Planning Applications - Cyngor Gwynedd

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO 

PLANNING COMMITTEE 

DYDDIAD: 

DATE: 

29/04/2013 

YSTAFELL GYFARFOD 

FRONDEG MEETING 

ROOM PWLLHELI 

EITEM 

ITEM 

CAIS RHIF 

APPLICATION 

NUMBER 

CYMUNED 

COMMUNITY 

LLEOLIAD 

LOCATION 

1 C12/1323/41/LL Llanystumdwy Ocean Heights Caravan Park, Chwilog 

2 C12/1605/44/LL Porthmadog Tir gyferbyn / Land opposite, Madoc Yacht Club, Pen Cei, 

Porthmadog 

3 C12/1622/39/LL Llanengan Sea Breeze, Lon Sarn Bach, Abersoch, 

4 C13/0028/35/AM Criccieth Tir Gyferbyn/land opposite, Gwesty George IV, Stryd Fawr, 

Criccieth 

5 C13/0094/36/LL Dolbenmaen Gwaith Dwr/Water Works, Garndolbenmaen, Gwynedd 

6 C13/0156/11/LL Bangor 7 Glandwr Terrace, Bangor 

7 C13/0173/16/LL Llandygai 2,3,5-9,11,13,16-21,23,25,26,28,29,32-34, 36-38, Erw Faen, 

Tregarth, Bangor 

8 C13/0203/11/LL Bangor Former Victoria Building Land, Plas Llwyd Terrace, Bangor 

9 C13/0306/30/LL Aberdaron Fferm Garreg, Aberdaron 

10 C12/0495/36/MW Dolbenmaen Llecheiddior Uchaf, Garndolbenmaen

PWYLLGOR CYNLLUNIO DYDDIAD: 29/04/2013 

ADRODDIAD PENNAETH ADRAN RHEOLEIDDIO 

(CYNLLUNIO, TRAFNIDIAETH A GWARCHOD Y CYHOEDD) 

PWLLHELI 

Number: 1 

REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE 

REFER TO A COOLING OFF PERIOD 

DATE OF THE PLANNING 

COMMITTEE MEETING: 

DESCRIPTION AND 

LOCATION OF 

APPLICATION: 

REPORT BY: 

RECOMMENDATION: 

29 April 2013 

Application No. C12/1323/41/LL – application to vary 

condition 5 attached to planning permission 

C11/0986/41/LL to be able to use the site all year for 

holiday purposes 

Head of Regulatory Department 

To accept the recommendation, which is to approve the 

application with conditions. 

1. PURPOSE 

1.1 This application was reported to the Planning Committee on 17 December 2012, and the 

Committee’s intention was to refuse the application, contrary to the recommendation. 

Because, in the opinion of the Head of Regulatory Department, the decision represented a 

substantial risk to the Council, the matter was referred to a cooling off period in line with the 

committee’s standing orders. The purpose of reporting back to the Committee is to highlight 

the planning policy issues, the possible risks and the possible options for the Committee 

before it reaches a final decision on the application. 

1.2 The cooling off period report was submitted before the Committee on 25 February 2013 and 

despite the fact that officers considered that the proposal did not fall within the criteria to 

request a Community and Linguistic Statement (as explained below under the heading 

Planning in order to undertake a linguistic impact assessment at the Council’s 

expenseLanguage), the decision of that Committee was: 

1.3 ‘in view of the special linguistic nature of this community, to defer this application in 

order to undertake a linguistic impact assessment at the Council’s expense of the impact 

of the proposal in the planning application, namely the impact of approving six 

additional weeks a year for holiday use only, on the linguistic and cultural character of 

the community’. 

1.4 At its meeting on 18 March 2013, the Committee agreed that the decision recorded above was 

accurate and a brief was provided for the work. Burum (Owain Wyn Consultancy Services) 

was commissioned to undertake the work. The requirements of the work commissioned were 

set out as follows: 

 

 

Restrict the assessment to what is relevant to the planning application, namely, what 

would be the effect of granting six extra weeks a year for holiday use only on the 

linguistic and cultural character of the community; 

Consideration of the proposed development in the application (namely six extra weeks a 

year for holiday use only) in the context of the relevant local and national planning 

policies (including the Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning and the Welsh 

Langugae) concerning planning and the Welsh language;




PWLLHELI 

 

 

Prepare a Community and Linguistic Statement showing the influence of the development 

in accordance with the requirements as noted in Appendix A of the Supplementary 

Planning Guidance: Planning and the Welsh Language; 

Subject to the results of the above, hold a Community and Linguistic Impact Assessment 

in accordance with the requirements noted in Appendix B of the Supplementary Planning 

Guidance: Planning and the Welsh Language. 

1.5 The Consultant’s full report has been included as Appendix 2 of this report. The summary 

and statements of the report note: 

1. ‘The purpose of this report is to collect evidence to form an opinion of the need to 

undertake an assessment of the possible effect on the linguistic and cultural character of 

the community of Chwilog of the proposal to permit the use of Ocean Height Caravan 

Park for and extra six week period during January and February every year. 

2. In order to make the assessment, information on the community relied on the recently 

published results of the 2011 Census. In the absence of direct knowledge about the usage 

characteristics and bout the site’s consumers, use has been made of information collected 

and published on holiday parks’ occupancy rates and on economic impacts (including 

static caravan parks) in Wales. Some assumptions were made about how many 2 and 3 

bedroom units are on the site and the proportion that are let out by owners to visitors. 

3. The model used predicts that a total of 620 persons will stay during the six weeks in 

question. The usual tourism pattern would mean that the distribution would be clustered 

around the weekend nights. On the basis of an equal spread between six weekends, that 

would mean an average of up to 52 persons on the site over a weekend. At best it can be 

presumed that, of those who come from Wales (10), one or two will be able to speak 

Welsh. A total therefore, of about 50 persons who do not speak Welsh will be visiting the 

area at any given time during the period in question. 

4. No evidence has come to hand about how often these persons would venture out of the 

park to the local village. Considering visitor visiting patterns, it must be assumed that 

they would spend very little time in the nearest village and that they would choose to 

travel to attractions further afield when out of the Park. 

5. Considering that the population aged 3 years and over in Chwilog was around 500 in 

2011, the number of occasions that visitors would visit the village, and, the absence of 

any evidence to the contrary in over 40 years of the existence of the Holiday Park in the 

area, I come to the conclusion that adding and extra 50 persons to the Park who 

don’t speak Welsh would not have a significant negative effect on the Welshness of 

the village. 

6. It is considered, therefore, that the proposal would not affect the balance between 

Welsh / English speakers not would it lead to an absolute or contributory 

deterioration un the number of Welsh speakers. 

7. On the basis of the evidence reviewed and presented in this assessment, the opinion 

is that there are no significant negative economic, social or linguistic effects as a 

result to the proposal to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park. 

2. DESCRIPTION




PWLLHELI 

2.1 This is an application to abolish condition 5 on planning permission C11/0986/41/LL to allow 

a holiday season lasting 12 months. The proposal would therefore extend the occupancy 

period of static caravans on the site, for holiday use only, from ten and a half months to 

twelve months. The existing permission restricts the occupancy of the caravans from 1 March 

to 10 January the following year. It is not intended to add to the number of caravans on the 

site (94 holiday caravans and one for the warden), only to extend the occupancy period for 

holiday use only. 

2.2 To avoid doubt, one of the static caravans on the site has been granted permission under 

application C11/0986/41/LL, to be used by the residential site warden throughout the year, 

and is therefore excluded from this application. 

2.3 There will be no amendments or additions to the existing facilities on the site as a result 

of this application either. 

