Contents Contents Agenda 2 4 - Minutes of Previous Meeting 8 5 - Planning Applications 21 No

Contents Contents Agenda 2 4 - Minutes of previous meeting 8 5 - Planning Applications 21 No. 1 - Green Pastures Caravan Park, Abersoch 22 Plans 28 No. 2 - Afonwen Laundry former site, Afonwen, Pwllheli 33 Plans 44 No. 3 - Harbour Hotel, Abersoch 52 Plans 67 No. 4 - Bryn Seiont Hospital, Pant Road, Caernarfon 82 Plans 92 No. 5 - Land rear of Dublin Street, Tremadog 99 Plans 105 No. 6 - Glandwr, Rhydyclafdy, Pwllheli 110 Plans 116 No. 7 - South Caernarfon Creameries Ltd, Chwilog 121 Plans 128 Gwasanaeth Democratiaeth Democracy Service Swyddfa’r Cyngor CAERNARFON Gwynedd LL55 1SH

Cyfarfod / Meeting

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO

PLANNING COMMITTEE

Dyddiad ac Amser / Date and Time

1.00pm DYDD LLUN, 25 TACHWEDD, 2013

1.00pm MONDAY, 25 NOVEMBER, 2013

Lleoliad / Location YSTAFELL GYFARFOD, FRONDEG, PWLLHELI MEETING ROOM, FRONDEG, PWLLHELI

D.S Rhagflaenir gan ymweliadau safle mewn cysylltiad â cheisiadau rhifau:- (i) C13/0849/44/MG (tir tu cefn Heol Dulyn, Tremadog, LL49 9RH), gydag aelodau’r pwyllgor i gyfarfod ger y safle am 10.00am (map o'r ardal ynghlwm) (ii) C13/0403/39/LL (White House Hotel, Abersoch, LL53 7AG), gydag aelodau’r pwyllgor i fynd ymlaen i’r safle erbyn 11.00am (nid yw’r cais yn cael ei drafod yn y pwyllgor hwn) N.B. To be preceded by site visits in relation to applications numbers:- (i) C13/0849/44/MG (land rear of Dublin Street, Tremadog, LL49 9RH), with committee members by the site at 10.00am (area map attached) (ii) C13/0403/39/LL (White House Hotel, Abersoch, LL53 7AG), with committee members to proceed to the site by 11.00am (the application will not be discussed at this meeting)

Pwynt Cyswllt / Contact Point

IOAN HUGHES

(01286 679780)

[email protected]

Dosbarthwyd/Distributed 15.11.13 PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO PLANNING COMMITTEE

Aelodaeth / Membership (15)

Plaid Cymru (7)

Y Cynghorwyr/Councillors Elwyn Edwards Dyfrig Jones Dafydd Meurig Michael Sol Owen Tudor Owen Hefin Williams Eurig Wyn

Annibynnol/Independent (3)

Y Cynghorwyr/Councillors Anne T. Lloyd Jones Eirwyn Williams Christopher O’Neal

Llais Gwynedd (3)

Y Cynghorwyr/Councillors Endaf Cooke Louise Hughes Owain Williams

Llafur/Labour (1)

Y Cynghorydd/Councillor Gwen Griffith

Rhyddfrydwyr Democrataidd / Liberal Democrats (1)

Y Cynghorydd/Councillor June Marshall

Eilyddion / Substitutes Y Cynghorwyr / Councillors

Craig ab Iago (Plaid Cymru) John Pughe Roberts (Annibynnol / Independent) Gruffydd Williams (Llais Gwynedd) Gwynfor Edwards (Llafur / Labour) Stephen Churchman (Rhyddfrydwyr Democrataidd / Liberal Democrats) AELODAU LLEOL A WAHODDIR/ LOCAL MEMBERS INVITED (Cynghorydd/Councillor + Rhif Cais/ Application Number)

1. Cyng/Coun John Brynmor Hughes C12/1577/39/LL

2. Cyng/Coun Aled Evans C13/0599/41/AM

3. Cyng/Coun R. H. Wyn Williams C13/0736/39/LL

4. Cyng/Coun Endaf Cooke a/and Roy Owen C13/0810/14/LL

5. Cyng/Coun Alwyn Gruffydd C13/0849/44/MG

6. Cyng/Coun Anwen J. Davies C13/0880/33/LL

7. Cyng/Coun Peter Read C13/0901/41/LL TREFN SIARAD YN Y PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO

Mae’r Cyngor wedi penderfynu rhoddi’r hawl i 3ydd parti siarad yn y Pwyllgor Cynllunio. Mae’r daflen hon yn amlinellu’r trefniadau gweithredol arferol ar gyfer siarad yn y pwyllgor.

1. Adroddiad y Gwasanaeth Cynllunio ar y cais cynllunio yn cynnwys argymhelliad.

2. Os oes cais wedi ei dderbyn gan 3ydd parti i siarad, bydd y Cadeirydd yn gwahodd y siaradwr ymlaen

3. Gwrthwynebydd, neu gynrychiolydd o’r gwrthwynebwyr yn cael 3 munud annerch y pwyllgor

4. Ymgeisydd, gynrychiolydd yr ymgeisydd(wyr) neu Asiant yn cael 3 munud annerch y pwyllgor

5. Aelod(au) Lleol yn cael annerch y pwyllgor 10 munud

6. Cadeirydd y pwyllgor yn gofyn am gynigydd ac eilydd i’r cais cynllunio

7. Y pwyllgor yn trafod y cais cynllunio.

PROCEDURE FOR SPEAKING IN THE PLANNING COMMITTEE

The Council has decided that third parties have the right to speak at the Planning Committee. This leaflet outlines the normal operational arrangements for speaking at the committee.

1. Report of the Planning Service on the planning application including a recommendation.

2. If an application has been received from a 3rd party to speak the Chairman will invite the speaker to come forwards.

3. Objector, or a representative of the objectors to address the 3 minutes committee.

4. Applicant or a representative of the applicant(s) to address the 3 minutes committee.

5. Local Member(s) to address the committee 10 minutes

6. Committee Chairman to ask for a proposer and seconder for the planning application.

7. The committee to discuss the planning application RHAGLEN

1. YMDDIHEURIADAU

Derbyn unrhyw ymddiheuriadau am absenoldeb.

2. DATGAN BUDDIANT PERSONOL

Derbyn unrhyw ddatganiad o fuddiant personol.

3. MATERION BRYS

Nodi unrhyw eitemau sy’n fater brys ym marn y Cadeirydd fel y gellir eu hystyried.

4. COFNODION

Bydd y Cadeirydd yn cynnig y dylid llofnodi cofnodion y cyfarfod diwethaf o’r pwyllgor hwn, a gynhaliwyd ar 4 Tachwedd, 2013, fel rhai cywir (copi yma – papur melyn)

5. CEISIADAU AM GANIATÂD CYNLLUNIO

Cyflwyno adroddiad Pennaeth Adran Rheoleiddio (copi yma – papur gwyn). AGENDA

1. APOLOGIES

To accept any apologies for absence.

2. DECLARATION OF PERSONAL INTEREST

To receive any declaration of financial interest or personal connection.

3. URGENT ITEMS

To note any items that are a matter of urgency in the view of the Chairman for consideration.

4. MINUTES

The Chairman shall propose that the minutes of the last meeting of this committee, held on, 4 November, 2013, be signed as a true record (copy herewith - yellow enclosure).

5. PLANNING APPLICATIONS

To submit the report of the Head of Regulatory Department (copy herewith – white enclosure). PLANNING COMMITTEE 4/11/13

PLANNING COMMITTEE 4/11/13

Present: Councillor Gwen Griffith – Chair Councillor Michael Sol Owen – Vice-chair

Councillors: Councillors Endaf Cooke, Louise Hughes, Anne Lloyd Jones, June Marshall, Dafydd Meurig, William Tudor Owen, Eirwyn Williams, Hefin Williams, Owain Williams, and Craig ab Iago (substitute).

Others invited: Councillors Dyfed Edwards, Charles Wyn Jones, Elfed Wyn Williams, Gethin Glyn Williams, R. H. Wyn Williams and Robert J. Wright (local members).

Also present: Aled Davies (Head of Regulatory Department), Gareth Jones (Senior Planning Service Manager), Cara Owen (Acting Development Control Manager), Iwan Evans (Legal Services Manager), Gareth Roberts (Senior Transport Development Control Officer), Lowri Haf Evans and Bethan Adams (Member Support and Scrutiny Officers).

Apologies: Councillors Elwyn Edwards, Dyfrig Jones, Christopher O’Neal; Councillor John Pughe Roberts (substitute) and Councillor Liz Saville Roberts (local member).

1. CHAIR’S ANNOUNCEMENTS

a) The Chair, Gwen Griffith, welcomed everyone to the meeting b) Everyone was reminded that the committee was being recorded c) The voting system was tested

Apologies were conveyed to Cllr June Marshall as her apology for the previous planning committee had not been noted. It was also expressed that the apology of Cllr Anne Lloyd Jones had not been noted either.

2. DECLARATION OF PERSONAL INTEREST

(a) The following members declared a personal interest for the reasons noted:

(i) a) Councillor Owain Williams (a member of this Planning Committee), in item 5 on the agenda (planning application number C13/0758/42/LL) because he was the owner of a caravan park situated less than 6 miles away from the application site.

(ii) Councillor Gethin Glyn Williams (not a member of this Planning Committee) in relation to item 5 on the agenda (planning application number C13/0770/00/LL) as he was a member of the Barmouth Memorial Park.

(b) The following members declared that they were local members in relation to the items noted:

 Councillor Elfed Wyn Williams (not a member of this Planning Committee) in relation to item 5 on the agenda (planning application number C09A/0396/18/AM);  Councillor Dyfed Edwards (not a member of this Planning Committee) in relation to item 5 on the agenda (planning application number C13/0835/22/LL);  Councillor R. H. Wyn Williams (not a member of this Planning Committee) in relation to item 5 on the agenda (planning application number C13/0561/39/LL and C13/0826/39/LL);

1 PLANNING COMMITTEE 4/11/13

 Councillor Michael Sol Owen (a member of this Planning Committee) in relation to item 5 on the agenda (planning application number C13/0679/45/R3);  Councillor Robert J. Wright (not a member of this Planning Committee) in relation to item 5 on the agenda (planning application number C13/0679/45/R3);  Councillor Charles Wyn Jones (not a member of this Planning Committee) in relation to item 5 on the agenda (planning application number C13/0710/23/LL);  Councillor Gethin Glyn Williams (not a member of this Planning Committee) in relation to item 5 on the agenda (planning application number C13/0770/00/LL);  Councillor Endaf Cooke (a member of this Planning Committee) in relation to item 5 on the agenda (planning application number C13/0929/14/LL).

The members withdrew to the other side of the Chamber during the discussions on the applications in question and did not vote on these matters.

3. URGENT ITEMS None to note.

4. MINUTES

The Chair signed the minutes of the previous committee meeting held on 14 October 2013, as a true record. The apologies of Cllr June Marshall and Cllr Anne Lloyd Jones needed to be included in the minutes.

5. PLANNING APPLICATIONS

The Committee considered the following applications for development.

Details of the applications were expanded upon and questions were answered in relation to the plans and aspects of the policies.

RESOLVED

1. Application number C09A/0396/18/AM – Land near Victoria Terrace, Deiniolen

Residential development and creation of new access.

(a) It was noted that the application was being returned before the committee following a cooling-off period. Clear recommendations had been noted in the report in relation to the risk of refusing contrary to the recommendation. The members were informed that should the application be refused then the proposer and seconder would have to be prepared to defend the Council in an appeal, considering the recommendation of officers on the application and relevant evidence. It was confirmed that the applicant had already noted that he intended to lodge an appeal and make a request for costs should the application be refused.

(b) The Senior Planning Services Manager elaborated on the background of the application and noted that the application submitted before the Committee was an outline application for the development of 27 houses (including 5 affordable houses), along with the creation of a new access. At the Committee on 23.9.2013, the Committee’s proposal had been to refuse the application for 7 reasons.

1. Risk of flooding 2. Transportation matters 3. Impact on residential amenities 4. No local need for the development

2 PLANNING COMMITTEE 4/11/13

5. Insufficient provision of affordable housing 6. Impact on the Welsh language 7. Lack of play areas.

As a result, the Head of Regulatory Department had resolved to refer the matter to a cooling-off period as he was of the view that there would be risks for the Council as a result of refusing the application.

The report highlighted planning policies, highlighted the risks to the Council and the risks that the Council could be open to if the Planning Committee proposed to refuse. Additional information and evidence was included in the report (Appendix 1), along with relevant statements in response to the reasons for deferring the decision on the application when it was reported to the Committee for the first time.

Members were reminded that:  The site had been designated within the Unitary Development Plan for a housing development – the principle had already been established by the Council.  National and Local Policy Context had been considered. The development was in line with policies on a national level.  Specific responses to the seven reasons given for refusing the application had been listed. In brief: i. Language – an assessment had been submitted by the applicant and there was no evidence that the development would have a detrimental impact on the Welsh language or on the community. ii. Need for housing – i.e. the need in the dependency catchment area was the matter to be considered in line with the UDP. The area relevant to this application was the Caernarfon dependency catchment area (not Deiniolen) and the evidence proved that the need existed. iii. Site infrastructure matters – viable only to provide 5 affordable dwellings. iv. Flood risk – suitable drainage system provided for the plan. No objection from Natural Resources Wales, Welsh Water and the Council’s Land Drainage Unit. v. A second consultation was undertaken with the Transportation Unit – no impact on road safety deriving from the development. vi. Residential amenities and overdevelopment – density had reduced from 30 units to 27. Sufficient space between the development and existing property, thus no detrimental impact on residential amenities. vii. Play area and a green within the development. Every house within the development had a relatively large private garden.

It had to be realised that there were substantial risks to the Council associated with refusing the application, including:  Undermining policies as a local planning authority  Undermining national policies  Welsh Government being called in to make the decision (out of the hands of the Committee)  The greatest risk was associated with an appeal. The applicant had confirmed in writing that should the decision be refused at the Planning Committee that he intended to lodge an appeal and request a hearing or public inquiry.  There was a substantial financial risk to the Council associated with appeal. It was possible for the applicant upon appeal to make a request for costs against the Council for failing to provide robust and sound evidence to justify the reasons for refusal.

3 PLANNING COMMITTEE 4/11/13

Officers were of the opinion that firm evidence had been submitted in the report which showed that the application complied with the Unitary Development Plan. There was no firm evidence that justified refusing the application.

(c) The local member (not a member of the Planning Committee), underlined the concerns and objections being highlighted by the community of Deiniolen. The following observations were expressed:  There was no evidence showing the need for housing in the village  That 33 houses were currently for sale in the village  That six new-build houses had been for sale for over a year  An e-mail from Gwynedd Council’s Housing Department noted that the North Wales Housing Association had held an initial discussion regarding six empty houses in Bryn Bigil – responding to the demand for an intermediate rent scheme with an option to buy into the property in time  The percentage of affordable housing had reduced from 30% to 18%  The economic situation had changed substantially since 2009  There was a call for a Flexible Strategy in response to the current situation  That the agent’s comments, in relation to the refusal of the application, were threatening.

The recommendation was proposed and seconded.

(ch) The following observations were noted in favour of approving the application.

 Concerns from the previous hearing had been addressed with firm information and evidence.  The need to comply with the Local Development Plan that had been agreed already.  That the majority of services consulted had stated that they did not object to the application.  That evidence justified providing less than 30% of affordable housing within the development.

(d) The following observations were cited for refusing the application:

That Councillors, the Officers and the society should listen to the views of the local people.  There were empty houses in the village of Deiniolen at the moment, and there was no need for further development;  There were a number of empty houses in the area, but no customers for them;  A clear definition of ‘affordable houses’ was needed. How were percentages regarding the number of units decided upon?  Further concern regarding the future of the language in the community was highlighted.

A request was made for a registered vote: Accepted.

In favour (7) Councillors: Gwen Griffith, Anne T. Lloyd Jones, June Marshall, Dafydd Meurig, Michael Sol Owen, Tudor Owen, Hefin Williams.

Against (4) Councillors Endaf Cooke, Louise Hughes, Eirwyn Williams, Owain Williams.

Abstain (1) Councillor Craig ab Iago

4 PLANNING COMMITTEE 4/11/13

RESOLVED to delegate powers to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the application, subject to the applicant signing a legal agreement to ensure that five of the 27 houses proposed are affordable housing for general local need.

Conditions: Relevant time conditions Conditions re. submitting reserved matters details. Highways conditions / notes Natural Resources Wales conditions Welsh Water conditions Materials / slates Biodiversity mitigation measures as included in the ecological survey. Landscaping Removal of permitted rights for the affordable houses

2. Application number C13/0835/22/LL – 3, Water Street, Penygroes

Change of use of the former shop (A1) to A3 use for the sale of hot food to take away.

(a) It was noted that the following additional observations/information had been received: An amended plan from the applicant removing the access ramp from the front elevation in accordance with the requirements of the Transportation Unit on the basis that the ramp restricted accessibility in terms of using the pavement.

