Planning Committee 27 February 2012
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
PLANNING COMMITTEE 27-2-12 Present: Councillor Huw Price Hughes (Chair) Councillor Owain Williams (Vice-chair). Councillors: Elwyn Edwards, Alun Wyn Evans, Gwen Griffith, Louise Hughes, Anne Lloyd Jones, R.L. Jones, Dewi Llewelyn, Dilwyn Lloyd, June Marshall, W. Tudor Owen, Dafydd Roberts, Glyn Roberts and Guto Rhys Tomos. Others invited: Councillors Endaf Cooke, Roy Owen, Penri Jones, Sion Selwyn Roberts, R.H. Wyn Williams, Trevor Edwards, Charles Wyn Jones and John Gwilym Jones (local members). Two members were also present as members of neighbouring wards to take part in discussions in relation to two applications, namely Councillor John Gwilym Jones, (application number C11/1026/39/LL) and R.H. Wyn Williams (application number C12/0011/39/LL). Also present: Gruffydd Morris (Planning Service Manager), Hywel Thomas (Development Control Manager), Rhun ap Gareth (Senior Solicitor), Gareth Roberts (Senior Development Control Engineer – Transport), and Ioan Hughes (Committee Officer). Apologies:- Councillors Endaf Cooke and Roy Owen (local members – application number C11/0828/14/LL), Charles Jones (local member – application number C11/1177/23/R3) 1. DECLARATION OF PERSONAL INTEREST Councillor Dewi Llewelyn (a member of this Planning Committee) declared a personal interest in item 5 on the agenda, planning application number C11/1018/45/LL, as a close friend of his was the owner of ‘Wern yr Wylan’, a house situated behind Hafan. Councillor Huw P. Hughes (a member of this Planning Committee) declared a personal interest in item 5 on the agenda, planning application number C11/1103/15/AM, as he was the secretary of a local angling club, who had issued a request to the Environment Agency to take action because of deficiencies in the sewerage system. Councillor R.H. Wyn Williams (not a member of this Planning Committee), declared a personal interest in item 5 on the agenda, planning application number C11/1026/39/LL, because his wife was related to one of the objectors. Councillor John Gwilym Jones (not a member of this Planning Committee), declared a personal interest in item 5 on the agenda, planning application number C12/0011/39/LL, as he was the applicant. The members were of the opinion that they were prejudicial interests, and they left the room during the discussions on those matters. 2. MINUTES The Chair signed the minutes of the previous meeting of this committee held on 6 February, 2012, as a true record, subject to a change in the wording of the minute of application number C11/0769/18/LL in the English version, so that it noted that the local member was a member of this Planning Committee. 3. 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 no. C11/0828/14/LL – Ysbyty Bryn Seiont, Caernarfon A full application to demolish the existing hospital and erect a 77-bed specialist dementia nursing care facility together with parking spaces, a new laundry building, landscaping, and close one of the existing entrances and create a footpath to the site. a) The Planning Service Senior Manager reported that extensive discussions had been held regarding this application and that the following additional information had been received: A report by Design Commission Wales following their meeting with the Council and the Agent Observations by the Social Services Department The Agent’s response to the Commission’s report The additional observations of the Design Commission on the Agent’s response A report dated 23/2/12 by Professor Bob Woods, Bangor University, commissioned by the Service E-mail messages by the local members, Councillors Roy Owen and Endaf Cooke, stating their support to the development before the additional information had been sent to them. b) In light of the need to consider so much information and the need to hold further discussions with the applicant, the applicant’s representatives agreed to postpone a decision on the application, and it was recommended to defer the application in order to give fair consideration to the matter. Resolved to defer the application to allow time for the additional information to be considered, and for further discussions to be held with the applicant. 