2.4 The site is located in the countryside near the village of Chwilog, and there are three 

nearby houses located around a farmyard, with the road to the site running past the yard, 

between the houses. 

2.5 The application was submitted to Committee on 17 December 2012, with the officers’ 

recommendation to approve. It was recommended to be approved since the application, with 

relevant conditions, was considered acceptable on local and national policy grounds, and on 

the grounds of any possible impact on the amenities of nearby residents and the wider area. A 

copy of the report and the plans submitted to the Planning Committee on 17 December 2012 

is attached in Appendix 1, which further explain the background of the application. 

3. POLICY CONTEXT 

Planning Policy Wales (Version 5, 2012) and Technical Advice Note 

3.1 Before reaching a decision on this application, it will be necessary to consider National 

Planning Policy which is a material planning consideration in making decisions on planning 

applications. Chapter 11 – ‘Tourism, Sport and Recreation’ of Planning Policy Wales (PPW) 

(5 th edition, 2012) contains the national Planning Policy guidance on the matter. PPW 

highlights that the planning system should seek to promote a sustainable tourism sector which 

enables it to contribute to economic development, conservation, rural diversification, urban 

regeneration and social inclusion – and in doing so; recognising the needs of visitors and 

those of local communities. 

11.1.7 “In rural areas, tourism-related development is an essential element in providing for a 

healthy, diverse, local and national economy. It can contribute to the provision and 

maintenance of facilities for local communities. Here too development should be sympathetic 

in nature and scale to the local environment and to the needs of visitors and the local 

community”. 

3.2 Planning Policy Wales is endorsed by a series of Technical Advice Notes (TAN). The TAN 

which specifically relates to tourism is Note 13: ‘Tourism’ (1997). The TAN suggests that 

there are some cases where a holiday occupancy condition could be more appropriate than 

setting a seasonal occupancy condition. The TAN provides guidance on national planning 

policy in relation to development in rural communities. It emphasises that the planning 

system can respond to changes in tourism without compromising policies to safeguard the 

countryside, and there are cases where a holiday occupancy condition could reconcile these 

two objectives. Although it refers to the conversion of buildings to provide holiday 

accommodation or residential accommodation rather than caravans or chalets, the fact that




PWLLHELI 

priority is given to holiday use rather than residential use, due to its contribution to the rural 

economy and the recognition that this could reduce pressure on using housing for holiday use, 

is something to note in this context. 

3.3 Therefore, from the perspective of national planning policy, developments that are importance 

to the tourism sector, especially in rural areas, are encouraged, subject to reasonable and 

appropriate management. Further to this, the National Policy does not refer to any specific 

period in connection with the holiday season for the use of caravan sites, for holiday use 

purposes. 

Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan and Gwynedd Supplementary Planning Guidance: 

Holiday Accommodation 

3.4 Policy D18 of the Unitary Development Plan is a specific policy which supports applications 

to extend the holiday season of holiday sites to a period of ten and a half months, provided the 

standard of the units is appropriate for holiday use during the winter period. 

3.5 Historically, conditions have been placed on such sites to ensure that only holiday use occurs 

and also, historically, the standard of the units was not suitable for use in the winter. By now, 

the manufacturing of caravans is of a much better standard which means that they are more 

suitable to be used for holiday use all year round. Also, the nature of holidays has become 

more varied in terms of location, season and length. Many more people go on holiday several 

times a year now, more frequently and for varying periods, and not necessarily during the 

summer. 

3.6 The UDP already acknowledges that the seasonal nature of tourism causes significant 

variation in the demand for workers during the year, and has a notable effect on the economic 

prosperity of Gwynedd. Therefore, the Plan encourages extending the demand for 

accommodation beyond the traditional holiday period. The Supplementary Planning 

Guidance: Holiday Accommodation (2011) also refers to using holiday occupancy conditions 

which allows the use of holiday units throughout the year, for holiday purposes, but with 

relevant conditions which ensure that such units are not used for permanent residential use. 

3.7 Although Policy D18 of the UDP states that proposals to extend the occupancy period from 1 

March to 1 January will be approved there is no restriction or guidance in the condition to 

prevent extending the period further. There are many case laws that are clear and supportive 

on this matter. Furthermore, the SPG ‘Holiday Accommodation’ (2011) does not refer to any 

specific holiday period/season, but rather places the emphasis on supporting the principle of 

extending the holiday period, with management of the use through a specific condition. The 

SPG reflects current national policy as it makes no reference to a specific holiday 

period/season. 

Planning and the Welsh Language 

3.8 Policy A1 of the Development Plan is involved with Environmental Assessments or other 

Impact Assessments, such as language, and states that ‘proposals will be refused unless 

sufficient information is provided with the planning application concerning any significant 

likely environmental or other impacts’. 

3.9 In the same manner, Policy A2 of the Development Plan relates to Protecting the Social, 

Linguistic and Cultural Fabric of Communities. This policy requests that ‘proposals that 

would, because of their size, scale or location cause significant harm to the social, linguistic 

or cultural cohesion of communities’ be refused.




PWLLHELI 

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

states that the Planning Authority will request a Community and Language Statement as part 

of a planning application for developments that falls into one or more of the following 

categories:- 

 

 

 

 

a development of five or more residential units on a site/land that has not already 

been designated for residential use in the development plan 

a commercial, industrial or tourist development with an area of 1000m 2 or more 

a development which is likely to lead to the loss of community facilities or job 

opportunities 

a tourism development that will create ten or more holiday units 

3.11 The proposal does not add to the number of holiday units that already have planning 

permission. The proposal is for holiday use only and not for permanent residential use. In 

accordance with the local and national policy it is intended to attach appropriate conditions to 

ensure that the units are only used as holiday accommodation, and not as a main residence. It 

is not considered, therefore, that the proposal falls within the above criteria; therefore there is 

no justification to request a Community and Language Statement. 

3.12 The SPG also states: ‘From time to time, new developments that are substantial in terms of 

their scale and likely impacts on the community may be submitted unexpectedly to the 

Planning Authority. In this respect it is difficult to anticipate the specific size or actual type of 

development that is submitted. Despite this, it is reasonable to suggest that developments that 

are on a larger scale and that are more significant in their likely impact on communities will 

fall into one or more of the following categories, namely ones which:- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

are over and above the needs and aspirations of local communities 

are on unallocated land/sites and are contrary to the policies of the Development 

Plan 

are not part of a local project or strategy 

replicate past tendencies where a damaging effect has occurred on communities 

and language 

are on a large scale in comparison with the level of demand in the local market 

are not likely to contribute to communities in a sustainable manner 

3.13 The assessment of any planning application will be a matter for the Planning Authority and it 

will decide whether an application falls within the above-mentioned definitions. If that is the 

case, developers will be required to prepare a Community and Language Impact Assessment 

which is much more rigorous than a Community and Language Statement…’. 

3.14 It is not considered either that the proposal to extend the holiday season for 6 weeks (from 

10.5 months to 12 months, or from 46 weeks to 52 weeks) is more substantial in terms of its 

scale or its possible impact on the community than what already exists. The proposal cannot 

be reasonable considered to be ‘on a larger scale’ than what is outlined in the above criteria 

which relate to submitting a Community and Language Statement. Therefore it is not 

considered that these criteria are relevant and there are no grounds to request a Community 

and Language Impact Assessment. It is emphasised that there would be appropriate conditions 

to ensure that the units were only used as holiday accommodation and not as a main place of 

residence, and this is an enforceable condition. A condition for keeping a register would 

facilitate monitoring and enforcement arrangements. 