(b) The Senior Planning Services Manager elaborated on the background of the application noting that it was an application to change the use of an empty shop to sell hot food to take away. The proposal involved making internal changes to the ground floor of the property – installing a counter at the front and a kitchen and preparation area in the back and installing an air extraction flue on the external wall of the property (to the rear). The original application included an access ramp at the front of the building; however, this element had now been removed because of the objection of the transportation unit (accessibility restriction on the pavement). In terms of location, it was a site on the main street in the centre of Penygroes where there was a mixture of shops and other hot food take aways and individual houses. As a result of the public consultation, objections had been received on the grounds of an excessive number of this type of use in the area. There was concern of causing disturbance and anti-social behaviour, thus affecting the residential amenities of nearby residents. In terms of the principle of the development, Policy D25 dealt specifically with this type of applications in the Unitary Development Plan. There was a need to consider the existing character of uses within the area and based on the nature of the current location, the development would not have an unacceptable detrimental impact in this location in Penygroes. The property was currently empty and thus it would be beneficial should it be brought back into economic use. Objections received from local residents had been given full consideration. Considering all relevant planning matters, the recommendation was to delegate powers to approve the application subject to receiving favourable observations from the Public Protection Service regarding the air extraction system.

(c) The local member (not a member of the Planning Committee), underlined that he welcomed applications that improved the condition of the village and developed the village. He made the following observations:

 He noted that the property had in fact been let regularly and had not stood empty for years.  He suggested that the application’s failure/success hinged on one point only – namely “it does not appear that there is an excessive accumulation of this type of

5 PLANNING COMMITTEE 4/11/13

development in the vicinity; although it is agreed that this part of the street could be close to reaching its capacity of this type of business.” That was a matter of opinion.  The report did not note the numbers.  He suggested that the Penygroes high street had reached its capacity in terms of an excessive number of the same type of development.  A condition that the shop sign should be in Welsh / bilingual, if the application was approved.

(ch) It was proposed and seconded to refuse the application.

The following observations were noted in favour of refusing the application:  Policy D25 clearly noted reasons regarding having excessive accumulation within a specific area and the impact in relation to the amenities of nearby residents.

RESOLVED to refuse on the grounds of an excessive accumulation of this type of use that would create an accumulation of hot food take away uses, contrary to Policy D25 and would have a detrimental impact on the amenities of nearby residents, contrary to Policy B23.

3. Application number C13/0561/39/LL – Land opposite Anhywel, Lôn Pont Morgan, Abersoch.

New house and associated works.

(a) The officers recommended deferring the application as amended plans had been received late in the day and thus there was a need for a second consultation.

(b) The guest speaker was invited to provide observations. The speaker decided to reserve his right to speak until the time when the application would be reported back to the Committee.

4. Application number C13/0679/45/R3 – Hafan Pwllheli, Glan y Don Industrial Estate, Pwllheli.

Marine work within Pwllheli Harbour in association with the Welsh National Sailing Academy and Events Centre including dredging of existing channel and pontoons, capital dredging to create new moorings, land reclamation within the Harbour, landscaping of existing dredged material and construction of new piles and pontoons.

(a) It was noted that the following additional observations/information had been received:

Public Protection – After examining the application and discussing with the applicant, there was no objection to the application subject to including conditions relating to noise on any permission.

(b) It was noted also that the objector who intended to speak at the Committee had noted late in the day that he did not wish to do so. The reasons noted were allegations that the individual had not received sufficient opportunity to consider the details of the application and allegations regarding the accuracy of the plans. The Senior Manager confirmed that the objector had not given any planning reasons to support his objection to the application.

(c) The Senior Planning Services Manager elaborated on the background of the application and noted that it was an application relating to marine work within Pwllheli Harbour.

6 PLANNING COMMITTEE 4/11/13

Dredging work to create new moorings and pontoons along with maintenance dredging work at the location of existing moorings. This application formed the third phase of the process of developing the national sailing academy with the first two phases, namely the access and buildings, having been approved by Council already. The purpose of the dredging work was to clear the channel so that existing moorings and new moorings could be used regardless of the tide – this would facilitate more extensive use of the existing facility. The dredged material would need to be disposed of by vacuuming the silt and sand off the seabed and pumping it into an area shown on the plans, with this area then being treated and managed as an area to compensate for any ecological effect as a result of the dredging work. The area was a sensitive environmental place and within 200m to a special area of conservation.

Reference was made to the responses following the consultation on the application and it was noted that the statutory bodies did not have any objection, subject to relevant planning conditions.

It was considered that the application was acceptable in principle considering its location and the fact that it was part of a broader plan to develop and improve the quality of the marine facilities in the local harbour area.

Following a thorough assessment of the ecological matters and relevant regulations, it was not considered that the proposal would have any substantial impact on the features of the special area of conservation. It was also noted that any visual impact and impact on amenities would be temporary impacts only, and after taking all other planning matters into account it was considered that the application was in accordance with the UDP.

(ch) Local members welcomed the application. The following observations were expressed:  The concern of Pwllheli Town Council was that a substantial part of the harbour would be lost.  Concerns regarding the impact of disposing dredged material on nearby residents (Morfa Garreg and Bron y De). In the past, dredged material had been left outside the houses and had caused unpleasant odours as it dried out.  There was a need to make additions to condition 7.1 that whilst work was undertaken, it needed to be borne in mind that residents lived nearby and that there was a need to consider steps to mitigate any unpleasant impact from the disposal of dredged material.  There was a need to consider using the gate halfway down the Cob as a works access.  Reference was made to future dredging work. Natural Resources Wales was seeking a commitment from Gwynedd Council to draw up an amended dredging strategy – a strategic decision should be made, rather than an arbitrary decision.

(d) Reference was made to the dredging strategy and the officers acknowledged that this development was a short-term resolution and that a strategy for the future should be obtained. The Committee wished to convey a clear message to the Cabinet member and relevant department for the need for a clear dredging strategy in future as there were planning obligations and implications for local residents in future.

(dd) The application regarding using the gate on the Cob had been referred to the transport officer. The officer reiterated that it was possible to bind the observation made to condition 4. It was possible to consider this (in terms of permanent use).

7 PLANNING COMMITTEE 4/11/13

The recommendation was proposed and seconded.

RESOLVED to approve the application.

Conditions:  Commencement within five years.  In accordance with revised plans.  Agree on the natural stone to face the bund.  To submit and agree on a Construction Method Statement and Environmental Management Plan before commencing the work. The Construction Method Statement to include full details of the dredging method, the construction of the quay wall and construction of the pontoon and bund. The Environmental Management Plan to summarise the environmental actions and the monitoring required.  To submit and agree on a programme to monitor water quality. This should include an agreement regarding the suspended sediments and the monitoring method and frequency. A mitigating method will also be required if the target sediment loading is higher than what was agreed.  To submit and agree to a biosecurity risk assessment. There will be a need to ensure that appropriate measures have been taken to ensure that there is no risk of introducing non-native species to the marine environment. Evidence of suitable cleaning methods will be required and to ensure that pontoons have easy cleaning methods.  There is a need to agree on the compensation package for the reclaimed land including details of how the site will be managed for wildlife along with details of who will be responsible for managing the site and how it will be funded.  Landscaping.  Compliance with mitigating measures that have been included in Part 13 Noise and Vibrations of the Environmental Statement.  To sweep the road on a daily basis during the construction phase.  To agree on the condition of roads before commencing the work.  Any relevant conditions from the Public Protection Unit.

5. Application number C13/0710/23/LL – Land at Parc Uchaf, Llanrug

Erection of two dwellings and garages together with associated access.

(a) The Acting Development Control Manager elaborated on the background of the application, noting that this was a full application to erect 2 two-storey dwellings on a plot of land within the development boundary of Llanrug. The land had already been earmarked for residential development in the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan (GUDP), with the intention of erecting 4 open market houses and two affordable houses. The development brief (November 2009) requested that six houses be developed on this site. The applicant had not proved that circumstances had changed since the GUDP was adopted, i.e. that there was no longer a need for affordable housing. Reference was made to policy CH2, relating to the supply of land for housing. There was a need to ensure, through the monitoring and reviewing processes of the Plan, that there was at least a five year genuine supply of land available for housing in the area of the Plan. The principle of this development was contrary to the requirements of local and national policies within the plan.

(b) Taking advantage of the right to speak, the applicant reiterated the following observations, outlining her intention to develop two houses, instead of six, on the site.  She referred to policy CH1 within the Local Development Plan which noted that the site and the adjacent site was suitable for developing 12 houses between them. She noted that the adjacent site was larger and that the figure was merely a rounded-off figure.

8 PLANNING COMMITTEE 4/11/13

 Reference was made to policy 9.2.13 (Planning Policy Wales), which referred to the need to avoid a tandem development – this could affect the privacy of the houses in relation to one another and affect houses located nearby.  The site was unsuitable for six houses – it could not accommodate six houses with a garden and parking spaces and ensure a high quality environment.  Constructing two, four-bedroom houses was more suitable and was more in-keeping with the area. More variety was required in the village and this supported policy B22.  Policy CH6 – the intention was to build two affordable dwellings for the applicant and her sister and to use the value of the land to obtain a mortgage.  It was an opportunity for the two sisters to remain in their home area and continue as members of the community of Llanrug.  The design of both houses for the severe disabilities of one child. She noted that there were no suitable, affordable houses in Llanrug, or in the nearby area, for these special needs.  Policy 9.2.16 (Planning Policy Wales) that in principle, all new open market housing could contribute to the need for affordable housing, as in the applicant’s case.

(c) The local member (not a member of the Planning Committee), underlined his support to the applicant’s application and submitted the following observations:

 When preparing for the Unitary Development Plan, the main observations expressed by the people of Llanrug was that the infrastructure of the village was under pressure – parking, transportation and the primary school was full – key factors on the types of houses that the village would be able to cope with.  Two areas in the village had been identified for the development of no more than 20 houses (this changed to 30 following a public inquiry). Only one of these sites had been developed.  Nine houses had been recommended to the inspector, not 12. Permission had already been granted for 6; therefore, there would be a total of 8 houses on the site. These two houses were more in-keeping with the area.  There was a sufficient number of affordable housing in the village.  The Community Council had requested that a pavement should be constructed in front of the two proposed dwellings.

(ch) The Head of Regulatory Department emphasised that a mater of basic planning policy principle applied to the application. Should the Committee decide to approve the application based on the reasons submitted, he noted that he would have no option but to refer the matter to a cooling-off period, in order to submit a report highlighting all risks and the associated options.

It was proposed and seconded to approve the application, contrary to the recommendation on the basis that there was a need for the houses and in order to satisfy special needs and there was no need for more affordable housing in the village.

The Head of Regulatory Department noted his intention, in accordance with the Procedural Rules of this Committee, to refer the application to a cooling-off period and to bring a further report before the committee at the end of November highlighting the risks associated with approving the application.

6. Application number C13/0758/42/LL – Tu Hwnt i’r Ffrwd, Lôn Uchaf, Morfa Nefyn

Creation of site for 16 touring caravans including hardstandings.

(a) It was noted that the following additional observations/information had been received:

9 PLANNING COMMITTEE 4/11/13

A Community and Language Statement dated 25.10.2013 and a letter noting that the applicant had held discussions with officers following the submission of an application; however, they had refused the proposal. They wished to discuss the impact of the proposal and mitigation steps and they emphasised that the site was not within a Landscape Conservation Area.

2 objections -  had not commenced the implementation of the previous permissions for both caravan sites; therefore, it was not possible to justify the extension yet.  the objector owned a touring site in the vicinity – accumulative impact.

Planning Policy Unit – From the information submitted with the application, it did not appear that the proposal proposed any specific improvements to the site and did not meet the requirements of policy D20.

(b) The Acting Development Control Manager elaborated upon the background of the application and noted that this was an application to establish an extension for 16 touring caravans to an existing caravan park, installation of hardstandings for the touring caravans and provision of a track around the field. The proposal submitted before the committee also included an element of additional landscaping to strengthen the existing hedges. Planning permission (number C12/0862/42/LL) for 14 touring units and toilet block had already been granted in February 2013 – they had not been implemented fully thus far. The site was two fields, or approximately 260m, away from an area that had been designated a Landscape Conservation Area, and was also within 230m of the Cors Geirch Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). A public footpath ran alongside the access road to the site. Policy D20 approved proposals to increase the number of pitches, extensions to sites, relocation or exchange of sites if the proposal included a plan to ensure environmental and visual improvements, and met other criteria regarding the impact of the development on the local area. Although a clawdd had been built and a light hedge had been planted, it was insufficient to screen 16 caravans. The proposals offer no visual and environmental improvements as required by the policy, and therefore the development would not integrate successfully into the landscape or make a positive contribution to the visual amenities of the area. Although it was not within the landscape conservation area, it was very visible from that area. Therefore, the proposal was contrary to policy D20 as it was not an extension that offered visual or environmental improvement, the extension was purely being undertaken in order to have more caravans on the site.

(ch) The recommendation to refuse the application was proposed and seconded.

RESOLVED to refuse the application.

Reason: The proposed extension to the caravan site, because of its location, scale, layout and appearance in the landscape, would stand out as a prominent and intrusive feature in open countryside and would have a detrimental impact on the landscape and on the visual amenities of the area. The proposal was therefore contrary to policy D20 of the GUDP and the SPG: Holiday Accommodation.

7. Application number C13/0770/00/LL – Memorial Park Tennis Courts, Park Road, Barmouth

Installation of new playground equipment, rubber matting and fence.

10 PLANNING COMMITTEE 4/11/13

The playground existed already. The proposal intended to upgrade the site.

(a) The Acting Development Control Manager elaborated on the background of the application and noted that it was an application to develop the existing playground and install a synthetic surface to the playground, install new play equipment and erect a fence within the existing park and tennis court that was already surrounded by a high fence. The playground equipment would include a stainless steel climbing frame and various outdoor fitness equipment constructed of painted steel.

(b) No objections had been received.

RESOLVED to approve the application.

Conditions: Time Comply with plans Materials / colour

8. Application number C13/0822/17/LL – Air Caernarfon Ltd, Caernarfon Airport, Llanwnda

Demolition of existing control tower, construction of new control tower, adaptations to existing car park and creation of new access.

(a) It was noted that the following additional observations/information had been received:

Confirmation from Natural Resources Wales that they were withdrawing their objection that was on the grounds of flood risk as a result of receiving amended plans. They suggested a condition to ensure that the finished floor level was at a minimum point of 4.3m above Ordnance Datum.

(b) The Acting Development Control Manager elaborated on the background of the application and noted that this was an application to demolish the existing control tower and build a new four-storey tower of a substantial size. In comparison with other buildings on the site, it would take its place acceptably in terms of scale, design and materials and as a result there would be no adverse impact on the amenities of the area or the local residents.

(ch) It was proposed and seconded to approve the application.

It was reiterated that the development was part of a process. There was a need to draw the attention of the applicant to the Council’s language policy of placing a bilingual sign on the development.

RESOLVED to delegate powers to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the application, subject to receiving favourable observations from NRW.

Conditions: Five years In accordance with the revised plans received 03/10/2013 To agree on external finish and colour Transport conditions Contaminated land conditions

11 PLANNING COMMITTEE 4/11/13

Submit a Site Waste Management Plan Archaeology conditions NRW Condition

9. Application number C13/0826/39/LL – Blaen y Wawr, Abersoch

Demolition of existing dwelling and detached garage and construction of new dwelling with attached garage.

The Acting Development Control Manager elaborated on the background of the application and noted that this was a development to demolish an existing bungalow and garage and erect a new two-storey dwelling and garage in their place. The proposal was of a modern design, with a large two-storey section with an arched roof and to the rear a two-storey and single-storey section with a flat roof and a garage. It was proposed to use a variety of materials, including a green sedum roof, glass, coloured render and other sections would be covered with timber. The floor surface area of the house would be larger than the existing surface area. It was a corner plot and the front and side boundaries abutted Lôn Engan and a public footpath ran along the front of the plot. A hedge of laylandii created a dense screen along the front boundary of the plot and hedges and bushes had been dispersed on the side boundary, which meant that the plot was relatively enclosed. It was a residential area, located within the development boundary of Abersoch. It was proposed to use the existing access to the Lôn Engan county road. The dwelling was located within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Full consideration was given to the amenities of neighbouring properties but due to the nature of the area, the location of the house and the design it was considered that there would be no unacceptable impact on the amenities of nearby residents or the wider area including the AONB.

Objections had been received as a result of the size and character of the house – no significant character belonged to the houses in the area. The development site was relatively sizeable.

(b) The local member highlighted that he had no objection to the application; however: - he wished to see conditions being imposed for the applicant to retain trees - the applicant should make a contribution towards improvement to the narrow and dangerous corner.

(c) The officer noted that an application for one house was submitted before the committee and that the applicant would have to make a contribution on a voluntary basis towards improving the road. It was suggested that discussions could be held with the applicant in order to make improvements to the corner in the road.

It was proposed and seconded to approve the application.