2 2. Application number C11/0932/38/LL – Land near Cysgod y Bryn, Llanbedrog Delete condition 15 on permission C10D/0211/38/LL which restricted connecting the sewerage system of a constructed two dwelling development to the sewerage system of Tŷ'n Pwll. a) The Development Control Manager elaborated on the background to the application. b) It was noted that the condition, attached to planning permission C10D/0211/38/LL, restricted the connection of the residential development's sewerage system to Tŷ'n Pwll's sewerage system. Tŷ’n Pwll’s sewerage system was by now the responsibility of Welsh Water, who did not object to the application. c) Taking advantage of the right to speak, the local member, who was not a member of this Planning Committee, noted that serious concerns remained regarding the site’s sewerage system. He added that doubts continued regarding the capacity of the sewerage system to receive additional connections. ch) The member accepted that Welsh Water was now responsible for the whole of Tŷ’n Pwll’s drainage system, and he noted that he expected that any further problems regarding the systems on Tŷ’n Pwll Estate and Cysgod y Bryn Estate would be resolved. d) In response to further observations by the member, it was noted that concerns regarding construction vehicles travelling through Tŷ'n Pwll Estate to the development site would be flagged up with the developer, and that they were outside the discussions of this Planning Committee. RESOLVED to approve the application unconditionally. 3. Application no. C11/1018/45/LL – Hafan, Yr Ala, Pwllheli Erect a new dwelling at the rear of Hafan for the applicant’s family so that Hafan could be used as a granny annexe. a) In accordance with the Planning Officers’ response to the many objections received, and the fact that the meeting of the Planning Committee was being held in Pwllheli, the members of this Committee had visited the site prior to the meeting. b) The Planning Service Senior Manager expanded on the background to the application and referred to the latest changes to the plan, where additional windows on the side and front gable-ends had been eliminated, and windows included in the roof and slate part of the wall which faced the front. He added that additional plans had been received which gave details of the scale of the original plan, in light of concerns that had been stated by individuals, but he did not consider that the difference in the scale due to the method of developing the plans was more than 2.5%, and would not be likely to have misled anyone on the scale of the development. 3 c) He explained that the following additional information had been received after notifying residents of amended elevation plans, which eliminated windows in the roof and windows on the gable-end facing Hafan, and included the installation of one velux window only: 18 correspondences in response to the amended plan, namely 14 objections, one letter of objection with 9 names on it (one of those names had also stated that she had no objections). The objections reiterated original concerns, with doubts being raised regarding the need for an annexe, together with observations that a Section 106 Agreement should be imposed, binding the two houses. Agent – additional plans were submitted, emphasising the scale and showing the surface water disposal system. The response of the Environment Agency on a surface water disposal plan stated – No observations to give on this – it is a mater for Building Control, and although the intention to use SuDS/soakaway to deal with the surface water is welcomed, the development is too small to provide specific comments. It is anticipated that Building Control will expect to see a percolation test to ensure that the land is suitable for a soakaway. A letter was also received on the day of the Committee noting that a covenant existed in relation to the site, restricting development of the site in many ways. In response, it was noted that a covenant was a legal matter between landowners rather than a planning matter. ch) Taking advantage of the right to speak, an objector noted that the development would impair on the privacy of her and her mother – they lived close to the site. She further emphasised that several of the residents of the Erweni and Ala Estates objected to the application, and that a two-storey house would be out of character, given that bungalows occupied the vicinity. She referred specifically to the covenant that restricted the development of the site. She stressed her objection further by noting that the two-storey house would cast awful shadows and would impact on several nearby properties. d) The applicant’s son took advantage of the right to speak and noted that the intention was to prepare a provision to care for his mother in the future, and to have a reasonably sized garden. The following main points were made by him in addition: That extensive discussions had been held before the original application was submitted; That reference had been made to a similar application that had been approved on a nearby site in 2003; That plans for an entrance to the site had been deemed acceptable by the Council’s Highways Department. That the plans had been changed in order to try and comply with the planning officers’ recommendations, and in response to the concerns of nearby residents.