3.15 The findings of the work by the Consultant confirms the above and states ‘on the basis of the 

evidence reviewed and presented in this assessment, the opinion is that there are no




PWLLHELI 

significant negative economic, social or linguistic effects as a result to the proposal to extend 

the opening period of the Caravan Park.’ 

Appeal Cases 

3.16 Several similar appeal cases have been recorded in the volumes of ‘Development Control 

Practice’ (DCP) which also mentions Circular 35/95 (Wales) – The Use of Conditions in 

Planning Permissions’. The Circular states that planning conditions should only be imposed 

because: 

1. They are ‘Essential’ 

2. They are ‘relevant to planning’ 

3. They are ‘relevant to the development which is to be approved’ 

4. They can be enforced 

5. They are ‘Detailed’ 

6. They are 'Reasonable in all other respects’ 

3.17 In accordance with this the DCP notes that such a condition should simply state that the 

accommodation is to be used as holiday accommodation only, and that the reference to date(s) 

should only apply if the unit is unsuitable for holiday use all year round because of its light 

construction. Following on from this, part 24.241 of the DCP states that for these reasons, ‘a 

condition imposed today would be a version of: ‘The units hereby approved shall be used 

only for holiday accommodation and not for permanent residential accommodation’. 

3.18 It is explained in the DCP that ‘better standard to caravans and all-year tourism patterns mean 

that authorities should give more sympathetic consideration to applications to extend the 

opening period approved under existing permissions’. Legal opinion on the application 

confirms that it is acceptable for sites to be open throughout the year, subject to conditions 

which will ensure that the caravans will not be used as permanent living units. This can be 

achieved by imposing a holiday only condition, which is considered acceptable. If a register 

was considered necessary, as a tool to collect information on the main condition, this could be 

reasonable and would not intervene excessively. 

3.19 Relevant conditions for managing the use would therefore include: 

i) The units approved shall be used for holiday accommodation only, and not for 

permanent residential accommodation. 

ii) Owners/operators of the site must keep a current register of the names of all 

owners/residents of each individual caravan on the site, together with their main 

address, and this information should be available to the Local Planning Authority at any 

reasonable time. 

3.20 Recent Appeals have been permitted on the same type of applications, and examples are 

attached as Appendices 3 – 7 with this summary: 

3.21 Caerwys Caravan Park, Caerwys (June 2012) (APP/A6835/A/12/2169310) 

Approve an appeal to change the holiday season condition of a caravan site for a condition 

stating that the caravans were to be used as holiday accommodation only, and not as any 

person’s main place of residence. The Inspector was satisfied that the condition suggested 

was clear in its restriction and therefore abolished the holiday season condition and replaced it 

with a condition that the caravans were only used as holiday accommodation, and not as any 

person’s main place of residence.




PWLLHELI 

3.22 The appeal in Caerwys stated that there was no need to keep a register since doing so would 

be too laborious. Following legal advice, there was disagreement with the Inspector’s 

decision in the case of Caerwys not to include a condition requesting that a register be kept. 

There are several cases (see below) where Planning Inspectors have used the condition of 

keeping registers in their decisions. It is considered that such a condition is reasonable and 

meets the six criteria referred to above with regard to the use of planning conditions. It is also 

believed that keeping a register would be a means of collecting information on the condition 

which restricts the use to holiday use only. To this end, it is considered that such a condition 

is acceptable and would not cause excessive interference, and that it is therefore appropriate 

to impose such a condition on this application. 

3.23 Coppice Leisure Park, Ockeridge, Wichenford, Worcester (March 2012) 

(APP/J1860/A/11/2165323) – Inspector of the opinion that a condition stipulating holiday 

accommodation only and no other residential use is sufficient, and that a condition noting 

dates or a specific period was not required. Also suggested a condition for keeping a register. 

3.24 The Croft, Upper Denbigh Rd, St Asaph (December 2010) (APP/R6830/A/10/2125079) 

Approve an appeal to install 21 ‘lodges’ together with associated works subject to relevant 

conditions including a condition on holiday use only and not using the units as a person’s 

main place of residence. Also requested that a current register be kept. 

3.25 Llwyn Afon Caravan Park, Llanrhaeadr, Denbigh (June 2010) 

(APP/R6830/A/10/2125469) 

Approve an appeal for 8 static units to replace 12 touring units without a 10.5 month 

condition, subject to conditions including holiday use only, not using the units as a person’s 

main place of residence and keeping a current register. 

3.26 The Nurseries Garden Centre, Stockton Rd, South Kilvington (July 2008) 

(APP/G2713/4/08/2064528) 

Approve an appeal for 18 caravans/log cabins subject to conditions including holiday use 

only, not using the units as a person’s main place of residence and keeping a current register. 

3.27 Following the appeal decision for Caerwys other Planning Authorities in North Wales were 

contacted, to see how they intended to obtain management of caravan sites. The intention of 

the Authorities who gave a clear opinion on the matter was to consider continuing using the 

condition on keeping a register, with the condition on holiday use only. 

4. RISKS TO THE COUNCIL OF REFUSING THE APPLICATION 

4.1 As outlined above, refusing the application would undermine local and national policies in 

respect of using static caravan sites for holiday use all year round. 

4.2 Refusing the application would create inconsistency in decisions on applications in respect of 

using static caravan sites for holiday use all year round. The Council in the past has approved 

other similar applications, as they were not considered to be contrary to local or national 

policies, and as there were specific conditions to control use. These include C12/0598/44/LL 

– Penrhyn Farm, Treflys, Porthmadog; C12/0969/24/LL – White Tower Caravan Park, Saron, 

Caernarfon; C12/1312/39/LL – Tyddyn Talgoch Uchaf, Bwlchtocyn, and a list of them is 

provided in Appendix 8. 

4.3 There is a risk of the application being called in by the Welsh Government to be determined. 

As well as the risk of individual applications being called in, the Welsh Government has 

powers to intervene formally in the way the Council provides the Planning Service.




PWLLHELI 

4.4 The risk of refusing the application without evidence introduces the risk that an appeal will be 

submitted to the Planning Inspectorate, with the likelihood that the appeal would be approved. 

This would also incur the risk of substantial financial costs against the Council for refusing an 

application without evidence. The case of Wern Manor is an example of where an application 

was refused contrary to the recommendation and without supporting evidence, and one of the 

reasons for refusal included the impact on the Welsh language. The application was approved 

on appeal and this cost the Council over £50,000. The Council was also heavily criticised by 

the Inspectorate for attempting to provide evidence to support the reasons for refusal, after the 

decision had been made. There would also be the risk of a complaint of maladministration to 

the Ombudsman. 

4.5 Due to the work that has been commissioned the report which has been submitted by the 

consultant provides evidence there are no significant negative economic, social or linguistic 

effects as a result to the proposal to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park. Therefore, 

the applicant would be able to use this evidence to support his case in an appeal situation. 

5. OPTIONS TO THE COMMITTEE 

5.1 The options available to the Committee in determining the application include the following, 

where the level of risk to the Council is also identified. 

1. Refuse on the grounds of (starting with the greatest risk): 

a) Linguistic and community impact, as well as the impact on services, based on the 

concern that people would live in the holiday caravans permanently. Refusing on 

these grounds and without evidence would generate substantial risk to the Council, 

with the further risk of costs against the Council which could amount to tens of 

thousands of pounds if the application went to appeal. The work undertaken by the 

consultant is evidence that there would be no effect. 

b) The Committee’s belief that approving a year-round holiday period would be a longer 

period than the 10.5 months noted in Policy D18, and that the proposal would 

therefore be contrary to this policy. There is no planning basis or justification for 

doing this, since planning conditions ensure appropriate management of the use, and 

it therefore creates a risk to the Council, with the further risk of costs against the 

Council if the application went to appeal. 

c) The impact on residential amenities resulting from the increase in the holiday period. 