RESOLVED to approve the application.

Conditions: Commence within five years. In accordance with the amended plans Finishes to be agreed Agree on the details of the timber louvres Sustainable homes code conditions Withdrawal of permitted development rights No windows except those shown on the plan Welsh Water conditions Landscaping

12 PLANNING COMMITTEE 4/11/13

Stop work if bats are found

10. Application number C13/0885/11/AM – Bron Derw, Garth Road, Bangor

Outline application to erect three buildings to provide 64 student accommodation with communal and ancillary facilities and parking.

(a) It was confirmed that the applicant had withdrawn this application.

11. Application number C13/0929/14/LL – Fron Goch Garden Centre, Pant Road, Caernarfon

Demolition of existing structures, extensions to the garden shop and café, erection of new storage building, extension of servicing yard, erection of 2m high security fence, creation of additional parking spaces and landscaping. Location of new buildings behind the site against an embankment and therefore blend into the landscape and existing buildings. Also an opportunity to improve the existing service yard by having a dedicated shed.

(a) The site had developed substantially over the years and now employed over 70 individuals (this figure could increase to 95 should the application be approved). The current business made a substantial contribution to the local economy.

(b) The Local Member expressed his support of the application.

RESOLVED to delegate powers to approve the application subject to the end of the consultation period and not receiving more than two letters opposing the application.

Conditions: Five years In accordance with the plans. Landscaping External materials to be agreed with the LPA. Work on the car park to be undertaken before commencing the use of extensions.

The meeting commenced at 1pm and concluded at 4.15pm.

13 PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 YSTAFELL GYFARFOD PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE: FRONDEG MEETING ROOM

EITEM CAIS RHIF CYMUNED LLEOLIAD ITEM APPLICATION COMMUNITY LOCATION NUMBER

1 C12/1577/39/LL Llanengan Green Pastures Caravan Park, Abersoch 2 C13/0599/41/AM Llanystumdwy Safle cyn Afon Wen Laundry former site, Afonwen, Pwllheli 3 C13/0736/39/LL Llanengan Harbour Hotel, Abersoch 4 C13/0810/14/LL Caernarfon Ysbyty Bryn Seiont Hospital, Pant Road, Caernarfon 5 C13/0849/44/MG Porthmadog Tir tu cefn/Land rear of Heol Dulyn/Dublin Street, Tremadog 6 C13/0880/33/LL Buan Glandwr, Rhydyclafdy, Pwllheli 7 C13/0901/41/LL Llanystumdwy Hufenfa De Arfon Cyf / South Caernarfon Creameries Ltd, Chwilog PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Number: 1 PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Application Number: C12/1577/39/LL Date Registered: 05/12/2012 Application Type: Full - Planning Community: Llanengan Ward: Llanengan

Proposal: EXTEND SITE AND RELOCATION OF SEVEN STATIC HOLIDAY CARAVANS AND SITING OF SIX ADDITIONAL STATIC HOLIDAY CARAVANS TOGETHER WITH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENTS AND ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING Location: GREEN PASTURES CARAVAN PARK, ABERSOCH, PWLLHELI, LL537LD

Summary of the Recommendation: TO APPROVE SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS

1. Description:

1.1 The proposal involves extending the existing static caravan park in order to relocate seven of the existing static caravans and site six additional static caravans. The proposed changes would include additional landscaping on the caravan site boundaries and also within the site including around the boat storage area. Additional landscaping would be undertaken along the existing eastern boundary of the caravan site and also the extended eastern boundary of the caravan site. Also, by relocating caravans additional parking spaces would be created within the caravan site. The current planning permission is for a total of 62 static caravans on the site.

1.2 The site is situated in the countryside and lies within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Access is gained to the site along an unclassified road.

1.3 The application is submitted to Committee as it involves more than five caravans.

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 B8 – AONB - 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 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 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. PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

POLICY D17 – UPGRADING OF EXISTING STATIC HOLIDAY CARAVAN AND HOLIDAY CHALET SITES - Proposals to upgrade existing static holiday caravan and chalet sites through minor extensions, relocations, small increase in numbers, exchanging touring pitches for static holiday caravan units will be approved if they conform to criteria regarding improving the range and quality of accommodation and facilities; substantial and permanent improvements to the design, layout and appearance of the site and its setting in the surrounding landscape; and the increase in numbers is commensurate with the scale of any improvements to the site.

Supplementary Planning Guidance – Holiday Accommodation (2011)

2.3 National Policies: Planning Policy Wales, Fifth Edition, November 2012. Technical Advice Note 13 – Tourism

3. Relevant Planning History:

3.1 3/4/92C – Increase the number of caravans to 60 – Approved 10 May 1965.

3.2 3/4/92D – Connect eight caravans to sewer – Approved 21 March 1966.

3.3 3/3492E – Outline application to extend the site – Refused 30 May 1967.

3.4 34/63/92F – Site 57 caravans, installing a children’s play area and construct new sewage treatment works – Refused 5 November 1969.

3.5 34/53/92G – Extension to toilet block and drains – Approved 11 November 1970.

3.6 C99D/0352/39/LL - Demolish current reception and construct new reception – Approved 4 November 1999.

3.7 C06D/0469/39/LL – Amend condition 3 on permission 3/4/92C in order to extend the holiday season from 1 March in any year to 10 January the following year – Approved 19 October 2006.

3.8 C12/1324/39/LL –Amend condition 2 on planning permission C06D/0469/39/LL in order to approve a 12 month holiday season – Approved 9 November 2012.

3.9 C12/1479/39/TC – Lawful Use Certificate for amenity land including children’s play equipment and maintained sports field along with boat storage area for the use of visitors staying at the caravan park – Approved 25 January 2013.

3.10 C13/0792/39/TC – Lawful Use Certificate for the siting of two static caravans for holiday use – Judgement in the process of being issued to approve the application.

4. Consultations:

Community/Town Council: Refuse as it is an overdevelopment and there are plenty of caravans of this confined site already.

Transportation Unit: No recommendation as it is not assumed that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on any road or proposed road.

Caravans Officer: Approve. It was noted during a visit that the site was of a high PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

standard; however some aspects of licence conditions were not adhered to. Approving this application would allow the applicant to comply with some aspects of the licence that needed to be addressed.

Fire and Rescue Service: No observations

AONB Unit: Not received.

Public Consultation: A notice was posted on the site and nearby residents were informed. The notification period ended on 3 January 2013 and one letter had been received objecting to the application on the following grounds:  Effect on privacy  Additional noise  Significant traffic increase on Lôn Pentre Bach which is a narrow road.

One item of correspondence was received noting that they did not want a letter which had been submitted to support the previous application for a Lawful Use Certificate for amenity land including children’s play equipment and sports field and boat storage area to be used to support this application.

One letter was also received stating that there was no objection to the proposed relocation and extension which would improve the environment of the site and would remain within the 10% threshold allowed under policy D17 of the GUDP but also noting that landscaping and use of environmental colours on any new or replacement units should be sought.

5. Assessment of the material planning considerations:

Principle of the development 5.1 As noted above, a number of policies within the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan apply in determining the application. The main policy to consider when assessing the principle of the development is policy D17. The policy permits applications for upgrading existing static sites, minor extensions to the land area, relocating units or for a minor increase in numbers provided the three relevant criteria can be conformed to.

5.2 Point 1 of the Criteria: that the proposed development is part of a scheme to improve the range and quality of tourist accommodation and facilities on the site. The proposal is to relocate seven static caravans from the existing site to adjacent land along with the siting of six additional static caravans. Therefore, the proposal involves extending the existing caravan site and an increase in numbers. The site would be extended on land which is currently used as a playing field which received lawful use certificate permission for the use in January 2013. As part of the proposal, it is proposed to relocate the playing field further afield to the east. Policy D17 does not refer to size in terms of extensions to land surface area of caravan sites. It is considered that the size of the extension to the site is reasonable and acceptable in terms of the requirements of Policy D17. The existing planning permission, including the two which are the subject of application no. C13/0792/39/TC, is for 62 static caravans and increasing this by six caravans would equate to a 9.6% increase which falls within the 10% PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

noted in the guidelines to policy D17 in terms of increase in numbers. Also, approving the application would mean that parts of the existing caravan park would be opened up allowing the addition of landscaping and additional parking spaces within the site. It is also proposed to landscape around the boat storage site and this would be of assistance to improve the environment within the caravan park. It is given to understand from the Caravans Officer’s observations that the proposal would also allow for some of the requirements of the caravans licence to be realised as at present they are not adhered to. It is considered that the proposal demonstrates an attempt to improve the range and quality of facilities and experiences offered to visitors in accordance with the requirements of criterion 1.

5.3 Point 2 of the Criteria: that the proposed development offers significant and permanent improvements to the design, layout and appearance of the site and its setting in the surrounding landscape. As part of the application, landscaping work is proposed. This landscaping would include additional landscaping undertaken along the existing eastern boundary of the caravan site and also the extended eastern boundary of the caravan site. This landscaping would be a mix of hedges and trees. Additional landscaping would also be undertaken on the southern and western boundaries. It is also intended to include elements of landscaping within the caravan park including landscaping around the boat storage site. Also, as part of the improvements, it is intended to provide additional car parking spaces for the site users. It is therefore considered that the proposed landscaping would be of assistance to reduce the impact of the caravan park on the landscape which is also within the AONB. It is also considered that the proposed improvements would improve the appearance of the site as moving some caravans would open up parts of the site and would also allow more landscaping within the site. It is considered that the proposal complies with criterion 2 of policy D17.

5.4 Point 3 of the Criteria: that any increase in the number of static holiday caravan or holiday chalet units is minor and is commensurate with the scale of any improvements to the site. The existing planning permission for the site is for 62 static caravans and increasing this by six caravans would equate to a 9.6% increase which falls within the 10% noted in the guidelines to policy D17 in terms of increase in numbers. It is considered that the improvements outlined above are in keeping with the increase of six additional caravans sought in this application and that the proposal, therefore, complies with criterion 3 of Policy D17.

Visual amenities 5.5 Policy B8 of the GUDP assesses the impact of developments on the AONB. It is not considered that the proposal would have a detrimental effect on the visual amenities of the area and the landscaping plans proposed as part of the proposal would be of assistance to reduce the impact of the existing site on the landscape. It is considered that the proposal complies with Policy B8 of the GUDP.

5.6 The plan and the planting and maintenance details show details of the existing trees and hedgerows and also details of the location of the proposed landscaping. It is considered that the landscaping is suitable to the site and in keeping with the existing character of the area, and therefore complies with policy B27 of the GUDP.

General and residential amenities 5.7 There are a few dwellings in the proximity of the caravan site. The proposal would mean that the location of the caravans on the site would be closer to one property which is located to the east of the site. Also, as a result of relocating the caravans the play area would also move closer to the said property. However, approximately 27 PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

metres of field would remain between the caravan site and the property. Since the caravan site is well established it is not considered that the proposed changes would have a detrimental impact on the visual amenities of neighbouring residents compared with the current situation. Also, it is not considered that an increase of six caravans would significantly increase traffic using the adjacent roads. It is considered that the proposal complies with Policy B23 of the GUDP.

Transport and access matters 5.8 Policy CH33 of the GUDP involves assessing proposals in terms of their effect on road safety. The site is served by an unclassified road. The Transportation Unit has no concerns regarding the proposal in terms of road safety. It is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of Policy CH33 of the GUDP. As part of the proposal it is intended to increase the parking spaces available within the site and it is considered that this would also contribute to road safety in the area.

Planning History 5.9 On 9 November 2012 application no. C12/1324/39/LL was approved in order to allow a holiday season of 12 months for the caravan park. It is therefore considered, as part of the current application, that conditions should be imposed that the caravans are for holiday use only but that the caravan park can be open throughout the year.

6. Conclusions:

6.1 The proposal here is to extend the boundary of the existing caravan site to relocate seven caravans from the existing site and site six additional caravans. A series of improvements are proposed as part of the proposal including landscaping along the boundaries and within the site, increasing amenity land available within the site and increasing the number of parking spaces within the site. It is considered that the proposal is acceptable and that it would not have a detrimental effect on the visual amenities of the area which is also an AONB. Iit is not considered that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on road safety or on the amenities of neighbouring residents.

7. Recommendation:

7.1 To approve - conditions: 1. Commencement within five years. 2. In accordance with the plans. 3. Restrict numbers to 68. 4. Restrict the use of the caravans to holiday use only. 5. Keep a register of names of owners / occupiers and their main home address. 6. Agree on the type and colour of every new or replacement caravan located on the site. 7. Complete the landscaping work in accordance with the details submitted including replanting if anything dies. 8. Create parking spaces in accordance with the plans and prior to the use of the caravans in the extension as holiday use.

Number: 2 Application Number: C13/0599/41/AM Date Registered: 15/07/2013 Application Type: Outline Community: Llanystumdwy Ward: Llanystumdwy

Proposal: OUTLINE APPLICATION TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING BUILDINGS AND ERECT 13 DWELLINGS. Location: SITE OF THE FORMER AFON WEN LAUNDRY, FORMER LAUNDARY SITE, AFON WEN, PWLLHELI, GWYNEDD, LL53 6NQ

Summary of the TO REFUSE Recommendation:

1. Description:

1.1 This is an outline application to erect 13 residential houses on the site of the former Afonwen laundry. As part of the outline application, details regarding the access, plan and size must be considered while the details relating to appearance and landscaping have been reserved for future consideration by means of a further application to approve reserved matters.

1.2 The site is located off a first class highway. Two houses (namely ‘Glenlyn’ and ‘Tan y Coed’) abut the site and a terrace of houses is located on the opposite side of the road. There is a dwelling house along with holiday units and industrial uses on the road leading to Chwilog, which is to the north west of the site.

1.3 The site measures approximately 0.4 hectares and has historically been used as an industrial laundry. Since the relocation of the laundry, the site has been dormant. The site is in a comparatively prominent position as most of it can be seen from the nearby A497, however it is relatively hidden from the road that leads to Chwilog due to the trees that abut the site.

1.4 The site is not located within any development boundary, the Chwilog development boundary is approximately 600m away to the north west. Therefore, in policy terms, the site is in open countryside. However, the site is designated as a redevelopment site in the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan (July 2009) and a development brief has been prepared for the site which forms part of adopted supplementary planning guidance.

1.5 The development involves erecting a single detached house and semi-detached houses with parking and gardens along with associated works including the creation of an estate road, installation of services, landscaping and erecting a single-storey building as a bat roost. The proposal will also include demolishing the existing building on the site.

1.6 To conform to current legislative and policy requirements, the following information was submitted with the application as formal documents:  Design and Access Statement  Linguistic and Community Assessment  Affordable Housing Needs Assessment  Contaminated Land Assessment  Bat Survey  Trees Statement  Level 3 Code Sustainability Code Initial Assessment  Flooding Consequence Assessment (FCA)

2. Relevant Policies:

2.2 Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan 2009:

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

POLICY B20 – SPECIES AND THEIR HABITATS THAT ARE INTERNATIONALLY AND NATIONALLY IMPORTANT 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 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 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 B29 – DEVELOPMENT ON LAND AT RISK FROM FLOODING Manage specific developments in the C1 and C2 flood zones and direct them towards suitable land in zone A unless they can conform to a series of criteria relevant to the features of the site and to the purpose of the development.

POLICY B30 – CONTAMINATED LAND OR BUILDINGS Ensure that proposals for developing contaminated land or buildings are refused unless they can conform to a series of criteria aimed at controlling or restricting the contamination.

POLICY B32 – INCREASING SURFACE WATER Refuse proposals that do not include appropriate flood minimisation or mitigation measures that will reduce the volume and rate at which surface water reaches and flows into rivers and other water courses.

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 C3 – RE-USING PREVIOUSLY DEVELOPED SITES Proposals that give priority to re-using previously developed land or buildings that are located within or near development boundaries will be permitted provided the site or building and the proposed use are appropriate.

POLICY C5 – REDEVELOPMENT SITES Development proposals on sites identified on the Proposals Maps as redevelopment sites will be permitted provided they are consistent with the relevant development briefs and/or any master plan approved for the site by the Local Planning Authority.

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 CH9 - NEW DWELLINGS IN OPEN COUNTRYSIDE Refuse proposals for new dwellings in rural areas unless they are for individuals who must live on the site due to their work and a number of other criteria relevant to the location and the type of dwelling, and restrictions on ownership of the dwelling.

POLICY CH7 – AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON RURAL EXCEPTION SITES DIRECTLY ADJOINING THE BOUNDARIES OF VILLAGES AND LOCAL CENTRES Permit affordable housing on rural sites directly adjoining the boundaries of Villages and Local Centres if they conform to criteria relating to local need, affordability and impact on the form of the settlement.

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 CH32 – INCREASING ACCESSIBILITY BY PUBLIC TRANSPORT Proposals that are likely to lead to a substantial increase in the number of journeys by private motor vehicles will be refused unless there is an adequate public transport service in place as an alternative, or unless the development will be effectively served by public transport in the future and that consideration has been given to promoting the use of public transport services in the planning and design of the development.

