIDE - Ensure that proposals for adaptations or extensions to buildings conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the character and amenity value of the local area.

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

POLICY B25 – BUILDING MATERIALS – Safeguard the visual character by ensuring that building materials are of a high standard and are in keeping with the character and appearance of the local area.

2.3 National Policies:

TAN 12 Design Planning Policy Wales (Edition 5) November 2012

3. Relevant Planning History: None

4. Consultations:

Town/Community Council: Object – it is tantamount to creating a house in multiple occupation for students in a residential area which has a high number of family houses at present. The proposal will set a precedent which will mean that it will be more difficult to refuse similar proposals in the area and this would be likely to have a detrimental impact on the character and amenities of neighbouring residents. The size and scale of the proposed extension is likely to have a detrimental impact on the amenities of neighbouring residents.

Welsh Water: No response.

Public Consultation: A notice was posted on the site and nearby residents were informed. The consultation period ended on 25.11.13 and three letters were received at the time of writing the report stating the following:

• No objection to this specific proposal; however, object to setting a precedent for similar extensions which could affect the amenities of other houses in the area. • The extension would affect sunlight to the ground floor and first floor rooms as well as the garden (adjacent house). • Cause overlooking to the rear. • Increases the number of people living in the property and therefore likely to cause parking problems. • Concern regarding the nature of the proposed dwelling.

5. Assessment of the material planning considerations:

Principle of the development

5.1 General planning policies within the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan support applications for the erection of extensions to residential dwellings provided they are assessed appropriately.

5.2 Policy B24 of the Unitary Development Plan involves making alterations to buildings. This proposal involves erecting a two-storey extension with a pitched roof to the rear of the property. The extension is not substantial in size, and there is

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

adequate curtilage to the rear with the level of the land inclining further away from the property itself. The extension is normal in size, scale and design and an amended plan has been submitted to replace the gable-end of the extension with a hip roof in order to try to reduce any potential oppressive impact. It is considered that the size and design of the extension is suitable and is in keeping with the original property and the surrounding area. In this case, it is considered that the extension conforms with the requirements of policy B24 above.

Visual, general and residential amenities

5.3 Policies B22, B23 and B25 of the Unitary Development Plan involve assessing the proposal’s design, amenities and external materials.

5.4 This proposal involves erecting a two-storey extension with a pitched roof to the rear of the property. It is considered that the design of the extension is suitable and is in keeping with the site and existing property. The land at the rear curtilage of this property and neighbouring houses inclines further away from the rear of the houses and therefore it is not considered that the extension is oppressive; the extension has been stepped back by 1m from the boundary of the property with no. 19 Trem Elidir and 3m away from the boundary of property no. 21 Trem Elidir. There are first floor windows at the rear of the extension which face the rear of the houses in the street behind; however, there is high and thick vegetation between the two properties and there is approximately 10-12m between the rear of the extension and the boundary with the properties to the rear. It is not considered that the proposal is likely to have a detrimental effect on amenities or cause substantial or unsuitable overlooking to this direction. It is not intended to install any openings on the elevation which faces 21 Trem Elidir, and it is intended to install a window in the shower room only (with obscured glass used) on the first floor level which faces no. 19 Trem Elidir and it is not considered that this will cause any unacceptable overlooking.

5.5 An objection has been received on the grounds that the proposed development would obstruct sunlight to the ground floor and first floor windows of no. 19 Trem Elidir and to the rest of the curtilage also. The proposed extension has been stepped back by 1m away from the boundary with no. 19 and, therefore, it is considered that there is at least 1.5m between the wall of the extension and the windows of the property next- door. It appears that the extension is located in the path of sunlight and that the extension is likely to obstruct somewhat on direct sunlight to the rear (dependent on the time of year and the adjacent vegetation), however, it is not considered that the proposal is likely to affect daylight to the windows of property no. 19 Trem Elidir to such an extent as being unacceptable. In addition, the extension is likely to have some effect on some direct sunlight within the curtilage of the property next-door, but it is considered that the curtilage of the property is adequate which would mean that the proposal is not likely to unreasonably affect the amenities of residents in this next- door property. The proposed materials are suitable and in keeping. Therefore, it is not considered that the extension is contrary to the requirements of policies B22, B23 and B25 of the Unitary Development Plan.

Response to the public consultation

5.6 Following a period of public consultation, three observations were received noting the following points

• No objection to this specific proposal; however, object to setting a precedent for similar extensions which could affect the amenities of other houses in the area.

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 16/12/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO CAERNARFON (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

• The extension would affect sunlight to the ground floor and first floor rooms as well as the garden. • Cause overlooking to the rear. • Increases the number of people living in the property and therefore likely to cause parking problems. • Concern regarding the nature of the proposed dwelling.

It is considered that matters relating to overlooking, oppressive impact and impact on daylight/sunlight have been dealt with above.

5.7 On-street parking is available outside the property which is the subject of this application, and it is not considered that adding one bedroom is likely to cause a significant increase in traffic to this specific property and therefore it is not considered that it is likely to cause significant parking problems as a result.

5.8 The application has been submitted before the Local Planning Authority as an application by a house occupier to erect an extension and it does not include any intention to change its use into a house in multiple occupation. At present, the property falls under use class C3, residential houses, which means that the use of the residential property is restricted to a family, individual or up to six people living together as an individual family. The proposal involves an extension to create one additional bedroom bringing the total to four bedrooms and therefore it is considered reasonable to presume that this is the applicant’s intention. However, should the owner of the property decide to use his rights to provide accommodation for up to six people living together as an individual family, this is outside the control of the Local Planning Authority and the existence of that right or the concern that this could happen is not a reason to refuse this application. In addition, changing the use of the property to a house in multiple occupation would require further planning permission as the use would then fall within another use class.

5.9 It is not considered that the observations and objections submitted outweigh the relevant policy considerations and they are not adequate to refuse this application.

6. Conclusions:

6.1 It is not considered that the proposal is contrary to any relevant policy noted above. The proposal is not likely to have an unacceptable detrimental effect on the amenities of the local area or on the residents of any neighbouring property.

7. Recommendation:

To approve with conditions: 1. 5 years 2. ensure that the development is completed in accordance with the plans submitted 3. external finish to be in keeping with the existing property 4. slates on the roof 5. Welsh Water note