A lesser financial risk associated with this, but there would still be a possibility of an 

appeal. It would also be difficult to justify this type of reason for refusal, as there is 

already planning permission for holiday use for a period of 10 and a half months per 

year. 

5.2 Therefore, it must be realised that there are significant risks associated with refusing the 

application, which include substantial financial risks. In order to ensure that the 

Council avoids the above risks, the recommendation is: 

2. To approve according to the recommendation in the report (Appendix 1) with 

specific conditions to include: 

i) The units approved shall be used for holiday accommodation only, and not for 

permanent residential accommodation.




PWLLHELI 

ii) 

Owners/operators of the site must keep a current register of the names of all 

owners/residents of each individual caravan on the site, together with their main 

address, and this information should be available to the Local Planning 

Authority at any reasonable time. 

6. APPENDICES 

Appendix 1 – A copy of the report that was submitted to the Planning Committee on 17 December 

2012 

Appendix 2 – Statement of the Need for an Assessment of the Possible Effect of the Proposal on the 

Linguistic and Cultural Character of the Community. Burum (Owain Wyn Consultancy Services). 

April 2013. 

Appendix 3 – A copy of the appeal decision in respect of Caerwys Caravan Park 

Appendix 4 – A copy of the appeal decision in respect of Coppice Leisure Park 

Appendix 5 – A copy of the appeal decision in respect of ‘The Croft’, St Asaph 

Appendix 6 – A copy of the appeal decision in respect of Llwyn Afon Caravan Park 

Appendix 7 – A copy of the appeal decision in respect of The Nurseries Garden Centre 

Appendix 8 – Applications for changing the occupancy period of caravan parks 1/1/12 – 7/12/12




PWLLHELI 

Rhif: 1 

APPENDIX 1 

Number: 1




PWLLHELI 

Application Number: C12/1323/41/LL 

Date Registered: 04/10/2012 

Application Type: Full - Planning 

Community: 

Llanystumdwy 

Ward: 

Llanystumdwy 

Proposal: 

Location: 

APPLICATION TO VARY CONDITION 5 ATTACHED TO PERMISSION 

NO. C11/0986/41/LL TO BE ABLE TO USE THE SITE ALL YEAR FOR 

HOLIDAY PURPOSES. 

OCEAN HEIGHTS CARAVAN PARK, CHWILOG, GWYNEDD, LL53 6NQ 

1. Description: 

1.1 This is an application to abolish condition 5 on planning permission C11/0986/41/LL to 

allow a holiday season lasting 12 months. This proposal therefore extends the occupancy 

period of static caravans on the site from ten and a half months to twelve months. The 

existing permission restricts the occupancy of the caravans from 1 March to 10 January the 

following year. It is not intended to add to the number of caravans on the site (94 holiday 

caravans and one for the warden), only to extend the occupancy period. 

1.2 There will be no amendments or additions to the existing facilities on the site as a result of 

this application either. 

1.3 The site is located in the countryside near the village of Chwilog, and there are three nearby 

houses located around a farmyard, with the road to the site running past the yard, between the 

houses. 

2. Relevant Policies: 

2.1 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and paragraph 2.1.2 of 

Planning Policy Wales emphasise that planning decisions should be in accordance with the 

Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Planning considerations 

include National Planning Policy and the Unitary Development Plan. 

2.2 Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan 2009: 

POLICY 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 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 D18 – STATIC HOLIDAY CARAVAN AND HOLIDAY CHALET SITES – 

EXTENDING THE SEASON 

Proposals for extending the holiday season of static holiday caravan sites (single and double 

units) and holiday chalet sites to a period of ten and a half months will be approved provided 

the standard of the units is appropriate for human habitation during the winter period. 

Supplementary Planning Guidance: Holiday Accommodation (July, 2011)




PWLLHELI 

2.3 National Policies: 

Planning Policy Wales (Fifth edition, November 2012) 

Chapter 11 Tourism, Sport and Recreation 

11.3.3 Authorities need to consider the effect of sport and recreation activities on any 

neighbouring facilities in terms of noise, light, traffic and in the case of larger developments, 

ease of access and the safety of residents, users and the public 

Technical Advice Note 13 – Tourism 

Paragraph 14 – Authorities should give sympathetic consideration to applications to extend 

the opening period permitted under existing permissions. 

3. Relevant Planning History: 

3.1 C04D/0224/41/LL – variation of condition 3 on consent 3/4/1396A, condition 1 on consent 

34/67/1396C and condition 8 of consent 34/67/1396E to allow ten and a half month use of 

static caravans. Approved 2005. 

3.2 C04D/0538/41/TC – use of land for boat storage, football ground and children's play area 

ancillary to existing static caravan park. Approved 2005. 

3.3 C09D/0247/41/LL – extend site boundary to re-site five existing static caravans and site six 

new static caravans together with environmental improvements. Withdrawn. 

3.4 C11/0986/41/LL – application to relocate 12 static caravans and siting four additional 

caravans on land that forms an extension to the existing caravan park, to include a 

landscaping scheme and re-siting of boat storage area and the use of one of the existing 

caravans as the manager’s residence. 

4. Consultations: 

Community/Town Council: 

Transportation Unit: 

Fire Officer: 

Public Protection Unit: 

Strong objections, as approving this application could set a very 

dangerous precedent that open the door to every other caravan park 

to submit a similar application. It is understood that approval has 

already been granted to an application in the Treflys area. The 

approval of this type of application could have a detrimental impact 

on communities. 

No detrimental impact on any road. 

Awaiting a response. 

During the visit it was noted that the site was of a high standard. 

However, some aspects of the conditions have led to a breach of the 

licence as noted in a letter dated 01-12-2011 to the applicant through 

the agent Charles F Jones. 

The applicant is required to comply with the conditions noted above. 

The site will be expected to comply with the Model Standards 1989. 

If this application were to be approved, the applicant would be 

required to conform to the additional licensing conditions relating to 

extending the holiday occupancy period throughout the year.




PWLLHELI 

The existing site licence, number 406 dated 12-01-1979, requires 

amending. 

Public Consultation: 

A notice was placed on the site and nearby residents were 

informed. The advertisement period ended on 8 November 

2012 and four letters were received objecting to the 

application on the following grounds:- 

Impact on the quality of family life due to the 

increase in traffic, noise and pollution 

Would end the 3-month period of peace and 

tranquillity that currently exists 

Vehicle lights are likely to affect the amenities in 

front of the property, reducing privacy and spoiling 

the peace and tranquillity which is enjoyed during the 

quiet period 

 

The access statement is misleading and threatening 

as it mentions an appeal in Caerwys 

Additional movements would have a likely 

detrimental impact on the residents of the three 

nearby properties. 

 

 

Access statement contravenes the Supplementary 

Planning Guidance: Holiday Accommodation 

Although there is ten and a half months approval, it 

is only in operation for nine months, is residential 

status intended 

As well as the above-mentioned objections, objections were 

submitted that were not valid planning objections, which 

included: 

 

 

The caravan owners have no objection to the existing 

occupancy restriction. 

Wish to see a separate access road created for the 

caravan park 

Accuracy issues: 

A question regarding the accuracy of the land 

ownership map and ownership of the access road. 

5. Assessment of the material planning considerations: 

Principle of the development 

5.1 As shown above, the Unitary Development Plan has a specific policy which supports 

applications to extend the holiday season of holiday sites to a period of ten and a half months, 

provided the standard of the units is appropriate for human habitation during the winter 

period.