CH33 – SAFETY ON ROADS AND STREETS – Development proposals will be approved if they comply with specific criteria relating to 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, 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.

As well as the above, 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 – Development Briefs SPG – Affordable Housing SPG – Planning and the Welsh Language SPG – Planning for sustainable building Gwynedd Design Guidance

2.3 NationalPolicies:

Planning Policy Wales – Fifth Edition (November 2012)

Chapter 3 – Determining planning decisions and enforcing them Chapter 4 - Planning for Sustainability - Part 4.11 – Promoting sustainability through good design - Part 4.12 – Planning for sustainable buildings - Para. 8.7.1 – Development control and transport Chapter 8 - Transportation Chapter 9 - Housing

9.3.1 “New housing developments should be well integrated with and connected to the existing pattern of settlements…… Where housing development is on a significant scale, or where a new settlement or urban village is proposed, it should be integrated with existing or new industrial, commercial and retail development and with community facilities.”

9.3.6 “New buildings in the open countryside away from existing settlements must continue to be strictly controlled….. Isolated new houses in the open countryside require special justification, for example where they are essential to enable rural enterprise workers to live at or close to their place of work in the absence of nearby accommodation.”

Chapter 13 – Minimising and Managing Environmental Risks and Pollution - Section 13.4 Managing Development and Flood Risk - Section 13.7 Managing Development and contaminated land

Technical Advice Note 2: Planning and Affordable Housing Technical Advice Note 5: Planning and Nature Conservation Technical Advice Note 15: Development and Flood Risk Technical Advice Note 12: Design Technical Advice Note 18: Transportation Technical Advice Note 22: Planning for sustainable buildings

3. Relevant Planning History:

3/4/814 – New store. Approved 30/07/65. 3/4/814A – New Office – Approved 06/07/66 3/4/814B - Amended plans for new offices. Approved 05/04/68. 3/4/814C – Relocation of petrol pumps. Approved 11/04/69.

C97D/0235/21/CL – New site for the laundry – Approved in 1997.

4. Consultations:

Community/Town Council: Support

Transportation Unit: No objection – conditions needed.

Natural Resources Wales: Following discussions and receiving more information, no objection on grounds of flooding matters. A condition is needed relating to contaminated land.

Gwynedd Archaeological Conditions needed relating to archaeological investigation work. Service:

Biodiversity: No objection provided the tree report is implemented.

Rights of Way Unit: I refer to the aforementioned application. The Countryside and Access Department is concerned to ensure that public footpath number 70A in Llanystumdwy (Lôn Goed) is protected during and at the end of this development.

Public Protection: Need polluted land conditions

Welsh Water: No objection – conditions needed.

Public Consultation: A notice was posted on the site and nearby residents were informed. The consultation period will end on 15/08/13 and two letters / correspondences were received objecting on the grounds of:  Loss of privacy  Loss of light  Dangerous access, speeding traffic.

5. Assessment of the material planning considerations:

Principle of the development 5.1 The site is located outside the Chwilog development boundary, as noted in the UDP, therefore, this site is defined as one that is located in open countryside. Chwilog’s development boundary is approximately 600m away to the north west.

5.2 Policy C1 notes 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 open countryside will be refused with the exception of a development which is permitted under another policy within the Plan.”

5.3 Policy CH9 of the GUDP is relevant when considering the principle of developing housing in the countryside. This policy states that new dwellings in rural areas will only be approved under exceptional circumstances i.e. when the dwelling is required as a home for a full-time worker mainly employed in agriculture, forestry or other rural land based industry; or a person that earns their living through a full-time activity that provides an essential service to the agricultural or forestry sector within the county. It is also necessary to prove that it is essential for the person requiring a house to live on that specific site. Technical Advice Note 6 states that “one of the few circumstances in which new isolated residential development in the open countryside can be justified is when accommodation is required to enable a rural enterprise worker to live at, or close to, his workplace.” No information has been submitted with the application that suggests that this proposal seeks to meet any need of this type. The proposal is therefore contrary to policies C1 and CH9.

5.4 In some cases it is possible to release land in locations where housing would not usually be supported. Policy CH7 approves proposals for affordable homes on rural exception sites directly adjoining the boundaries of villages or centres. This site is approximately 600m from the Chwilog development boundary, thus the site does not abut the development boundary. Therefore, the site is not suitable as a rural exception site and it is considered contrary to policy CH7.

5.5 Despite the fundamental policy objection to the proposal of erecting houses on the site the design and access statement received with the application seeks to justify the development on the grounds that the proposal makes use of a previously developed site and the fact that the site was designated as a site for redevelopment within the UDP. A development brief has been prepared for this specific site and it forms part of the adopted supplementary planning guidance. Policies C3 and C5 are relevant to these considerations.

5.6 Policy C3 approves proposals that prioritise reusing previously developed land or buildings that are located within or around development boundaries, provided that the site and its proposed use are suitable and in-keeping with the plan’s objectives and development strategy. The policy also acknowledges that not all previously developed lands will be suitable for development due to its location or proposed use and proposals will have to be considered against all other relevant UDP policies. As noted above, the proposed land use (namely erecting new houses in open countryside) is not acceptable in terms of UDP policies. Consequently, the proposal does not coincide with the objectives or the development strategy of the plan and the application is considered contrary to policy C3. 5.7 Policy C5 permits development proposals on redevelopment sites provided they are consistent with the relevant development briefs. The development brief forms part of adopted supplementary planning guidance and is therefore a material planning consideration. The development brief for this site notes that the site should be redeveloped “for the economic and social benefit of the local area”. Although the brief does not refer to specific land uses there is no reference to residential development. The section of the brief relating to ‘Main policies and guidance’ does not refer to any of the UDP’s housing policies and this suggests strongly that the purpose of the brief for redeveloping the site is not to redevelop the site for housing development. Consequently, it is not considered that the proposal to build 13 houses on a site outside the boundary meets with neither the contents nor the main aim of the brief for the site’s development “for the economic and social benefit of the local area”.

5.8 The development briefs set out the general principles for specific sites however the designation does not mean that any proposed land use could be acceptable on the site nor does it override the need for developments to comply with other relevant policies within the UDP. It is not considered that this designation as a redevelopment site outweighs the local and national policy arguments for restricting new housing in open countryside.

Affordable Housing Matters

5.9 An affordable homes needs assessment was submitted as part of the application. In this case, the developer is offering five affordable homes out of the 13, a contribution of approximately 40%. Due to the fundamental policy objection to the proposal this element of the application was not discussed further with the developer as a greater contribution or a different contribution would not overcome the above policy arguments relating to the principle of housing development on the site.

Sustainability matters

5.10 The site is registered with a sustainability code assessor and the applicant has submitted a pre-assessment report to show that the units could reach level 3 of the code for sustainable homes. This aspect of the application therefore complies with policy C7 and TAN 22.

Visual amenities

5.11 The site is located on a prominent site near the A497. There is a mix of development forms in the area surrounding the site including individual houses, terraced houses and industrial uses. The site has been dormant since the laundry was relocated and the original building is now in an unkempt dilapidated state. There is no objection in principle to demolishing this building in order to improve the area’s visual standard. Despite this, the site’s existing state and its designation as a redevelopment site is not a means of justifying approving the application as a way of improving its visual standard when the principle of the development is otherwise unacceptable.

5.12 In addition to this, the aim of the Unitary Plan, particularly through housing policies is to protect open countryside and to prevent unacceptable developments. The site is well outside the Chwilog village boundary where there is a concentration of residential developments. The development brief acknowledges that a development must be secured that is sympathetic to its countryside location. A development of 13 new houses on this site would create a standalone urban feature, which is disconnected from any village of development pattern. Consequently, the development would be unsympathetic to its countryside location and harmful to the area’s visual amenities. Therefore, the application is contrary to policy CH9 which protects the countryside against unacceptable new housing developments and policy B23 which relates to amenities.

General and residential amenities

5.13 This application is concerned with access, design and size matters, details relating to appearance and landscaping have been reserved. The main objection to this application by a member of the public relates to loss of privacy and light. Nevertheless, it has been shown in the plans that it would be possible to set out and design the houses without causing overlooking, loss of privacy or unreasonable loss of light. The agent has made suggestions as to the appearance of the houses and the location of the windows, however, these details would be a material consideration when determining a reserved matters application, where any specific impact relating to this will be considered upon the submittal of detailed plans, and when it can be ensured that the requirements of policy B23 are satisfied. Therefore, it is considered that the development is acceptable in terms of impact on general and residential amenities and the proposal meets with the requirements of policy B23 and B22.

Transportation and access matters

5.14 Policies CH33 and CH36 relate to safety on roads and streets and private car parking facilities. The Transportation Unit has responded to the consultation and has no objection to the proposal. The submitted plan shows that turning and parking spaces can be provided for vehicles within the site which satisfies the requirements of policy CH36. The concerns of the objectors have been acknowledged and have been considered in full, however; with conditions it is considered that the proposal is in accordance with Policy CH33 and CH36 of the GUDP.

Linguistic matters

5.15 Policy A2 states that proposals which would cause significant harm to the social, linguistic or cultural cohesion of communities, due to their size, scale or location, will be refused. In accordance within the Planning and the Welsh Language supplementary planning guidance, a community and linguistic impact assessment was submitted with the application which included specific information regarding the area and local population and the development’s impact on relevant matters. The report acknowledges the importance of the Welsh language and the consideration that should be given to all relevant issues.

5.16 Due to the development’s location away from any village, it is unlikely that the development would make a positive contribution to the community. However, due to the scale, nature and location of this development, it is not anticipated that the development would attract buyers searching for a second home and it is unlikely to have a harmful impact on the community. To this end, it is not believed that the proposal is contrary to Policy A2, as it is not considered that there would be pressure on the language or a negative effect on the community. This is also in accordance with the Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning and the Welsh Language.

Flooding matters

5.17 The application site is partly located within a C2 zone, according to the development advice map referred to in TAN 15 – Development and Flood Risk. Zone C2 is recognised by TAN 15 as an area of the flood plain without substantial infrastructure to be protected from floods.

5.18 Policy B29 of the UDP is relevant to flooding and it states that ‘proposals for a development which is very vulnerable to harm on a site forming part of an area categorised as a C2 zone will be refused...New developments should be directed away from zone C and towards suitable land...Residential developments are defined as developments that are very vulnerable to harm’. In light of this as well as initial objection from Natural Resources Wales, an amended plan was received moving the houses further away from the river along with an additional report for the flood risk assessment. Following a further consultation period, Natural Resources Wales did not object to the proposal, provided it could be ensured that the finished floor levels of the proposed houses were sufficiently high.

5.19 Although NRW no longer object to the proposal, part of the site and some of the houses remain within the C2 flood zone. Therefore, the application must be assessed using the TAN 15 criteria. TAN 15 states that the only time where other new developments should be permitted in C1 and C2 zones is when the planning authority decides that there is justification to locate them there. There can only be justification for such a development when it can be shown that the development has to be in a C zone in order to promote, or to participate in a regeneration strategy by the local authority or in order to contribute to key employment objectives that are supported by the local authority and which are crucial in order to maintain an existing settlement. Also, the proposal would have to coincide with the objectives of Planning Policy Wales.

5.20 As discussed above, the proposed land use (namely erecting new houses in open countryside) is not acceptable in terms of UDP policies. Therefore the proposal does not comply with the objectives and the development strategy of the plan and is contrary to the criteria of TAN 15. Hence, there is no justification to locate houses (even on a small part of the site) in a C2 flood zone. Therefore, in the context of TAN 15 and Policy B29, it is considered that there is no option other than to refuse the application on these grounds.

Biodiversity matters

5.21 Policy B20 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan involves protecting species and their habitats that are internationally and nationally important. Bat surveys have been submitted as part of the application and the results show that the building is used by bats. The plan also includes plans to provide a new building as a bat roost. NRW has no objections to the proposal subject to the implementation of the mitigation measures within the bat report. Therefore, it is considered that the proposal complies with the requirements of policy B20 above.

6. Conclusions:

6.1 It is considered that this proposal does not comply with the requirements of policies C1, C3, C5, CH9, B23 or B29 of the Unitary Development Plan due to its countryside location as described above. All material considerations were addressed when determining this application, but this has not changed the recommendation.

7. Recommendation:

7.1 Refuse on the following grounds:

1. The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy C1, C3, C5, CH7 and CH9 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan along with Planning Policy Wales, Chapter 9 – Housing as it involves erecting new housing in open countryside without any justification.

2. The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy B23 and CH9 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan as the development would create a standalone urban feature, that would be disconnected from any village or development patterns and unsympathetic to its countryside location and harmful to the area’s visual amenities.

3. The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy B29 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan and Technical Advice Note 15 as part of the site is located within a C2 flood zone and there is no justification for the development in this location.

Number: 3 Number: 3

Application Number: C13/0736/39/LL Date Registered: 15/07/2013 Application Type: Full - Planning Community: Llanengan Ward: Abersoch

Proposal: DEVELOPMENT OF 13 RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS INCLUDING 2 AFFORDABLE HOUSES WITH ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE AND LANDSCAPING Location: HARBOUR HOTEL, ABERSOCH, PWLLHELI, LL537HR

Summary of the TO APPROVE SUBJECT TO SIGNING A 106 AGREEMENT. Recommendation:

1. Description:

1.1 This is a proposal to demolish the hotel building which has been dormant since around 2010 and the existing annexe and redevelop the site for 13 residential dwellings. The proposed houses would be a mixture of terrace houses, semi-detached houses and detached houses. The four terrace houses facing Lôn Engan are two- storey, 3 bedroom houses. The remaining units are four-storey, 3 bedroom ones with the ground floor containing parking spaces. The external walls of the development would be finished in a combination of timber and render and the roofs will be covered with slate. It is also intended to build a bat roost as part of the development. Units 6-13 contain two parking spaces and units 1-5 contain one parking space. An additional five parking spaces would also be included within the boundary of the site. The proposal also includes a communal landscaping area and creating stair access down to the river.

1.2 When the application was submitted originally it was intended to designate two houses as affordable units. The applicant has now proposed four affordable units at 55% of the open market price (a discount of 45%). The internal size of the four affordable houses would be approximately 88 square metres and would include three bedrooms.

1.3 Part of the application site is located within the Abersoch development boundary while the remainder is located on the outside. The part of the development that contains the residential units would be located inside the boundary. The site lies within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). There are houses to the west of the site. Lôn Engan is to the south of the site, which is a third class road and the section below towards the junction with Lôn Garmon is a first class road. Lower down to the east is the site of the Riverside hotel. The part of the site that is more towards the north and which is closer to the river Soch lies within a C1 flood zone.

1.4 The following were submitted as part of the application: a design and access statement, a planning statement, a statement of community involvement, a transportation statement, a code for sustainable homes assessment, a geotechnical and geo-environmental desk study report – part 1, a floods consequence assessment, a bat survey, a language and community statement, a tree quality survey report, development implications and arboricultural method statement, a financial viability statement, a streetscape and visual assessment, an extended phase 1 habitats survey assessment (2012) and a Japanese Knotweed survey. 1.5 The application is submitted to the Committee as it involves five or more houses.

2. Relevant Policies:

2.2 Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan 2009: POLICY A2 – PROTECT THE SOCIAL, LINGUISTIC AND CULTURAL FABRIC OF COMMUNITIES - Safeguard the social, linguistic or cultural cohesion of communities against significant harm due to the size, scale or location of proposals.

POLICY B8 – THE LLŶN AND ANGLESEY AREAS OF OUTSTANDING NATURAL BEAUTY (AONB) - 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 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 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 B29 – DEVELOPMENT ON LAND AT RISK OF FLOODING - Manage specific developments in the C1 and C2 flood zones and direct them towards suitable land in zone A unless they conform to a series of criteria that are relevant to the features on the site and to the purpose of the development.

POLICY B35 – AVOIDING THE SPREAD OF INVASIVE SPECIES - Ensure that measures are taken to deal with invasive species where the development involves the disturbance of soil that is contaminated by invasive species.

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 C3 – RE-USING PREVIOUSLY DEVELOPED SITES - Proposals which give priority to reusing previously developed land or buildings and are 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 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 new dwelling(s) which would lead to an increase in the number of second homes within a community where they already constitute a high percentage of the housing stock.

POLICY CH11 – CONVERSION OF BUILDINGS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES OF LOCAL CENTRES AND VILLAGES FOR RESIDENTIAL USE - Proposals to convert buildings for residential use within the development boundaries of villages and local centres will be approved provided they conform to criteria relating to local need, impact on holiday accommodation and community services and occupancy of the dwelling.

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 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. Consideration will be given 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. In circumstances where off-street parking is needed and where the developer does not offer parking facilities on the site, or where it is not possible to take advantage of the existing parking provisions, proposals will be approved provided the developer contributes to the cost of improving the accessibility of the site or providing the necessary parking spaces on another nearby site.