PWLLHELI 

5.2 Historically, conditions have been placed on such sites to ensure that only holiday use occurs 

and also, historically, the standard of the units was not suitable for use in the winter. Also, the 

nature of holidays has become more varied in terms of location, season and length. Many 

more people go on holiday several times a year now, more frequently and for varying periods, 

and not necessarily during the summer. 

5.3 The UDP already acknowledges that the seasonal nature of tourism causes significant 

variation in the demand for workers during the year, and has a notable effect on the economic 

prosperity of Gwynedd. Therefore, the Plan encourages extending the demand for 

accommodation beyond the traditional holiday period. The Supplementary Planning 

Guidance: Holiday Accommodation (2011) also refers to using a holiday occupancy condition 

which allows the use of holiday units throughout the year but with relevant conditions which 

ensure that such units are not used for permanent residential use. 

5.4 Although Policy D18 of the UDP states that proposals to extend the occupancy period from 1 

March to 1 January will be approved, there is no restriction or guidance in the condition to 

prevent extending the period further. There are many case laws that are clear and supportive 

on this matter. 

5.5 One of the static caravans on the site has received approval under application 

C11/0986/41/LL to be used by the residential site warden throughout the year, and it is 

therefore excluded from this application. 

Visual amenities 

5.5 This proposal will not make the existing situation worse in relation to the impact of the static 

caravans on the environment as they are already located on the site throughout the year and it 

is not intended to increase their number. Therefore, it is believed that the proposal is 

acceptable in relation to the requirements of Policy B23 of the UDP (safeguarding the 

amenities of the local neighbourhood). 

General and residential amenities 

5.6 It is not believed that extending the occupancy period of the caravans will have a significant 

impact on the amenities of neighbouring residents bearing in mind that the site already has 

approval to be used for 10½ months and that it only adds an extra month and a half to the 

existing occupancy period. As the site is unlikely to be full to capacity during this period it is 

not considered that the proposal would cause significant harm to the amenities of local 

residents, and that the additional disturbance, if any, would be minimal. It must also be 

considered that nothing in respect of planning control prevents the caravan owners from 

visiting the units for maintenance purposes during the six weeks when they cannot be 

occupied, and therefore the potential of journeys back and forth already exists. On this basis, 

it is therefore considered that the application is acceptable in terms of the requirements of 

Policy B23 as above. 

Transport and access matters 

5.7 The application does not involve any increase in the number of static caravans, only an 

extension to the occupancy period. It is not believed that the extra month and a half in the 

caravan occupancy period would lead to a significant escalation in the use of the roads 

network serving the site. The Transportation Unit has no concerns regarding the proposal. 

Therefore, it is considered that the proposal complies with Policy CH33. 

Response to the consultation




PWLLHELI 

5.8 Concerns have been raised by the Community Council that approving this application could 

set a very dangerous precedent which would open the door to every other caravan park in the 

county to submit a similar application. The approval of this type of application could have a 

detrimental impact on communities. However, the holiday use on the site could be controlled 

by means of new conditions to ensure that the units are not used as permanent dwellings. A 

number of sites within the County have already received approval (with relevant conditions) 

for this type of development. 

5.9 In relation to the objection regarding the impact on the quality of family life due to the 

increased traffic, noise and pollution, and that the application is likely to eliminate the three 

months of peace and tranquillity that currently exist, it is not considered that extending the 

current approved period of ten and a half months by six weeks would have a significant or 

unacceptable impact on the amenities of nearby residents. 

5.10 It is not considered that passing vehicle lights is likely to affect the amenities at the front of 

the property by reducing privacy and spoiling the peace and tranquillity which is enjoyed 

during the quiet period, as the additional disturbance, if any, would be minimal. 

5.11 Additional movements would have a likely detrimental impact on the residents of the three 

nearby properties. It is considered that this concern has been assessed under the headings 

‘General and Residential Amenities’ and ‘Transportation and Access Matters’ above. 

5.12 The objection also notes that the access statement contravenes the Supplementary Planning 

Guidance: Holiday Accommodation, and that it is also misleading and threatening as it 

mentions an appeal in Caerwys. There is no reference as to why it is considered that the 

access statement contravenes the SPG. The following observation was also made: Although 

there is ten and a half months approval, it is only in operation for nine months, is residential 

status intended These points are addressed below: 

5.13 The Supplementary Planning Guidance: Holiday Accommodation deals with Holiday 

Occupancy Conditions in paragraphs 45-47, and paragraphs 46 and 47 state: 

‘Although extending the holiday season is something which should be encouraged, this needs 

to be balanced with the need to ensure that self-service accommodation and static holiday 

caravans and chalets cannot be used as permanent residences. Therefore, appropriate 

holiday occupancy conditions will be attached to every planning permission granted for 

proposals for self-service accommodation and static holiday caravans and chalets’. 

5.14 In accordance with the Supplementary Planning Guidance and in the case of static holiday 

caravans and holiday chalets, the relevant condition would be: 

‘The accommodation will be used for holiday purposes only and will not be occupied as a 

person’s sole or main place of residence.’ 

5.15 As well as the above-mentioned objections, objections were submitted which were not valid 

planning objections, which included: 

 

 

The caravan owners have no objection to the existing occupancy restriction – this is not a 

relevant planning matter. 

Wish to see a separate access road created for the caravan park – this is not relevant to 

this application. 

5.16 These are immaterial and irrelevant to this application.




PWLLHELI 

5.17 There was also a question relating to the accuracy of the land ownership map and ownership 

of the access road. By now a new land ownership map has been received which supersedes 

the original map that was questioned. 

6. Conclusions: 

6.1 Despite the objections to the application, it is believed that the application, subject to 

conditions, is acceptable on policy grounds and on the grounds of its impact on the amenities 

of nearby residents and the wider area. All material considerations were addressed when 

determining this application, but this has not changed the recommendation. 

7. Recommendation: 

7.1 To approve – abolish the relevant conditions to permit a 12-month a year holiday 

period, subject to imposing a holiday caravans condition stipulating holiday use only. 

APPENDIX 2




PWLLHELI 

Cyngor Gwynedd Council 

APPLICATION NUMBER C/12/1323/41/LL 

OCEAN HEIGHTS CARAVAN PARK, CHWILOG 

CHANGE OF CONDITION IN ORDER TO USE THE PRESENT STATIC 

CARAVAN SITE FOR HOLIDAYS ALL THE YEAR ROUND 

STATMENT OF THE NEED FOR AN ASSESSMENT OF THE POSSIBLE 

EFFECT OF THE PROPOSAL ON THE LINGUISTIC AND CULTURAL 

CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY 

gwasanaethau ymgynghorol 

Owain Wyn 

consultancy services 

10A Palace Street 

CAERNARFON 

Gwynedd 

LL55 1RR 

post@burum.co.uk April 2013

STATMENT OF THE NEED FOR AN ASSESSMENT OF THE 

POSSIBLE EFFECT OF THE PROPOSAL ON THE LINGUISTIC AND 

CULTURAL CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY 

Contents 

Introduction 1 

Characteristics of the Proposal 2 

Methodology 3 

Economic and Social Context 6 

Policy Context 10 

Assumptions about Users 12 

Proposal’s Impact 17 

Conclusions and the Statement 20 

Summary and General Conclusion 25 

Appendix 1. Lower Layer Super Output Characteristics 

(Llanystumdwy Community) 

27 

Appendix 2 Visitor Assumptions Model 30 

Table 1 Statistical Characteristics of the Community 7 

Table 2 Ocean Heights’ 2013 Letting Prices 15 

Figure 1 2011 Census Output Areas 7

Figure 2 Lower Layer Super Output Area 

10 

APPLICATION NUMBER C/12/1323/41/LL 

OCEAN HEIGHTS CARAVAN PARK, CHWILOG 

CHANGE OF CONDITION IN ORDER TO USE THE PRESENT 

STATIC CARAVAN SITE FOR HOLIDAYS ALL THE YEAR ROUND 

STATMENT OF THE NEED FOR AN ASSESSMENT OF THE 

POSSIBLE EFFECT OF THE PROPOSAL ON THE LINGUISTIC AND 

CULTURAL CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY 

INTRODUCTION 

8. I was appointed by Gwynedd Council on 15 March 2013 to form an opinion, in the form of a 

statement, on whether an assessment should be undertaken on the possible effects of the 

proposal on the linguistic and cultural character of the community of Chwilog. 