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

Supplementary Planning Guidance – Planning obligations Supplementary Planning Guidance – Affordable housing Supplementary Planning Guidance – Landscape character Supplementary Planning Guidance – Housing developments and open spaces of recreational value Supplementary Planning Guidance – Planning and the Welsh language Supplementary Planning Guidance – Planning for sustainable building

2.3 National Policies: Planning Policy Wales (Edition 5 November 2012)  Part 4.9 – Reusing land  Part 4.10 – Promoting sustainability through good design  Part 4.11 – Planning for sustainable buildings  Paragraph 5.3.5 – Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty  Paragraph 8.7.1 – Development control and transport  Paragraph 9.2.11 – Provision of open spaces  Paragraph 9.2.14 – The community’s need for affordable housing  Paragraph 9.3.4 – Ensuring that the proposed development does not damage the area’s character and amenity

Technical Advice Note 2 – Planning and Affordable Housing Technical Advice Note 12 – Design Technical Advice Note 15 – Development and Flood Risk Technical Advice Note 18 – Transport Technical Advice Note 20 – The Welsh Language Technical Advice Note 22 – Planning for sustainable buildings

3. Relevant Planning History:

3.1 2/19/225 – Additional parking provision including a new access onto Lôn Engan – Harbour Hotel, Abersoch – Approved 8 November 1976.

3.2 2/19/225A – A hotel extension to include an indoor swimming pool (outline) – Harbour Hotel, Abersoch – 26 October 1993.

3.3 2/19/225B – An extension for a restaurant and bar – Harbour Hotel, Abersoch – Approved 7 December 1994.

3.4 C06D/0390/39/LL – A retrospective application to retain a door instead of a window on the gable-end of the hotel – Harbour Hotel, Abersoch – Approved 13 October 2006.

3.5 C07D/0411/39/LL – A front balcony on the first floor level – Harbour Hotel, Abersoch – Approved 10 September 2007.

4. Consultations: Town Council: Refuse because it is an overdevelopment in an AONB and the scheme is incompatible with the houses around the site, it would overfill an empty space and open landscape. Also, the scheme does not offer sufficient affordable housing to comply with the Council’s policy. Concern was expressed about the houses facing Lôn Engan as their parking spaces are on a busy, narrow and dangerous main road, with no pavement.

Transportation Unit: Observations:  Satisfied with the parking arrangement.  Not entirely satisfied with the arrangement that the occupants of units 1-4 would not be able to enter or exit the parking space in a forward gear, but there are no statistics to indicate that this situation is dangerous, and the traffic flow is not excessively heavy or fast. Not confident that we could refuse on the basis of this element.

Welsh Water: Conditions need to be imposed on any planning permission in relation to foul water, surface water and land drainage.

Natural Resources Wales: Suggest conditions to safeguard the development from flooding.

Satisfied that the bat survey has been conducted to an acceptable standard and that the report concludes that part of the annexe will be a roost for lesser horseshoe bats. The proposal must adhere to the recommendations offered in the report (part 8.1) to avoid affecting any bats. Need to ensure therefore that the mitigation steps are implemented.

Biodiversity Unit: No objection in principle to the application but the developer must satisfy statutory biodiversity requirements on the site. Bats – the report submitted is comprehensive and the developer should follow the ecologists’ guidance and comply with what is recommended. Details of the new bat roost will need to be submitted and the roost must be completed before commencing any demolition work on the site. Birds – Any work that could have an impact on bird nests (e.g. felling trees) should be undertaken outside the bird nesting season (October – February), and should this not be possible, a survey should be undertaken. Otters – as it is possible that otters are using parts of the site, a survey will need to be submitted (noted in the extended phase 1 report). Water vole – if any work is carried out within eight metres of the river, a survey should be submitted. This could be the case when constructing the bat roost. Reptiles – before undertaking any engineering work a survey should be undertaken, as noted in the extended phase 1 report. Japanese Knotweed – Following the receipt of a further report on Japanese Knotweed, we are satisfied with what has been submitted. Need to follow the instructions that are offered in the report – chemical treatment.

Trees Unit: Appreciate the high standard of the tree survey and the tree preservation measures. If these measures are followed carefully, there will not be an excessive negative effect on trees or the landscape, therefore there are no significant concerns regarding trees.

Affordable Housing: Awaiting a response to the latest proposal of four affordable houses.

AONB Unit: Observations:  Supportive of demolishing the latest flat-roof extensions to the main building – parts of the latest buildings are of a poor design and are substandard.  There is no objection to the principle of redeveloping the remainder of the site provided there is sufficient parking provision available.  Support the fact that the applicant is aiming to reach standard 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes.  Concerns about losing the original hotel building.  Including a garage on the ground floor of units 5-13 has resulted in a four-storey development which would be obtrusive in the streetscape of Abersoch.  A modern and unfamiliar design to units 5-13, and the roof lights on the rear elevation are an alien feature.  Concern for 13 new living units in a village where the percentage of holiday homes is already high and the local culture is under pressure.

Public Consultation: A notice was placed in the press and on the site, and nearby residents were informed. The advertising period ended on 20 August 2013. Letters / correspondence were received from two objectors, objecting on the following grounds:  The design, materials, form and scale of the buildings are not in keeping with the area.  Overdevelopment of the site.  Effect on the streetscape – the four-storey development would dominate the streetscape, especially when approaching / leaving the village.  Transportation – the four accesses would cause problems for users of the existing narrow road.  Privacy – parts of the development will overlook an existing nearby house.  Loss of the provision of hotel beds.  Too many open market housing in the village – these create more second homes.  No benefits to the local community.

The following observations were also received on the proposal.  Approving such a development may be the only practical way of preventing the deterioration of a prominent site.  There is no architectural value to the existing buildings. 5. Assessment of the material planning considerations:

Principle of the development 5.1 The site is partially located within the development boundary of Abersoch as indicated on the GUDP proposal maps. All the residential units that are the subject of the application are located within the development boundary. The remainder of the site lies outside the boundary but immediately nearby the boundary. No part of the site has been specifically designated for housing in the GUDP. Policy C1 of the GUDP states that land within town and village development boundaries and the developed form of rural villages will be the main focus for new developments. Furthermore, the policy states that new buildings, structures and ancillary facilities in the countryside (i.e. outside development boundaries and outside the developed form of rural villages) will be refused with the exception of development that is permitted by another policy of the Plan.

5.2 The site is also considered to be on previously developed land. Policy C3 of the GUDP states that proposals that give priority, wherever possible, to reusing previously developed land or buildings that are located within or near development boundaries, rather than using greenfield sites, will be approved provided that the site or building and the proposed use are suitable and conform to the Plan’s objectives and development strategy. The proposal would therefore make acceptable use of previously developed land.

5.3 The proposal would mean losing a hotel in the area. There is no specific policy in the GUDP that deals with the loss of hotel accommodation by redeveloping sites, although Policy CH11 which deals with the conversion of buildings within village development boundaries for residential use, states that a proposal must not lead to the loss of serviced holiday accommodation in main holiday centres unless strong evidence has been submitted to the Council demonstrating that the property has been marketed unsuccessfully as holiday accommodation at a fair and reasonable price for a continuous period of 12 months.

5.4 Abersoch has been identified as one of the main holiday centres in the explanation to Policy CH11. The information submitted with the application notes that the site has been empty since 2010 and that no interest has been shown in using it for a C1 use (a hotel) in the period since. It is not clear, however, whether this means that a real attempt has been made during this period to market the property as a hotel, and in the meantime the condition of the building and the site has deteriorated and is now an eyesore. Paragraph 5 of TAN 13 Tourism refers to the need to consider the implications of losing accommodation to other land uses and the effect of this on a town’s ability to retain its status as a ‘resort’. The same paragraph also notes that care should be taken not to use the planning system to perpetuate outdated accommodation for which there is no longer a market demand.

5.4 Policy CH4 relates to housing developments within development boundaries. This policy approves, in principle, proposals to build new homes on unallocated sites within the development boundaries of village’ provided a proportion of the units on each site (which will vary from site to site) are affordable units to meet the general local need determined for affordable housing, unless it can be proven to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority that, having considered all the relevant factors, it would be inappropriate to provide affordable housing on the site.

5.5 Consequently, and subject to assessment of the following issues: affordability, language and community, visual, general and residential amenities, transportation, biodiversity, sustainability and flooding, the principle of the proposal is considered acceptable.

Affordable Housing Matters

5.6 Paragraph 2.17 of the Supplementary Planning Guidance – Affordable Housing (November 2009) states that the local planning authority, when assessing an application in accordance with Policy CH4, will consider the situation that exists in the settlement in question. This will include consideration of matters such as:

 evidence of the factors which influence affordability in the local area;  evidence of a specific need for housing in the Village or Local Centre;  the current availability of affordable housing in the Village or Local Centre, i.e. the mixture of housing, in terms of tenure;  to what extent will it be possible, realistically, to meet the need for affordable housing on land within the development boundary;  proposed housing association schemes (within or immediately adjoining the development boundary);  evidence of the financial feasibility of providing affordable housing on the site.

5.7 There is evidence that there are problems with housing affordability in the Abersoch area and that there is a need for affordable housing in the area. Also, a substantial percentage (around 45%) of the housing in Abersoch consists of second homes. However, in accordance with the policy as seen above, consideration must also be given to the financial feasibility of providing affordable housing on the site. Paragraph 10.6 of Technical Advice Note 2 – Planning and Affordable Housing, states that the viability of a site will be a critical factor to consider in determining thresholds (for affordable housing), particularly on small sites. The impact of specific costs on the viability of a development is a factor which is considered in the first criterion of Policy CH4. This criterion states that a proportion of the units on a site of this type should be affordable, unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority that, having considered all the relevant factors, it would be inappropriate to provide affordable housing on the site. Paragraph 5.2.30 of the GUDP states that specific costs associated with the development of the site are a factor to be considered when negotiating with a developer in relation to the provision of affordable housing.

5.8 When the application was submitted originally, it included two 3-bedroom affordable units, but by now and following further negotiations, the applicant proposes four 3- bedroom affordable units, namely 30% of the houses on the site. The affordable houses are proposed to be sold at 55% of the open market price, namely a discount of 45%. The proposed units are units 1-4 and all these units are two-storey and have their own gardens. It is encouraging to see that four houses have been proposed as affordable units, rather than them being flats. The four affordable units proposed would be 3-bedroom houses, and would measure approximately 88 square metres internally. The size of the affordable units would therefore comply with the size of an affordable house as contained in the Supplementary Planning Guidance: Affordable Housing. It is considered that the offer of four affordable houses is acceptable as a percentage of the proposal, and that the proposal is therefore acceptable in terms of the requirements of Policy CH4 of the GUDP. It must be ensured that these houses are bound as general local need affordable housing by signing a section 106 agreement. Enquiries were also made with housing associations to see whether they would be interested in the affordable houses, and confirmation was received from Tai Eryri that they would be interested in the affordable units if the developer so wished.

Language and Community Matters

5.9 A language and community statement was received as part of the application. It is noted that the percentage of Welsh speakers in Abersoch is comparatively low, and that it has reduced between 2001 and 2011. It is recognised that the site is located in a convenient place in Abersoch, close to services and facilities, and is therefore likely to have a positive effect on local shops and services. The development should improve the visual environment and make the area a more attractive place to live. The proposal would offer four affordable houses. No specific mitigation measures have been proposed in the language and community statement. The response of the Policy Unit is awaited on the contents of the language and community statement, which hopefully will have arrived by the date of the Committee.

5.10 From a community perspective, Policy CH10 of the GUDP which deals with second homes is relevant to the application. However, it is essential to note that the Planning Inspectorate affords very little weight to this policy when determining appeals that are based on this policy. What comes over in the appeals is that it cannot be proven with robust evidence that the residential units would be holiday homes or second homes. Although there is a substantial percentage of second homes in Abersoch, an appeal on the site of the Power Boat Club has been approved, contrary to the decision of the Council. 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.

5.11 Considering all the information that is relevant to this application including its location, the need for affordable housing, the percentage of second homes in the area as well as the contribution of affordable housing proposed, it is not considered that the proposal would have a significant impact on the Welsh language or on the community.

Visual amenities 5.12 As well as discussing the issues of design, scale etc. with the Council, the applicant has also discussed at length with the Wales Design Commission as the proposal has evolved, and the development submitted today has changed considerably from the original proposal. The original proposal was to have a block of 35 flats over five storeys, and it was not considered that this was suitable for the site. Over time a number of matters have been considered and amended. These matters include the following:-

 The scale and form of the development.  Taking advantage of the topography of the land.  The suitability of the types of houses and gardens being proposed for families.  The architectural form of the design, where it was suggested to consider a contemporary design rather than attempting to recreate Victorian-style buildings.  Consideration to the landscaping.  Access down to the river.  The location of the access.

In their latest observations on the proposal the Wales Design Commission noted that it was an interesting design and that the simplicity of the houses was welcomed. 5.12 By now the proposal involves locating 13 residential units on the site. Units 1-4 would be positioned facing Lôn Engan whilst the remaining units would face down towards the river and the harbour. Units 1-4 and Units 5-10 would be terraced housing, units 11 and 12 would be semi-detached houses and unit 13 would be a detached house. Units 1-4 would be two-storey and the remainder of the units would be four-storey. The units are positioned on the land in a way which makes use of the varying ground levels. The proposal would not be higher than the height of the current hotel, but of course more of the site would be taken up for building on it compared with the current site.

5.13 The design of units 1-4 is fairly traditional, but the use of timber cladding on parts of the external walls will give a more contemporary aspect to the design. Units 5-13 are of a modern design. Although they are four-storey, they would appear to be three- storey from the rear (due to the slope of the land) and they would also be stepped down in line with the slope of the land, therefore the roof ridges will not be the same height across the house frontages. Units 5-10 are not positioned in a straight line either, but are stepped back per two houses. There will also be an empty space between block 5-10 and units 11-12 and unit 13.

5.14 This is considered to be a means of breaking up the development, thus lessening its impact. Also, although they are four storey units, the rooms on the fourth floor would be located in the roof space. The development is divided up into blocks of buildings, therefore there are spaces between the buildings and this is considered to minimise the proposal’s impact on the landscape and the street scene. To create interest, unit 5, namely the end of terrace house opposite Lôn Engan, contains windows etc. on the gable end.

5.15 All the houses would have private gardens and would also have use of a communal garden. In addition to this a large band of green land would remain on the slopes between the buildings that are on elevated ground and the river, which is on lower ground. As there will be gardens and green land around the buildings it would be possible to landscape the site quite extensively. It must also be borne in mind that the site is not entirely empty at present as the existing hotel buildings are located on part of the land. Therefore, it is not considered that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the area’s visual amenities given the present situation. The proposal would be finished with slate roofs and external walls in a combination of timber and render. It is considered that these materials would be acceptable for use on the proposal. Due to the above, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in respect of policies B22, B25 and B27 of the GUDP.

5.16 The site lies within the AONB and therefore the impact of the proposal on this designation must be considered. In this respect the requirements of Policy B8 of the GUDP must be considered. The aim is to protect, maintain and enhance the character of the AONB and to refuse proposals that would cause significant harm to the landscape and the coast (including views in and out of the area), wildlife, historical remains and buildings, language and culture and the quiet and unpolluted nature of the area unless there are very exceptional circumstances where the following criteria can be met:-

 that a very significant national economic or social benefit has been established in favour of the development and that refusing permission would be extremely detrimental to the local economy;  that consideration has been given to the cost and the possibility of providing the development outside the area or of meeting the need for it in some other way;  that consideration has been given to limiting any detrimental effect on the area’s character and that measures to achieve this have been included as part of the application.

Paragraph 5.3.5 of Planning Policy Wales also states that development plan policies and development control decisions affecting AONBs should favour conservation of natural beauty, although it will also be appropriate to have regard to the economic and social well-being of the areas.

5.17 The observations of the AONB Unit were received regarding the proposal. These observations state that there is no objection to the principle of redeveloping the site and that they are supportive of demolishing the latest flat-roof extensions to the main building. There are concerns however in respect of losing the original hotel building. Although it is recognised that the AONB Unit have mentioned that consideration should be given to retaining the original hotel, it must be realised that in general, the existing buildings, particularly the extensions on the site, are not of a standard and design that are worth conserving. It appears that one of the main concerns of the AONB Unit is the fact that units 5-13 are four-storey, which they consider to be obtrusive in the streetscape of Abersoch. There is also concern about the roof lights on units 5-13. In terms of design, it is considered that an attempt has been made to create a development that has character, and to include architectural features that avoid a monotonous and uniform development. Although the design is contemporary in nature, this does not necessarily mean that it would cause significant harm to the AONB.

5.18 As is noted above, the development has evolved significantly since the original proposal was put forward, and there has been considerable input in terms of the proposal in general and in terms of the design. The site is located near the built form of the village of Abersoch and it is not a stand-alone site in open countryside. It is likely that one of the main views of the site will be that from Lôn Pont Morgan by the bridge when entering Abersoch. The land where it is intended to build is on elevated ground, and consequently it is fairly prominent in the landscape from this location. A large band of green land would remain on the slopes around the site and there would be spaces between the building blocks along with a combination of private gardens and a communal garden for the residents of the proposed units, which would be a means of contributing to the character of the area. In light of this, it is considered that people looking upstream from Pont Morgan would still be able to enjoy views which would include greenery and open spaces. The buildings would be mainly set on previously developed land or on land that forms part of the hotel curtilage and therefore it is not considered that the proposal would affect the beauty of the natural landscape. It is not considered therefore that the proposal would cause significant harm to the AONB, and it is therefore acceptable in respect of Policy B8 of the GUDP.

5.19 General and residential amenities The two nearest residential properties to the site are located to the west. Those houses are on a higher level than the site of the application. Because of these differences in ground levels and the distances between the nearby houses and the proposed houses, it is not considered that the proposal would cause overlooking or loss of privacy for the occupants of these houses in a way which would cause significant harm. Also, in respect of Policy B23, the site currently includes a car park for the hotel, and it therefore has the capacity to accommodate a number of customers and cars coming and going there. Therefore, it is not considered that the proposal would add to the traffic or the noise associated with traffic in a way that would cause significant harm to local amenities. The proposal is considered acceptable in terms of Policy B23 of the GUDP.

5.20 Transport and access matters The development would use the current vehicular access to the site and it includes parking spaces for a total of 26 cars. There would be one parking space each for units 1-5, two parking spaces each for units 6-13 and five general parking spaces within the site. It is proposed to have a footway along the frontage of the site with Lôn Engan. There would also be pedestrian access from the development down to the river. The Transportation Unit was consulted and following the receipt of a parking plan which showed five general parking spaces within the site, they are satisfied with the proposal in respect of parking. Concerns have been expressed that the occupants of units 1-4 would need to drive in or out of the parking spaces in reverse gear. However, although the Transportation Unit were not completely happy with this arrangement, they did not consider that the application should be refused on this basis in light of the fact that the traffic flow was not excessive or fast in this particular area. It is therefore considered that the proposal is acceptable in respect of policies CH33 and CH36 which relate to road safety and parking.

5.21 Biodiversity Matters The applicant submitted a Bat Survey and an extended phase 1 habitat survey assessment (2012) with the application. Also, information was submitted on eradicating Japanese knotweed which is present on part of the site. The Biodiversity Unit and Natural Resources Wales were consulted on the application. These observations state that there is no objection to the principle of the application. The bat report submitted is comprehensive and the developer should follow the ecologists’ guidance and comply with what is recommended. Details of the new bat roost will need to be submitted and the roost must be completed before commencing any demolition work on the site. In order to protect nesting birds, the work that could affect birds’ nests should be undertaken outside the bird nesting season.

5.22 There is a possibility that otters use the site and the extended phase 1 habitat survey assessment (2012) notes that if the area of swamp and the wooded bank are not affected by the development, there is no need for a further survey, but it suggests that a pallas security fence should be installed when undertaking the development to prevent otters from entering the works area and to reflect noise back to the site. If this area is affected, then a further otter survey would be needed. It seems that the work through this land would be associated with constructing the bat roost and creating the steps down to the river bank. As there will be a need to agree on the exact details and location of the bat roost, it is considered that a condition could be imposed that a further otter survey must be submitted before commencing the work, as the exact location of this work could affect the survey. The extended phase 1 habitat survey assessment (2012) notes that a water vole survey should be undertaken if any work is undertaken within eight metres of the river. The location of the bat roost is currently shown to be approximately 10 metres from the river and therefore a survey would not be needed. However, as the exact details of the bat roost have not yet been agreed, a condition could be included that a water vole survey would be required if the roost was within eight metres of the river. The Biodiversity Unit have also recommended that a reptile survey should be undertaken before starting any engineering work. Provided that suitable conditions are included, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in relation to Policy B20 of the GUDP.

5.23 Japanese knotweed, an invasive plant which is difficult to eradicate is present on part of the site. It is important that the development work does not cause this plant to spread. Details of a chemical treatment programme for eradicating the Japanese knotweed were received and a condition will be required on any planning permission in relation to its eradication. If treatment of Japanese knotweed is undertaken, it is considered that the proposal would be acceptable in the context of Policy B35 of the GUDP.

5.24 A tree quality survey, development implications and an arboricultural method statement were submitted as part of the application. The Trees Unit appreciates the high standard of the tree survey and the tree preservation measures and considers that if these measures are carefully followed, there will be no excessive negative effect on trees or the landscape, and therefore there are no significant concerns in relation to trees. It is considered that a condition should be included for undertaking the work in accordance with the tree quality survey, development implications and arboricultural method statement. A landscaping scheme has also been received which will add to the variety of vegetation on the edges of the site and within. This landscaping scheme is considered acceptable in terms of Policy B27 of the GUDP.

5.25 Sustainability matters A pre-assessment report was submitted in relation to compliance with Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes. This assessment shows that it is anticipated that the units would achieve a score of 57.71% which would reach level 3. A condition will be needed on the permission to ensure that the finished units reach at least Level 3, and in doing so it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in respect of Policy C7 of the GUDP which relates to building in a sustainable manner.

5.26 Flooding matters Part of the site lies within a C1 flooding zone as designated in Technical Advice Note 15: Development and Flood Risk. A flooding consequence assessment was submitted as part of the application. The observations of Natural Resources Wales were received on the proposal. They have no objection to the proposed development but conditions will be required to safeguard the development from flooding. Consequently, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in respect of policy B29 of the GUDP and TAN 15.

5.27 Response to the public consultation It is considered that all the relevant planning observations received as a result of the consultation period have been given due consideration in the above assessment.

6. Conclusions:

6.1 This is a proposal to redevelop the Harbour Hotel site for 13 residential units which would be a combination of two-storey and four-storey units, and it is believed that the development is acceptable in principle. The applicant has confirmed that units 1-4 would be designated as affordable housing to be sold at 55% of the open market price. This would equate to 30% of the units on the site being affordable for local need, and it is considered that this percentage is acceptable. It is also encouraging to see that the proposed units are four houses with gardens, which will meet the need for family homes.

6.2 Having taken into consideration and assessed all the relevant matters, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in respect of local and national policies, and that there are no other material planning matters that state otherwise, and that consequently, the application should be approved subject to signing a section 106 agreement binding four of the units as general local need affordable housing, and subject to relevant conditions. 7. Recommendation:

7.1 To approve subject to signing a section 106 agreement binding four of the units as general local need affordable housing, and subject to the following conditions –

1. Commence within five years 2. In accordance with revised plans 3. Slates on the roof 4. Agree details for external walls 5. Code for Sustainable Homes conditions 6. Withdrawal of permitted development rights 7. Highway conditions 8. Welsh Water conditions 9. Natural Resources Wales conditions in relation to flooding 10. Biodiversity / ecological conditions 11. Landscaping conditions.

PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE: 25/11/2013 HEAD OF REGULATORY DEPARTMENT REPORT PWLLHELI (PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC PROTECTION)

Number: 4 PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE: 25/11/2013 HEAD OF REGULATORY DEPARTMENT REPORT PWLLHELI (PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC PROTECTION)

Application Number: C13/0810/14/LL Date Registered: 13/08/2013 Application Type: Full - Planning Community: Caernarfon Ward: Seiont

Proposal: PROVIDE 16 EXTRA CARE RESIDENTIAL UNITS Location: YSBYTY BRYN SEIONT HOSPITAL, PANT ROAD, CAERNARFON, LL552YU

Summary of the TO REFUSE Recommendation:

1. Description:

1.1 This is an application to provide 16 extra care residential units on a site adjacent to the former site of Bryn Seiont Hospital on the southern outskirts of Caernarfon. Please note that an application was approved in May, 2012 (with the decision on the application released in September, 2012) for the demolition of the existing hospital and construction of a 77 bed specialist nursing care facility together with parking spaces etc. and that this latest application is in addition to the specialist nursing care facility. Part of this application site will overlap the previous application site and will include the hospital’s existing parking spaces, the proposed access as well as the land that forms part of the former hospital’s curtilage. However, most of the proposed building will be located on open agricultural land to the south-east which is currently separated from the site of the former hospital with stock proof fencing. 1.2 The site is located to the south of Caernarfon and outside the development boundary as defined by the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan (GUDP). On the northern boundary of the site there is mature woodland of indigenous species (that is the subject of a tree preservation order) which is located on quite a steep slope of the A487 trunk road, to the east there are mature trees, grazing land and residential dwellings of Parc Muriau, to the south there is flat and open agricultural land as well as a dwelling known as Talgoed and to the west there are three residential properties along with a third class county road (Pant Road). 1.3 Currently, the hospital site is redundant and temporary cabins have been located on a section of the car park for the Blood Service. On health and safety grounds, the hospital site and the nearest curtilage to it has been closed off with fencing and the work in relation to the planning permission that was granted in 2012 for the nursing care facility has not yet commenced. 1.4 It is intended to locate the new units on the eastern gable end of the specialist nursing care facility with a corridor measuring 9m in length and 2.5m in width linking both buildings. The self-contained units will be designed in an L-shaped form on two floors with a corridor linking the units (8 units to each floor). Internally, each unit will include two bedrooms, a shower room, a kitchen and a lounge and in order to serve these units only there will be a reception, an office, a lift and toilets opposite the main entrance to the units themselves. In addition, a launderette and an equipment room will be located on the ground floor on the northern elevation. Externally, there will be a communal garden for occupants of the units as well as parking spaces along the southern boundary of the site for 16 cars. A new footpath will be created from the proposed building to the path that was approved under the previous application which will link the site with the bus stops located on this part of the trunk road. 1.5 The external walls of the building will be of coloured render and clean brickwork and zinc panels are to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Roof materials are also to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. It is intended to break up the PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE: 25/11/2013 HEAD OF REGULATORY DEPARTMENT REPORT PWLLHELI (PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC PROTECTION)

elevations of the building using different materials and include ridged roofs of different height and design. The height of the building will vary from 8.5m to the ridge down to 4m to the main entrance. 1.6 As part of the application and in accordance with the requirements of Technical Advice Note 12 on “Design” (June, 2009), a design and access statement was submitted. An explanation was also submitted regarding the proposed extra care residential units which states:- (i) The extra care units offer support to those suffering from dementia and their families. The Government emphasises how important it is for those suffering from dementia to remain independent for as long as possible and this type of accommodation is an option that promotes integrated care. (ii) It involves a security of tenure for those suffering from dementia for as long as possible (i.e. until the condition of those suffering deteriorates who would then need to be transferred to the specialist nursing care centre). (iii) Personal care with 24 hour supervision within a domestic environment. (iv) There will be eligibility guidelines for the units – those who are 55 years old and over, who need a personal care plan, a priority for people living in the community, occupants being transferred to the specialist nursing care centre when their condition deteriorates, the extra care unit will be re-sold to the trust that will be chosen to run and manage these units at Bryn Seiont. (v) The units will be self-contained units and occupants will have their own legal rights. 1.7 A Linguistic and Community Assessment, together with a trees assessment (which is the same report as was submitted with the previous application), were also submitted with the application along with a level 3 code sustainability assessment in accordance with the requirements of TAN 12 on “Design”, (2009) which state that it is possible to reach the target of level 3 code.

2. Relevant Policies:

2.2 Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan 2009:

POLICY B7 – SITES OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE Refuse proposals which will damage or destroy archaeological remains of national importance (whether scheduled or not) or their setting. Also refuse any development that will affect other archaeological remains unless the need for the development overrides the significance of the archaeological remains.

POLICY B19 – PROTECTED TREES, WOODLAND AND HEDGEROWS Proposals which will lead to the loss or damage of a tree, woodland or hedgerow that is protected will only be permitted when the development’s economic and/or social benefits outweigh any harm.

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. PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE: 25/11/2013 HEAD OF REGULATORY DEPARTMENT REPORT PWLLHELI (PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC PROTECTION)

POLICY B25 – BUILDING MATERIALS The visual character of the Plan area will be protected by ensuring that only natural Welsh slates or slates that are similar in terms of appearance, colour and weathering properties are permitted on roofs, except 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, developments 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 C1 – LOCATING A NEW DEVELOPMENT Land within the developments boundaries of towns and villages 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 a development that is permitted by another policy of the Plan.

POLICY CH9 – NEW DWELLINGS IN OPEN COUNTRYSIDE Refuse proposals for new dwellings in rural areas unless they are for individuals who must live on the site due to their work and a number of other criteria relevant to the location and the type of dwelling, and restrictions on ownership of the dwelling.

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 CH37 – EDUCATIONAL, HEALTH AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES Development proposals for new educational, health or community facilities or extensions to existing facilities will be approved provided they conform to a series of criteria relating to the location of the proposal, its accessibility using different modes of travel, together with highway considerations, the design of any new school and the effect on an identified town centre.

2.3 National Policies:

Technical Advice Note (NCT) 12 on “Design”, (June, 2009).

TAN 6 on “Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities”, (July, 2010).

TAN 22 on “Planning for Sustainable Buildings”, (February, 2011).

Planning Policy Wales, (November, 2012), Chapter 3 on “Making and Enforcing Planning Decisions “ and Chapter 9 on “Housing”. PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE: 25/11/2013 HEAD OF REGULATORY DEPARTMENT REPORT PWLLHELI (PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC PROTECTION)

3. Relevant Planning History:

3.1 Application number C11/0828/14/LL - to demolish the existing hospital and construct a 77 bed specialist nursing care facility together with parking spaces, a new laundry building, landscaping, and closing one of the existing entrances. Approved - September, 2012.

3.2 Pertinent to the history of this latest planning application is the correspondence received before the original application for the care facility was submitted in April and May 2009 when a concern was expressed in relation to including extra care residential units as part of the plan to develop the Bryn Seiont site. At the time it was confirmed, to all intents and purposes, that including these units was tantamount to creating new housing and undermined the policies of the Local Planning Authority in relation to restricting new dwellings within development boundaries. In accordance with this advice, this element of the proposal was removed from the planning application that was submitted for the facility itself and approved under reference C11/0828/14/LL.

4. Consultations:

Community/Town Council: Objection – contrary to countryside policy.

Transportation Unit: Recommend refusing the application on the grounds of an adverse impact on the local road. The application is likely to lead to a substantial increase along part of the local narrow and winding county road and if no improvements can be offered to widen the connecting road between the trunk road and site entrance, then it is recommended to refuse the application.

Natural Resources Wales: No objection but with conditions involving the requirements of TAN 15 in relation to mitigation measures to dispose of surface water from the site, lighting, loss of trees and bats.

Gwynedd Archaeological An archaeological investigation needs to be undertaken on relevant Planning Service: land that is the subject of the planning application in accordance with Welsh Government guidelines by imposing a relevant planning condition on any permission granted for this development.

Welsh Water: Standard conditions regarding the disposal of surface/foul water from the site.

Public Protection Unit: Standard polluted land condition.

Social Services Department: Awaiting a response.

Biodiversity Unit: Observations on the previous application regarding safeguarding bats continue to apply to this latest application.

Trees Officer: The trees report that was submitted with the application relates to the previous application rather than this latest application. Consequently, it is difficult to select and identify which trees need to be preserved on the site and how the roots can be safeguarded. The applicant should prepare a new report which corresponds with the latest plan. PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE: 25/11/2013 HEAD OF REGULATORY DEPARTMENT REPORT PWLLHELI (PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC PROTECTION)

Public Consultation: A notice was posted on site and neighbouring residents were notified. The advertising period ended on 19.09.13 and a letter / correspondence of objection was received on the following grounds:

 Increase in the number of traffic visiting the site of the specialist facility and the nearby residential units to the detriment of the amenities of local residents on the grounds of disturbance, light and noise.  The road is narrow and winding and on a hill and this part of the road is a danger to the safety of pedestrians and cyclists who use it.  There is no need for 16 extra care units in Bryn Seiont as a number of buildings in the town are already vacant. Would these be permanent units located outside the town and would the occupants pay tax like everybody else?

Two letters supporting the application were received from two local neighbours which state:-  That this option is excellent for the community and for the workforce.  Currently, the site is an eyesore and attracts vandals to the site.  Design is acceptable for such a development.

5. Assessment of the material planning considerations:

Principle of the development 5.1 The proposal involves constructing 16 extra care residential units outside a development boundary, and in essence, is tantamount to constructing 16 houses in open countryside. No justification to support the need for this type of development has been submitted as part of the application. The principle of developing self- contained residential units in open countryside outside development boundaries is considered under Policies C1 and CH9 of the GUDP.

5.2 Policy C1 states that land within the development boundaries of towns and villages and the developed form of rural villages will be the main focus for new developments, and new buildings, structures and ancillary facilities in the countryside will be refused (i.e. outside development boundaries and outside the built form of urban centres) with the exception of a development that is permitted by another policy in the plan.

5.3 Policy CH9 states that applications to construct new dwellings in the countryside will be refused unless the dwelling is required as a home for a full-time worker or someone who is mainly employed in agriculture, forestry or other rural land based industry; or someone who earns their living through a full-time activity that provides an essential service to the agricultural sector within the county.