9. I am a Business, Planning and Regeneration consultant, a Chartered Planner and a corporate 

member of the RTPI, the Royal Town Planning Institute. I am also a Management Partner in a 

small self catering accommodation business on Anglesey and am fairly familiar with how a 

holiday accommodation business works. 

10. The requirements of the assessment were set out in the letter of appointment, namely: 

I. Restrict the assessment to what is relevant to the planning application namely: what 

would be the effect of granting 6 extra weeks a year for holiday use only on the 

linguistic and cultural character of the community; 

II. 

Consideration of the proposed development in the application (namely 6 extra weeks a 

year for holiday use only) in the context of the relevant local and national planning 

policies (including Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning and the Welsh 

Language) concerning planning and the Welsh Language.

III. Prepare a Community and Linguistic Statement showing the influence of the 

development in accordance with the requirements and as noted in Appendix A of 

the Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning and the Welsh Language. 

IV. The work to be completed by not later than 5 April 2013. 

11. The report is set out under the following headings: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Characteristics of the Proposal; 

Methodology; 

Economic and Social Context; 

Policy Context; 

Linguistic Considerations; 

Findings; 

Conclusions and the Statement 

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROPOSAL 

12. Ocean Heights Caravan Park is one of seven sites in North Wales and Cheshire in the ownership 

of Thonely Leisure Ltd. Ocean Heights operates under planning permission which gives the 

operator the right to provide and let on the site 94 static caravan pitches and a pitch for one 

caravan for the warden. The operator also holds a permit for the same number under the 

Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960. 

13. Although the operator has planning permission to open for 10 and a half months at present, 

advertisements state that the site is open between the beginning of March and the end of 

November.

14. The site is about 200 metres to the south of the village of Chwilog. The entrance to the site, 

which encompasses three fields, is from the B4354 and along the road and through the farm of 

Pen y Bryn. There are two other dwellings at the entrance to the site itself. 

15. The site is a mixture of two and three bed roomed caravans and a mixture of caravans in third 

party ownership for their own use and some of which are kept for letting. Some are let directly 

by the Park operator, Thorley Leisure. 

METHODOLOGY 

16. It is generally recognised that it is not easy to measure and appraise the impact of a proposed 

development on the economic and social characteristic of a community at the best of times. An 

assessment must be made of the changes to the community that can be attributed to one 

specific intervention. Those changes could be direct and / or indirect. 

17. In this case, we are also trying to speculate what could happen in terms of the nature of the 

impact. That is, some assumptions must be made as to the nature of the impact (that is the 

scale, constitution and the language of the prospective caravan users for the extra six weeks in 

question) when the information is not available beforehand. We must also make some 

assumptions about the scale and nature of the interaction between the occupiers and the local 

community e.g.: 

How often would they come into contact with the community 

In what language would that interaction be 

What would be the influence and the impact of that interaction on the language 

and culture of the community 

How long lasting would that influence and impact be

18. When making assumptions care must be taken not to introduce prejudices and therefore I will 

try to detail the assumptions behind the considerations. 

19. The brief asks me to base my opinion by following the questions that are to be answered in 

Appendix A of the Supplementary Planning Guidance - Planning and the Welsh Language. These 

have been compiled to help an applicant to prepare relevant planning applications. They have 

not been formulated therefore with this sort of ex ante appraisal in mind and care must be 

taken when using them. 

20. The Appendix asks for the following details to be presented: 

1. General – How will the development:- 

i. Conform with local and national strategies / plans; 

ii. 

Meet local needs in the community; 

iii. Be likely to protect or add to community facilities; 

iv. 

Be sustainable in the long term; 

iv. 

Be likely to get the support of the local community; 

2. Population characteristics – Would the development: - 

i. Attract immigrants to the area and what would be the effect of that; 

ii. 

Contribute to emigration from the area and what would the effect of that be 

3. Residential – would the development: 

i. Reflect the need for local housing including affordable housing; 

ii. 

Be similar to other developments that were completed in the last five years; If 

so, what is the cumulative effect 

4. Employment – would the development: 

i. Require skilled labour which is available locally;

ii. 

Create jobs for the local workforce; 

iii. Attract workers from outside the County; 

iv. Create new opportunities for the workforce; 

v. Lead to further investment; 

vi. Contribute to an increased use of Welsh in the local area through visible 

methods such as bilingual signs and adverts, promoting understanding of 

Welsh amongst the workforce 

5. Mitigating Measures – Would it be possible to mitigate negative effects 

21. Where relevant, it was also decided to use the following supplementary questions (mainly 

derived from the Framework which is used in the Community and Linguistic Impact Assessment) 

to add value to the above requirements): 

I. Is the development likely to lead to an increase / decrease in the population that could 

affect the balance between Welsh / English speakers (in a negative / positive way) 

or lead to an absolute or contributory deterioration in the number of Welsh 

speakers 

II. 

Could the development lead to a permanent increase in the proportion of non Welsh 

speaking homes 

III. Could the development lead to the loss of Welsh speaking homes 

IV. Could the development lead to social tensions, conflict or serious divisions within the 

Welsh speaking community 

V. Could the development lead to changes in the local Welsh traditions / culture 

22. The findings are then summarized and evaluated and an opinion formed on the likely effect on 

the linguistic and cultural characteristics of the community.

23. In order to make the evidence grounds more robust, information on the nature of the use of the 

units and the site were asked for from the prospective developer through his agent. The 

following information was asked for: 

Monthly occupancy rates for the last 3 years; 

The number of 2 and 3 bedroomed units on site; 

The proportion of units in ownership and let for rent; 

The number and nature of employment on the site; 

The number and nature of supply service contracts and the proportion that 

come from local suppliers. 

24. Unfortunately Thornley Leisure Ltd did not co-operate in giving information within the timescale 

for the study. Assumptions had to be made on the basis of published information on the holiday 

and static caravan parks’ sector in Wales. 

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL CONTEXT 

25. The purpose of this section is to present a picture of the community affected by the 

development (the intervention). 

26. The data used is mainly from the 2011 Population Census for the Output Areas. The Output 

Areas are the lower layer in terms of the geographical areas used to present statistics. In 

Chwilog’s case the village is in two Output Areas (WO0000454 a WO0000457). Maps showing 

the boundaries of these Areas are in Figure 1.

Figure 1 The Output Areas 

27. It can be seen that Ocean Heights Caravan Park site and about half of Chwilog is within 

WO0000454, whilst part of middle Chwilog (around the Madryn Pub and the bus stop), is in 

WO0000457. That area also contains rural parts around Chwilog and Llanystumdwy but not the 

larger part of the village of Llanystumdwy itself. Neither does it include Hafan y Môr Holiday 

Park, namely the substantial caravan park and holiday cabins situated nearby to the south of the 

A497. 