5.4 In addition to these Policies, the Supplementary Planning Guidance: “Building new houses in the countryside” (November, 2009) states that national policies on houses in the countryside are aimed towards safeguarding areas from unnecessary developments that impact upon the beauty of the countryside. Houses, when located in remote areas can affect the landscape and can be expensive to connect to public utilities and can lead to an increase in traffic on unsuitable rural roads. Local policies PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE: 25/11/2013 HEAD OF REGULATORY DEPARTMENT REPORT PWLLHELI (PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC PROTECTION)

are also based on these considerations. The countryside is described as those areas outside the development boundaries of centres and villages and outside the built form of urban centres.

5.5 In addition to the above, consideration must be given to the national context, namely:

(i) TAN 6 on “Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities” - one of the few circumstances in which a new isolated residential development in the open countryside can be justified is when accommodation is required to enable a rural enterprise worker to live at, or close to, his workplace.

(ii) Planning Policy Wales, (November, 2012), Chapter 9 on “Housing” which states that “New housing developments should be well integrated and connected to the existing pattern of dwellings”. There should be strict control over the construction of new buildings and new developments in the open countryside that are far from existing dwellings.

5.6 Taking into consideration the context of the abovementioned policies and guidance, it is clear that the proposal is not acceptable in principle and that it is contrary to local policies and guidance along with national advice, on the following grounds:-

(i) Use – The applicant states that use of the extra care residential units is for:-

1. Occupants who are 55 years old and over who demonstrate the early signs of dementia but who want to live in a self-contained form. 2. The occupants must have a personal care plan with priority being given to people who live in the community. 3. The occupants would move to the specialist nursing facility when the illness deteriorates. 4. The units would be re-sold to the trust/company that supervises the units and the occupants will have legal rights as it is customary for owners of self- contained residential units.

(ii) Location – The site of this application is located in open countryside and is considerable distance (approximately 300m) from the nearest development boundary. Approximately 30% of the recent development is located within the curtilage of the former hospital and approximately 70% is located on open agricultural land. This shows that the proposal involves constructing self-contained residential units in open countryside without any connection with the built-up area of Caernarfon and without submitting any justification with the application for doing so. Therefore, it is believed that the proposal is contrary to Policy C1 and CH9 of the GUDP, the Supplementary Planning Guidance on “Construction of houses in the countryside” as well as Chapter 9 of Planning Policy Wales “Housing” and TAN 6 on “Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities”.

5.7 It is believed that the above situations reflect the definition of what is a “residential house” under Class C3 of the Use Classes Order, 1987 (as amended) where an element of care is available (“living in the community”) together with an element of independence within an “ordinary” house/dwelling for the occupants. To this end, it is therefore believed that the 16 extra care residential units are, to all intents, are tantamount to the construction of 16 permanent and self-contained residential units in open countryside and outside the development boundary of Caernarfon. Although the PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE: 25/11/2013 HEAD OF REGULATORY DEPARTMENT REPORT PWLLHELI (PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC PROTECTION)

units are physically connected to the proposed nursing facility with a corridor, the development is not an integrated part of the proposed nursing facility.

5.8 Taking the above assessment into consideration, it is believed that the proposal to construct 16 extra care residential units on this rural site is not acceptable in principle.

5.9 Reference has been made to Policy CH37 of the GUDP which states that new facilities associated with education, health and the community or extensions to existing facilities will be approved provided they conform to a series of criteria. The criteria state that the development has to be located within a development boundary or has to make use of a suitable existing building outside the boundary or a suitable previously used site close to the development boundary and that the site is easily accessible and acceptable on the grounds of parking, traffic and road safety. Taking the above assessment into consideration, it is not believed that the proposal is an intention to create a health facility but rather an intention to create permanent residential units outside the development boundary and in open countryside. In addition, should the proposal be deemed as a health facility it is believed that it would not comply with these guidelines on the grounds that the site is in open countryside, is a considerable distance from the nearest development boundary and also not on suitable previously developed land.

5.10 No justification to develop this plan in its current form in open countryside has been provided. Neither is there evidence of other options to develop the plan as an integrated part of the proposed nursing facility, or evidence to prove why the residential units cannot be provided within the development boundary. Therefore, taking into account the lack of evidence for the need for this type of provision on the application site, it is considered that the proposal as submitted does not exaggerate the concerns of the Local Planning Authority in relation to the principle of the proposed development.

Visual amenities 5.11 As referred to above, the site is a fairly visible site particularly from the south and from the adjacent trunk road below, although some vegetation and existing trees screen the site. The new building has been designed so that it does not create an incompatible structure in the landscape and ensures continuation in terms of external elevations and building materials that were previously approved for the specialist nursing facility. In this respect, it is believed that the proposal is acceptable on the grounds of Policy B22, B23 and B25 of the GUDP.

General and residential amenities 5.12 The units would be located on the south-eastern gable end of the proposed facility with its surface area in L-shaped form. The nearest established dwellings to the site are located approximately 65m to the east (Parc Muriau) where a mature coppice separates the site from the dwellings themselves. Taking into consideration the location of the units in relation to the nearest dwellings, it is believed that there will be no substantial or significant impact on the general amenities of the occupants of the dwellings that are located in Parc Muriau. It is therefore believed that the proposal is acceptable in terms of the requirements of Policy B23 of the GUDP.

Transport and access matters 5.13 As referred to in the above assessment, the site is served by a class III county road (Pant Road) which is narrow and winding between the junction with the A487 trunk road and the site entrance. The Transportation Unit has expressed their objection to this latest proposal in Bryn Seiont on the grounds that the proposal would create 16 PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE: 25/11/2013 HEAD OF REGULATORY DEPARTMENT REPORT PWLLHELI (PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC PROTECTION)

residential units, which would entail a substantial increase in traffic along this part of the county road and if it cannot be widened from 4.7m to 6.1m, then it is recommended to refuse the application on the grounds of road safety (this part of the road is sub-standard in terms of width and alignment). It is not considered that the application as submitted complies with the requirements of Policy CH33 of the GUDP on the grounds of safety on roads and streets.

Biodiversity matters 5.14 A concern was expressed by the Trees Officer that the trees report submitted with this application was the same report as was submitted with the previous application. To this end, it is not clear which trees are to be felled and which trees are to be preserved and how the roots of the trees will be safeguarded. The applicant should submit a new report reflecting the design and surface area of this latest application but because of fundamental concerns regarding the principle of the proposal, the Local Planning Authority does not consider that it is reasonable to request a new trees report. To this end, it is believed that the information submitted is insufficient in order to create a clear opinion on the impact of the application on the trees and the integrity of the coppice, and therefore this does not comply with the requirements of Policy B19 of the GUDP.

Archaeological Matters 5.15 According to the observations of the Gwynedd Archaeological Planning Service, in accordance with Welsh Government requirements there is a need to submit an archaeological surveys in order to establish the size, nature and importance of any archaeological feature that could be present on the site. It is therefore believed that the proposal is acceptable in terms of the requirements of Policy B7 of the GUDP.

Sustainability matters 5.16 The level 3 code sustainability assessment submitted with the application states that the target of level 3 code could be achieved with one credit under the requirements of ENE 1 and which is required in accordance with the guidelines of TAN 12 on “Design”, (June, 2009) and in accordance with Policy C7 of the GUDP.

Linguistic and Community Matters 5.17 In accordance with the requirements of the Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning and the Welsh Language, a Community and Linguistic Assessment was submitted with the application which states that the proposal would not have a negative impact on the language or the local community. However, the Assessment notes that there would be no certainty or way to control who would live in the residential units or who would be employed there, and it elaborates by stating that the number of incomers who would be living in the proposed units would be low (rather than no incomers at all or a high level of incomers). In the same manner, should the expertise not be available locally, the Assessment recognises that staff could be moving into the area to work on the site. However, the Assessment expresses a wish to employ local people where possible but that it is not possible to ensure this. The response of the Policy Unit is awaited on the outcomes of this Assessment and it is hoped that a formal response will be received by the date of the Committee.

6. Conclusions:

6.1 Taking the above assessment into account, it is believed that the proposal as submitted is unacceptable in terms of the principle of developing 16 extra care residential units which are, in essence, residential houses on a site outside PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE: 25/11/2013 HEAD OF REGULATORY DEPARTMENT REPORT PWLLHELI (PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC PROTECTION)

development boundaries. In addition, there is an objection on highway grounds and a lack of information in terms of protected trees, therefore based on this it is recommended to refuse the application for the reasons noted below:-

7. Recommendation:

To refuse – reasons:-

1. The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy C1 and CH9 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan, the Supplementary Planning Guidance: “Building new houses in the countryside” and Technical Advice Note 6 “Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities” as well as Chapter 9 of Planning Policy Wales on “Housing” as it involves the construction of permanent residential units in the countryside outside a recognised development boundary without any justification.

2. The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy CH33 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan as it would have a detrimental impact on road safety as a result of an increase in traffic visiting the site along this part of the class III county road, based on the narrowness and alignment of the road.

3. The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy B19 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan on the grounds of lack of information in relation to which trees have been issued with orders and which trees would be affected or felled in order to enable the development to proceed.

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Number: 5 PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Application Number: C13/0849/44/MG Date Registered: 22/08/2013 Application Type: Reserved Matters Community: Porthmadog Ward: Porthmadog – Tremadog

Proposal: RESERVED MATTERS FOR THE ERECTION OF A NEW DWELLING Location: LAND AT REAR OF DUBLIN STREET, TREMADOG, GWYNEDD, LL49 9RH

Summary of the Recommendation: TO APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS

1. Description:

1.1 Following a discussion on the application at the meeting on 14 October 2013, it was decided to postpone determination in order for members of the planning committee to visit the site.

1.2 The application deals with approving reserved matters following the granting of outline planning permission under application number C10D/0259/44/AM. The setting of the house has already been approved as part of the outline permission; therefore, the appearance, size, access and landscaping elements form part of the application before the committee.

1.3 A row of eight garages currently occupies the site. The site is located within the development boundary of Tremadog on the GUDP proposal maps. There is a row of terrace houses to the south of the site. The site is served by a minor road off the A487. The northern part of the site is on sloped higher ground where trees and hedges grow. Further north there is a row of residential dwellings that are grade II listed buildings with the Tremadog conservation area boundary running in front of the said dwellings.

2. Relevant Policies:

2.2 Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan 2009:

POLICY 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 series of criteria aimed at protecting the special character of the Listed Building and the local environment.

POLICY B4 – DEVELOPMENTS IN OR AFFECTING THE SETTING OF CONSERVATION AREAS Ensure that proposals within conservation areas, or proposals that affect their setting, are refused unless they aim to maintain or enhance the character or appearance of the conservation area and its setting. PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (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.

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

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

2.3 National Policies:

Planning Policy Wales – Fifth Edition (November 2012) - Part 4.10 – Promoting sustainability through good design - Part 4.11 – Planning for sustainable buildings - Para. 6.5.9 – Effect on listed buildings - Para. 6.5.16 – 6.5.18 & 6.5.20 – Effect on listed buildings - Para. 8.7.1 – Development control and transport

Technical Advice Note 12: Design

Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning for Sustainable Building Gwynedd Design Guidance PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

3. Relevant Planning History:

C10D/0259/44/AM – Erection of two-storey dwelling. Approved 03/11/2010

C09D/0479/44/AM – Erection of two dwellings with an integral car port. Refused 26/04/10

4. Consultations:

Community/Town Council: Object on the grounds of consistency with other similar applications that have been refused. The outline application is clear that windows facing the nearby housing terrace should not be approved. It was felt that this application was unacceptable.

Transportation Unit: I refer to the above application, and confirm that I have no objection to the proposal. Parking spaces and turning spaces are shown within the curtilage and I confirm that the provision shown is acceptable.

Welsh Water: Standard conditions.

Biodiversity Unit: No further observations to those noted in the outline application – work to be undertaken on trees outside the bird nesting season.

Trees Unit: No objection.

Public Consultation: A notice was posted on the site and nearby residents were informed. The consultation period ended on 26/09/13. At the time of writing the report, two letters / items of correspondence had been received objecting on the following grounds:  Increase in traffic on the access track  Surface water matters  Noise during the construction period  The location of infrastructure  Stability of Sunnyside road.  Surface water is a problem in the gardens of Dublin Street already  Effect on wildlife  No public consultation  How and where will refuse bins be collected?  Design and Access Statement on the outline application states that no windows will face towards the houses of Dublin Street; however, windows are shown in this location in this application.  Loss of privacy and overlooking.  Parking matters.

In addition to the above, objections were received that were not valid planning objections which included:  Access matters during the construction period PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

5. Assessment of the material planning considerations:

Principle of the development

5.1 The main considerations in the case of this application are the suitability of the proposed plan and its details on this site bearing in mind that an outline application has been approved and that the principle of constructing a house on the site has been supported.

General and residential amenities

5.2 The current houses on Dublin Street have rear windows and gardens that look out onto the site of the proposed dwelling. Although the applicant stated during the outline application that no windows would be installed in the southern elevation, no condition on the outline application prevents this. It is considered that windows could be installed in this elevation without having a substantial effect on the privacy of the houses in Dublin Street.

5.3 It is not considered that the ground floor windows will lead to unreasonable overlooking or loss of privacy due to the distance between windows. Many sheds / garages and fences are located at the rear of the gardens of the Dublin Street houses which also contribute to the privacy of residents. One first-floor window faces towards the Dublin Street houses. The window provides light to the landing and also provides balance and character to the design of the house. Although the landing is not a residential room, it is still considered reasonable to ensure that this window will not lead to overlooking and loss of privacy by imposing a condition to install a window with opaque glass. Also, Velux windows are located in this elevation; however, they are approximately 2m above ground level; therefore, it will not be possible to look out of the windows. Also, the privacy of the residents of Dublin Street can be managed and ensured by imposing a condition not to install any additional windows without planning permission. Consequently, it is not considered that the proposal would lead to unreasonable loss of privacy or overlooking from the southern elevation or from other elevations. It is therefore considered that the proposal complies with policies B22 and B23.

Visual amenities

5.4 It is considered that the location of the proposed house on the plot is suitable; the size of the house is acceptable also, considering the size of the plot. The design of the building reflects elements of adjacent houses in the area reflecting the height, scale, elements of the design and also the materials. It is considered that the design, scale, height and mass are suitable for the site and that it would not create an unacceptable or foreign feature in the townscape. Similarly, the use of appropriate materials as noted will be suitable to the site reflecting the character of the surrounding houses. It is, therefore, considered that the proposal would be acceptable and in accordance with Policies B22 and B25.

Transport and access matters

5.5 Policies CH33 and CH36 relate to safety on roads and streets and private car parking facilities. The transportation unit has responded to the consultation and has no objection to the proposal. The road leading to the site is considered suitable for a PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

development of this scale. The submitted plan shows that a turning and parking space can be provided for two vehicles within the site which satisfies the requirements of policy CH36 and condition number 8 on the outline permission. Due to the scale, nature and the proposed use, it is not anticipated that the development will aggravate the current situation on this road to an unacceptable level that would lead to the refusal of this application. The concerns of the objectors have been acknowledged and have been considered in full but it is considered that the proposal is in accordance with Policy CH33 and CH36 of the GUDP.

Response to the public consultation

5.6 The concerns regarding an increase in heavy traffic using the site during the building stages are recognised but this is true on any site where building work is carried out and this would only be temporary.

5.7 Also, the concerns regarding land drainage issues are realised. The suitability of the site has already been approved through the outline planning approval and Welsh Water had no objection to the proposal. Therefore, there is no justification to refuse the application solely for this reason.

6. Conclusions:

6.1 The objections by local residents have received full consideration as noted above. Based on the above assessment, and having considered all the relevant matters, including the objections, it is not considered that the proposal is contrary to the local and national policies and guidelines noted in the assessment, nor are there any material planning considerations that state otherwise. Based on the above, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable subject to relevant conditions.

7. Recommendation:

To approve – conditions

1. Materials and finishes 2. Withdrawal of permitted rights 3. Development to comply with the approved plans

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Number: 6 PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Application Number: C13/0880/33/LL Date Registered: 05/09/2013 Application Type: Full - Planning Community: Buan Ward: Efailnewydd/Buan

Proposal: CREATE AN AGRICULTURAL VEHICULAR ACCESS. Location: GLANDWR, RHYDYCLAFDY, PWLLHELI, LL537YH

Summary of the Recommendation: TO APPROVE SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS

1. Description:

1.1 The proposal involves creating a new agricultural access. The size of the access has been reduced since the application was originally submitted. The proposal is now for an 8 metre wide access near the adjacent road. A gate would be located 8 metres back from the side of the road which would allow vehicles to wait off the road when going in and out of the access.

1.2 The proposal would involve creating a new access with a shale surface. It has been given to understand from the applicant that the proposal is to have a new access in this location in order to access the field and avoid having to lay down hard surface tracks through the land from an access which is located to the south east of the land holding. In response to some of the objections, the applicant has stated that the intention is to have a larger access in the centre of the village in order to avoid the need to travel so much to reach the fields and in order to ease accessibility for the land improvement and maintenance work and to facilitate access to the land during the winter months. Currently, it is given to understand that it is not possible to access the fields closer to the centre of the village without damaging other fields.