28. Table 1 overleaf presents some key characteristics of these two Output Areas. 

Table 1 Statistical Characteristics of the Community

Characteristic WO0000454 WO0000457 Total Gwynedd 

Number of dwellings 148 163 311 

Dwellings without 

9.5% 12.3% 

regular inhabitants 

Residential Caravan or 

1 3 4 

temporary dwelling 

Regular Inhabitants 346 294 640 

Born in Wales 79.5% 75.5% 66.8% 

Born in England 18.8% 19.7% 27.4% 

Number of the 

271 224 495 

population 3yrs old or 

over who can speak 

Welsh 

Percentage of the 

81.1% 78.6% 65.4% 

population 3yrs old or 

over who can speak 

Welsh 

Percentage of 

51.3% 44.1% 45.1% 

employees aged 16 - 74

who are economically 

active (full time and 

part time) 

Percentage aged 16 - 74 

14.6% 18.5% 12.3% 

yrs old who are 

economically active 

(self employed) 

Percentage of those 

1.2% 1.4% 3.6% 

aged 16 – 74 who are 

economically active (out 

of work) 

Percentage of homes 

without deprivation 

across the 4 defined 

dimensions. 1 47.8% 43.3% 40% 

Percentage of homes 

3.7% 5.6% 5.7% 

with deprivation across 

at least 3 of the 

dimensions. 

1 The four dimensions are Employment (members without work or long time sickness); Education (members 

without a level 2 qualification or higher); Health (members with poor or very poor health or long term health 

problems); Home (overcrowding or no central heating)

Source: Census 2011 

29. The linguistic figures show a small increase in the numbers without skills in Welsh from 68 in 

2001 to 88 in 2011. 

30. There are some kinds of data that are not available for the Output Area layer. Therefore the 

Lower Layer Super Output Area which flocculates geographical communities with a minimum of 

1,000 population and 400 dwellings is also used. In this case it includes two other Output Areas 

of the rural area to the north as well as the two named above (see Figure 2). 

Figure 2 Lower Layer Super Output Area. 

31. Appendix 1 presents graphs which show some of the economic and demographic characteristics 

of this wider area. 

32. 89% of the Primary School children come from Welsh speaking homes. 

33. The general picture presented by these statistics suggest, compared with the profile for 

Gwynedd, that the community is comparatively healthy, economically, socially and linguistically.

POLICY CONTEXT 

34. It is not intended to repeat the scope and analysis of the planning policy context given in the 

officer’s report to the Planning Committee on 25 February 2013. Rather, for completeness, 

consideration is given to some other aspects of the planning policy context and some other 

relevant policy fields. 

Wales’ Planning Policy (version 5, 2012) 

35. As well as tourism, the following fields are considered important from the point of view of their 

effect on the community. 

Sustainable development 

36. The land use planning system should consider the needs and benefits of Welsh and by doing so 

could contribute to its welfare. 

37. Promote the reuse of land already developed and land that is being under used. 

Economic Development 

38. Planning authorities should deal with economic development applications in a positive and 

constructive way. In deciding on applications for the use of economic land, authorities should 

consider the likely economic advantages of the development, using robust evidence. 

39. 11.1.2 of the Welsh Government’s Objectives for tourism are: 

To promote sustainable tourism in Wales, promoting local prosperity and supporting 

community welfare and participation whilst safeguarding and appreciating natural 

heritage and culture

Technical Advice Note No 6 – Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities 

40. Having reviewed this document there is no further guidance concerning this type of 

development. 

Llŷn Regeneration Plan 2007 - 13 

41. The Plan notes that 25% of the wards in Wales suffer from Access to Services depravation. Eight 

of these are in Llŷn and Llanystumdwy ward is one of those eight. It is included amongst what is 

know as Communities of Need. Amongst the action priorities to spread economic prosperity is 

developing tourism of a higher standard. 

ASSUMPSIONS ABOUT USERS 

42. As mentioned in the above section on methodology, some assumptions had to be made about 

the characteristics of the visitors who make use of the caravan park. Specifically, it is necessary 

to hypothesize about the users that could be using the place during the six possible extra 

weeks, should the application to amend the conditions be granted. 

43. In the absence of specific information on the park, general information about the characteristics 

of the sector included in reports on the tourism industry is used. 

44. There are two main sources: 

 

A report commissioned by the British Holiday and Home Parks Association (BHHPA) and Visit 

Wales, published in 2011. 

TNS Report on the use of holiday accommodation in Wales, published in May 2012. 

Assessment of the Economic Impact of the Holiday Parks Industry

45. The first report assesses the economic impact of holiday parks on the economy in Wales. It is 

based on the following assumptions and it notes some findings relevant to this study: 

 

Ocean Heights was included as one of the 43 holiday parks that took part in the 

study and one of 11 parks in Wales which included a mixture of static units in 

ownership and static units for renting out. 

There are around 72,000 pitches in holiday parks in Wales with just under 45,000 

(62.5%) static unit sites in ownership and around 6,000 (8.3%) static unit sites for 

rent (the rest are units for touring vehicles); 

 

There are around 2.7 million overnight trips to holiday parks in Wales, generating 

£381 million to the Welsh economy. 98% of trips and 96% of the spend comes from 

visitors from Britain. 

Trips to holiday parks has risen by 9% over the period 2008 – 2011; 

 

 

16 out of 517 interviews were conducted with visitors to Ocean Heights; 

From the total of 517 interviews, 240 were visitors in static units in ownership, with 

36% from Wales. Of the 82 visitors in rented static units, 15% were from Wales; 

 

The report concludes from the analysis of the holiday parks taking part in the study 

that 1 full time equivalent job is created for every 15 units; 

 

The report concludes from the analysis of the visitor survey that visitors who own 

their caravan spend £10.84 a day, whilst visitors renting units spend £13.22 a day. 

Wales Accommodation Use Survey 2011 

46. This report is based on monthly returns from accommodation in Wales. It includes a section 

(Section 7) on caravan holiday parks and cabins. It should be noted that the report refers to

units to let and therefore it is taken that it does not include static units in ownership. The report 

is based on a sample of 24 forms which have been, on average, returned every month. The 

report notes that there are not enough holiday parks of this kind open during the months of 

November to the end of February. Included are tables comparing the monthly letting rates for 

the years 2007 to 2011. 

 

The yearly average varies from between 66% (2008) to 86% (2009) with an average of 

83% in 2010; 

 

The March average varies between 19% (2011) and 52% (2009). This varies depending 

on when the Easter Holidays fall. 

 

The October average varies from between 37% (2008) to 82% (2009) with an average of 

69% in 2011; 

 

 

Coastal locations are a little higher than the general average; 

4 – 5 star graded parks perform a little better than the March average but around the 

average for October. 

Profile of Ocean Heights Caravan Park 

47. Detailed information on the Park’s profile are not to hand. The little information available has 

been gleaned from looking at their website. 

There are 94 pitches on the site; 

The Park has been graded 5 star by the Visit Wales Grading System; 

Three types of unit are let: 

Snowdon (3 bedrooms – room for six) 

Clwyd (2 bedrooms – room for four)

Tryfan (2 bedrooms – room for four) 

48. The letting prices for 2013 are as follows: 

Table 2 Ocean Heights’ 2013 Letting Prices 

Type of unit March Summer November 

Snowdon 190 490 250 

Clwyd 180 440 240 

Tryfan 170 400 200 

49. the present operational period for Caravan Parks runs from the beginning of March through 

until the end of November (a nine month period); 

50. The applicant's agent has mentioned, on the basis of their experience of similar holiday parks in 

England and Wales, that an average letting of between 10% and 15% could be expected in 

January / February, which is a reasonable assessment in my opinion. 