1.3 The site lies within the development boundary of Rhydyclafdy and within a Landscape Conservation Area. The access site forms part of larger land that has been designated protected open land in the GUDP. The access would lead to an adjacent third class road. The site is located within a C2 flood zone. There are dwellings opposite the site to the west.

1.4 The application is submitted to Committee following receipt of three or more letters of objection.

2. Relevant Policies:

2.2 Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan 2009: B10 – PROTECTING AND ENHANCING LANDSCAPE CONSERVATION AREAS – Protect and enhance Landscape Conservation Areas by ensuring that proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at avoiding significant damage to recognised features. PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

B11 – OPEN SPACES BETWEEN OR WITHIN VILLAGES AND TOWNS – Ensures that proposals that cause significant harm to the function or importance of open spaces between villages/towns or open spaces within towns or villages which are important to their character are refused.

Policy B29 – DEVELOPMENT ON LAND AT RISK OF FLOODING - Manage specific developments in the C1 and C2 flood zones and direct them towards suitable land in zone A unless they conform to a series of criteria relevant to the features on the site and to the purpose of the development.

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

2.3 National Policies: Planning Policy Wales (Fifth edition, November 2012) Technical Advice Note 15: Development and Flood Risk (July 2004)

3. Relevant Planning History:

3.1 2/13/2 – Construction of housing or bungalows (outline application) – Glandwr, Rhydyclafdy – Approved 22 July 1974.

4. Consultations:

Community/Town Council: Support.

Transportation Unit: The amended plan based on the measurements is acceptable; however, there is a mistake in terms of the angle shown i.e. 45 degree angles are shown but as one side is 2 metres long and one side 5 metres long an angle of 45 degrees is incorrect. The plan is acceptable in terms of its length and width if the angles are disregarded.

Natural Resources Wales: No observations to make on the application.

Biodiversity Unit: No observations

Trees Unit: There is no Tree Preservation Order, Conservation Area or substantial trees on the land in question. Therefore, there are no concerns regarding trees.

Public Consultation: A notice was posted on the site and nearby residents were informed. Following receipt of amended plans the re- consultation period ended on 1 November 2013 and 26 objections were received. Also, one item of correspondence was received with six signatories and another item of correspondence with three signatories. The reasons for refusal involve the following:-  The access is near a corner, bridge and junction. PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

 Creating an access would affect the entrance opposite the site.  Access to a narrow and busy road.  Poor visibility.  Access can be gained to the field through another access further out of the village.  Many people walk past the site – children to catch buses, parents and children to the nursery etc.  Affects the proposal to paint double yellow lines in front of the access location.  The site is located within a Landscape Conservation Area.  Demolish part of a historic stone wall.  Use of post and wire fence rather than a stone wall is not suitable.  Concern that the site would be another eyesore for the village.  Loss of privacy  Concerns regarding flooding / the need for a flooding assessment.  Concern regarding waste disposal on land which is at risk of flooding and danger of pollution.  The site is listed with the Environment Agency (Natural Resources Wales) for waste disposal.  Concern regarding large lorries carrying waste through the village.  Objection to an access to dispose of waste.  There is a well on part of the field.  Build-up of mud on the road.  A lot of wildlife in the field / many trees and vegetation have already been cut back.  The field is not used for agricultural purposes.  Questioning the name Glandwr for the site.  The application was not advertised adequately.  Incorrect answers on the application form.  Certificate of ownership has been completed incorrectly.  Lack of information in the application.  The proposal is a way, through the back door, of making things easier to obtain other planning permissions – waste excavation, housing etc.

5. Assessment of the material planning considerations:

Visual Considerations 5.1 The proposal would involve creating a new agricultural access with a shale surface. It is intended to place a post and wire fence on the side of the access between the road and the gate and it is considered that finishes of this type would be suitable for an agricultural access. Currently there are trees and a clawdd on the boundary with the road. The proposal would mean the loss of part of the clawdd; however it is not intended to fell any trees as part of the proposal. Despite some visual changes as part of the proposal it is not considered that the proposal would have a detrimental effect PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

on the visual amenities of the area and agricultural accesses such as the one in this application are quite prominent features in rural areas. Therefore, it is not considered that the proposal of creating the access would have a detrimental impact on the area’s visual amenities which is also designated a Landscape Conservation Area. It is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of Policy B10 of the GUDP.

Transportation matters 5.2 The proposal involves creating a new access to a third class road. The Transportation Unit is satisfied with the length and width of the proposed access and it has not raised any concerns about road safety arising from the proposal. It is appreciated that many of the objectors have raised concerns involving road safety, however, as noted the Transportation Unit has no objection to the proposal. Also, given that the proposal is for an agricultural access, it is not considered that there would be heavy use of the proposed access. It is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of Policy CH33 of the GUDP.

Amenities Matters 5.3 The access would be located adjacent to some dwellings. Reference has been made in the letters of objection to the loss of privacy. However, given that the application is for an access it is not considered that privacy matters arise from the proposal. Neither is it considered, in relation to point 2 of Policy B23, that the proposal would be an overdevelopment of the site. Point 3 of Policy B23 involves traffic. It is not considered that the proposal would add significantly to traffic using the adjacent road and the Transportation Unit had no objection to the proposal. Therefore, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of Policy B23 and that it would not cause significant harm to the amenities of the local neighbourhood.

Biodiversity Matters 5.4 As there is a clawdd and trees near the boundary of the site, the Biodiversity Unit, Trees Unit and Natural Resources Wales were consulted on the proposal. Neither the Biodiversity Unit nor Natural Resources Wales had any observations on the application and, therefore, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of biodiversity matters. The Trees Unit has noted that there is no Tree Preservation Order, Conservation Area or any substantial trees on the land in question and therefore there are no concerns regarding trees. Also, as previously noted, there is no intention to fell any trees as part of the proposal. Therefore, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of biodiversity and trees matters.

Flooding matters 5.5 The site lies within a C2 flood zone as defined on the maps referred to in Technical Advice Note 15: Development and Flood Risk. Consequently, Natural Resources Wales were consulted on the application and they had no observations to provide in the context of this proposal. Therefore, it appears that Natural Resources Wales have no concerns relating to the proposal in relation to flooding matters and therefore it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of Policy B29 of the GUDP.

Protected Open Land Matters 5.6 The land which is the subject of the application forms part of larger land that has been designated protected open land in the GUDP. Policy B11 of the GUDP states that proposals that cause significant harm to the function or importance of open spaces between villages/towns or open spaces within towns or villages which are important to the urban/rural character of the area, town or village are refused. Therefore, there is a need to consider here whether this proposal causes harm to the protected open land noted in the UDP and detrimentally affects its function within the village. PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO GWYNEDD (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Only part of the protected open land would create the access and the rest of the land would remain as it is. Although the proposal would involve the loss of part of the open land, the majority of it would remain and therefore it is not considered that there would be significant loss of greenery should the application be approved. Also, it is not considered that approving the proposal would involve a significant loss of land which connects the village with the countryside. The policy explanation asks for the effect of a proposed development on the function or importance of designated open land to be assessed, in respect of the following factors:

a) the effect of the development on the character of the built environment b) the effect of the development on the local landscape c) the need for the development to be located in that area ch) the effect of the development on the ecological, geological or archaeological value of the site d) the effect of the development on the amenities of local residents

It is considered that these matters have been assessed previously in the assessment of the application and an explanation of the need to locate the agricultural access in this area has been given in the description section of this report. Consequently, it is not considered that the proposal would cause significant harm to the function of the open land and the proposal is considered to be acceptable in terms of Policy B11 of the GUDP.

Response to objections 5.7 It is considered that the matters that have arisen as a result of the consultation period have received consideration within the above assessment. However, several letters of objection have referred many times to matters involving bringing waste to the land and concerns that the current application is a means of obtaining permission for something else or alternative use on the land. The current application must be determined on its own merits and in this context the application for an agricultural access is considered acceptable and reasonable in this location. Should any planning applications be submitted for further developments in the future, those planning applications would be considered on their own merits giving consideration to the relevant planning policies at that time.

6. Conclusions:

6.1 This proposal is for an agricultural access and the application must be determined based on the information to hand. It is considered that the site is suitable for an agricultural access and that there are no implications in terms of road safety. It is not considered that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the area’s visual amenities which are within a Landscape Conservation Area. Also, it is not considered that the proposal, given its scale and location, would detrimentally affect the amenities of neighbouring residents.

7. Recommendation:

7.1 To approve – conditions 1. Commence the work within five years 2. Work to be completed in accordance with the amended plans received on 14 October 2013.

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO PWLLHELI (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Number: 7 PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO PWLLHELI (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

Number: 7

Application Number: C13/0901/41/LL Date Registered: 25/10/2013 Application Type: Full - Planning Community: Llanystumdwy Ward: Abererch

Proposal: ERECTION OF SIDE EXTENSION TO EXISTING BUILDING, RELOCATE AND INSTALL NEW SILOS AND PLANT, ALTERATIONS TO THE EXISTING VEHICULAR ACCESS AND CREATE A TURNING AREA AND LANDSCAPING. DEMOLITION OF THE OLD CHEESE PROCESSING BUILDING AND CONVEYOR BELT.

Location: SOUTH CAERNARFON CREAMERIES LTD, CHWILOG, PWLLHELI, LL536SB

Summary of the Recommendation: TO APPROVE SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS

1. Description:

1.1 This application includes a proposal to demolish the creamery’s old cheese processing building along with a conveyor belt which connects it to the more contemporary building. The facility will be relocated by building an extension to the eastern side of the existing contemporary building and relocate the silos and install new equipment nearby. It is also intended to reorganise the access and the internal roads in order to improve the highway safety and to allow lorries to turn entirely within the site. There will also be landscaping work to alleviate the visual effects. The development is located partly within the existing site and partly on adjacent agricultural land.

1.2 It is intended to continue using the old cheese production building as the new facilities are being prepared, ensuring that there will be no interruption to the productivity of the factory during the development process. The old building will be demolished and the site will be cleared once the new building is operational. Reports will be prepared looking at possible contamination of the land once the demolition work has been carried out in order to take appropriate steps to restore the site.

2. Relevant Policies:

2.2 Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan 2009:

STRATEGIC POLICY 16 – EMPLOYMENT

Developments that will strengthen local economies will be approved provided they do not significantly harm the environment, culture or amenities.

POLICY B20 – SPECIES AND THEIR HABITATS THAT ARE INTERNATIONALLY AND NATIONALLY IMPORTANT PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO PWLLHELI (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

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 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 D8 – EXPANSION OF EXISTING ENTERPRISES Proposals to extend/expand/intensify industrial enterprises and existing businesses or other enterprises will be approved if they conform with specific criteria regarding the appropriateness of the existing use in relation to the surrounding area and adjacent uses and how relevant it is to the existing work.

2.3 National Policies: Planning Policy Wales (Fifth edition, November 2012)

7.3.2 : The expansion of existing businesses located in the open countryside should be supported provided there are no unacceptable impacts on local amenity.

Technical Advice Note 12: Design (2009) Technical Advice Note 15: Development and Flood Risk (2004)

3. Relevant Planning History: PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO PWLLHELI (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

3.1 The site has an extensive planning history. Relevant to this application is: C97D/0276/21/CL – New cheese storage – Approved 06.11.13

4. Consultations:

Community Council: Support

Transportation Unit: No objection – suggest conditions involving ensuring suitable access for lorries and acceptable visibility splays.

Footpaths Unit: No response

Environmental Health / No objection Public Protection:

Natural Resources Wales: No objection

Originally objected on grounds of flood risk due to the site being in an area within reach of extensive flooding and therefore a Flood Consequence Assessment was needed.

As a result of this objection, a Flood Consequence Assessment was submitted and it is confirmed that the objection is withdrawn.

Suggest conditions on any consent involving Control of Contamination and Waste and Safeguarding of Bats.

Welsh Water: No response

Biodiversity Unit: Observations – suggest condition regarding bats.

Public Consultation: A notice was placed in the press and on the site, and nearby residents were informed. The consultation period ended on 19 September 2013.

One letter was received expressing concern about the development.

Summary of the planning objections:  Concern about noise affecting a nearby dwelling

Summary of other observations:  Trees need to be planted high enough to offer effective screening  The site of the building to be demolished needs to be cleared quickly and thoroughly – it should be restored to its original natural state.

5. Assessment of the material planning considerations:

Principle of the development 5.1 The proposal involves intensifying an existing industrial enterprise which will comply with the requirements of Policy D8 of the GUDP as it: PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO PWLLHELI (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

 is in a site where the existing enterprise does not create significant harm to the area,  is located within the boundary of the existing site and on land adjacent to it,  is ancillary to the existing enterprise,  is acceptable in terms of its effects on amenities, the environment and roads (see below),  offers sensitive landscaping measures (although it is believed that the current proposal should be improved).

5.2 For the reasons noted above, the proposal is acceptable in principle.

Visual amenities 5.3 The proposed extension would be of similar size, design and materials to the existing building to which it will be connected. It would be approximately 15m high, extending 24m to the east and creating 1520m2 of new surface area. This is compared to the 1570m2 of surface area lost by demolishing the old building. There are no special architectural features to the building that is to be demolished. The development would concentrate the visual effect of the site buildings but demolishing the old buildings would also offer an opportunity for significant improvements to the appearance of another part of the building.

5.4 The silos would be located in a more prominent area than they currently are but as they would be seen with the industrial building to the rear from all public vantage areas, it is not considered that their presence would be unacceptable.

5.5 It is believed that the landscaping shown on the existing plans is insufficient to screen the development, in particular from areas to the east of the site, and it is suggested that any permission should include a condition to submit and agree on a detailed landscaping plan before any work commences.

5.6 Given the above, it is believed that the appearance, size and scale of the development are acceptable and will comply with the requirements of Policies B22, B23, B24 and B27.

General and residential amenities 5.7 Concerns have been raised regarding matters involving noise and about the appearance of the site. The site of the existing cheese work is approximately 120m from the nearest houses with the silos (where the milk will be delivered from the lorries) is approximately 100m away. Following the development, the similar facilities will be approximately 220m from the nearest house and consequently there will be a reduction in any noise emanating from the site in particular as there is no intention to increase production. The improvement in the facilities for lorries, in particular the new roundabout which would allow them to turn without having to reverse would also mean that there would be a reduction in traffic noise as vehicles visit the site.

5.8 Demolishing the old buildings and restoring the land to a tidy condition would be an obvious visual improvement for neighbouring residents, in particular as the new facilities would be further away from the nearest houses and more concealed. The proposal therefore complies with policy B23.

Transport and access matters 5.9 The proposed changes to create an access and the transport system within the site would be a significant improvement on the existing situation. This would be an improvement to road safety, a reduction in intervention on the amenities of PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO PWLLHELI (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

neighbours and would allow for more efficient work within the site. The arrangement is acceptable to the Transportation Unit subject to conditions. The development therefore complies with Policy CH33.

Biodiversity matters 5.10 Although NRW do not anticipate bats being present in the building intended to be demolished, since a full bats survey was not completed they recommend action points when demolishing in case bats are present. The proposal therefore complies with Policy B20.

Sustainability matters 5.11 Concentrating the cheese production activity on one part of the site in a new purpose- built building using new equipment would improve the efficiency of the production process and reduce energy usage and consequently reduce carbon emissions and contribute to realising the objectives of Policy C7. Despite the fact that over 1000m2 of new surface area would be created by the development, as it is an extension to an existing building, there is a need for an Energy Design Advice report in this case.

The economy 5.12 South Caernarfon Creameries is an important part of the economy of the rural area. It creates direct employment opportunities and provides a market for local agricultural produce. The proposed development would improve the efficiency of the company’s operational methods and improve the image of the business for its customers and in doing so the economic sustainability of the business. This would be in keeping with the objectives of Strategic Policy 16 of the UDP.

Flooding matters 5.13 NRW assessed the Flood Consequence Assessment which shows that the risk can be managed and the flood consequences and acceptable in compliance with TAN15. It is, therefore, considered that the proposal is acceptable in relation to this.

Any other considerations 5.14 Due to the size of the proposed development a Linguistic and Community Assessment was required. This concluded that the development would be positive for the situation of the language by means of supporting the economic position of a local business. It is suggested that this is a reasonable analysis of the situation.

Response to the public consultation

6. Conclusions:

6.1 Despite this being a comparatively large development which involves some loss of green agricultural land, the improvements to the environment and local amenities, the improvements to transport and road safety as well as the improvement to the economic sustainability of the business mean that this is a development which, given careful consideration, is acceptable on grounds of local and national policy.

7. Recommendation:

7.1 To approve the application subject to conditions involving:

1. Time - five years. 2. In accordance with the plans received 04/09/2013 and 12/09/2013 3. To agree on external finish and colour PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 25/11/2013 ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO PWLLHELI (CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD)

4. Transport conditions 5. Flooding conditions 6. Submitting a Landscaping Plan 7. A condition to ensure that the old building is demolished once the new building is operational 8. Bats condition