THE IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL 

Assumptions 

I. On the basis of the above information the following assumptions were made to draw up 

a model to predict the number of users during the additional six week period.

II. 

That 80% are static units in ownership. The average occupancy for units in ownership is 

2 persons per night for a 2 bedroomed unit and 3 persons per night for a 3 

bedroomed unit; 

III. 50% of the above also let their unit for a proportion of time outside the peak season. 

The average occupancy is 3 persons per night for a 2 bedroomed unit and 5 persons 

per night for a 3 bedroomed unit; 

IV. The 20% remaining is kept for renting out. The average occupancy is 3 persons per night 

for a 2 bedroomed unit and 5 persons per night for a 3 bedroomed unit; 

V. The occupancy profile during the present open season is quite similar to the average 

Wales’ profile but a little higher taking into account its costal position and its grade; 

VI. Owners who aren’t renting will use the units for 3 nights on average during the six week 

period (7%). 

VII. Owners renting will succeed in letting 5 nights our of the 42 in question (12%); 

VIII.Units for rent will succeed in letting 8 nights out of the 42 possible (19%). 

51. Appendix 1 presents a model of the possible number of visitors to the Caravan Park during the 

extra six weeks on the basis of the above assumptions. 

52. The model predicts that a total of 620 persons will stay during the six weeks in question. 

Assuming that these would be spread equally over the six weeks (42 nights) that would equal an 

average of 15 persons per night. The model also predicts that that would equal an average of 86 

friends / family groups. 

53. However, the usual tourism pattern would mean that the distribution would be clustered 

around the weekend nights. On the basis of an equal spread between six weekends, that would 

mean an average of 52 persons on the site over a weekend.

54. I have also made an assumption about the proportion of these that do not come from Wales 

and the proportion that don’t speak Welsh. The result of this broadly is the assumption that 124 

out of the 620 would come from Wales, with 25 of those speaking Welsh. 

Findings in terms of economic and employment considerations 

55. The model also used the BHHPA / Visit Wales report’s findings to try and predict what the 

impact would be on the economy and employment. Using the report’s finding on spending, it is 

estimated that the extra visits during the six weeks in question would produce a spend of almost 

£8,000 (£7,978) during the visit. This includes all sorts of spending and presumably, a large 

proportion of that would be spent in locations outside Chwilog. If a spend of 25% is presumed 

(e.g. on food and drink from the local shop and pub) that would represent around £2,000 to the 

local economy annually during the six week period in question. 

56. With regards jobs, the BHHPA / Visit Wales report estimates that one full time equivalent job is 

created for every 15 units. In the case of Ocean Heights this would be the equivalent of 6.25 full 

time equivalent jobs. Some jobs need to be ignored such as warden or maintenance officer as 

those jobs would be there anyway. Others, such as Marketing Officer, would be located 

centrally in the Group. In terms of direct jobs, it is likely that the main input into the economy 

would be cleaning jobs. In the case of the six week period in question it is assumed that about 

55 lettings and 7 visits would be from owners. It is estimated that this would create demand for 

about 3.75 full time equivalent jobs over the period in question. On the basis of an average 

salary of £12.500 in the sector, that would inject between £5,150 and £7,500 into the local 

economy during the six weeks in question. 

57. If the Park already uses a network of cleaners from the area then there is a likelihood that these 

would be used also during the period in question.

Findings concerning population and residential considerations 

58. The above analysis does not suggest that extending the six week period will have a significant 

influence in itself on the population or on the tendency to emigrate or immigrate to / from the 

area. 

Findings concerning linguistic considerations 

59. The model assumes that 80% of the 620 visitor nights and 62 lettings at the Park during the six 

week period will be people travelling from outside Wales. If it is assumed that these are 

dispersed evenly over the 6 weekends, there should be 52 persons at the Park at any given time. 

At best, it can be assumed that, of those who come from Wales (10), one or two can speak 

Welsh. A total therefore, of about 50 persons who do not speak Welsh will be visiting the area 

at any given time during the period in question. 

60. No evidence has come to hand about how often these persons would venture out from the park 

to the local village. Considering visitor visiting patterns, it must be assumed that they would 

spend very little time in the nearest village and that they would choose to travel to attractions 

further afield when out of the Park. 

61. Considering that the number of the population aged 3 years and over in the Output Area was 

495 in 2011, the number of occasions that visitors would visit the village, and, the absence of 

any evidence to the contrary in over 40 years of the existence of the Holiday Park in the area, I 

come to the conclusion that adding an extra 50 persons to the Park who don’t speak Welsh 

would not have a significant negative effect on the Welshness of the village.

CONCLUSIONS AND THE STATEMENT 

General 

How would the development conform with local and national strategies / plans 

62. An inspection of the documents concerning the context of the local and national strategies / 

plans suggests that the proposal to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park with the 

potential to extend the holiday season will result in small extra economic benefits. It is 

considered that the proposals would not contravene other strategies / plans. 

How would the development satisfy local needs in the community 

63. On the basis of the evidence reviewed and presented in this assessment, the opinion is that 

extending the opening period of the Caravan Park would not make a significant difference to 

satisfying the local needs of the community. 

How is the development likely to protect or add to community facilities 


extending the opening period of the Caravan Park would not make a significant difference in 

terms of protecting or adding to community facilities. 

How will the development be sustainable in the long term 


extending the opening period of the Caravan Park would not make a significant difference in 

terms of adding to the sustainability of businesses and / or facilities in the long term.

How will the development be likely to gain the support of the local community 

66. Some concern has been expressed in observations on the application by the local community 

and in the local press on the dangers of creating permanent residential dwellings on the site by 

changing the condition. However, the opinion is that extending the opening period of the 

Caravan Park will not lead to general ill feeling in the community because of the nature of the 

holiday park occupancy and that the impact will be very small and temporary. 

Population characteristics 

Will the development attract immigrants to the area and what would be the effect of that 

67. On the basis of the evidence reviewed and presented in this assessment, the opinion is that the 

proposal to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park will not have any significant effect on 

the attractiveness of the area to immigrants. 

Will the development contribute to emigration from the area and what would that effect be 


proposal to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park will not have any significant effect on 

the propensity to emigrate from the area. 

Residential 

Will the development reflect the need for local housing including affordable housing

69. The opinion is that the proposal to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park is not 

relevant to this matter. 

Will the development be similar to other developments completed in the last five years If so, 

what is the cumulative effect 

70. The opinion is that the proposal to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park is not 


Employment 

Will the development require skilled labour which is available locally 


proposal to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park will not increase significantly the 

demand for skilled labour available locally. 

Will the development create jobs for the local workforce 


proposal to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park will not increase significantly the 

demand for skilled labour available locally. 

Will the development attract workers from outside the County 


proposal to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park will not attract workers from outside 

the County.

Will the development create new opportunities for the workforce 


proposal to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park will not create substantial new 

opportunities for the workforce. 

Will the development lead to further investment 


proposal to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park will not of itself lead to further 

investment but it could protect and strengthen the status of the present investment. 

Will the development contribute to an increased use of Welsh in the local area through 

visible methods such as bilingual signs and adverts, promoting understanding of Welsh 

amongst the workforce 

76. The opinion is that the intention to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park is not 


Additional Considerations 

Is the development likely to lead to an increase / decrease in the population that could affect 

the balance between Welsh / English speakers (in a negative / positive way) or lead to an 

absolute or contributory deterioration in the number of Welsh speakers 


proposal to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park is not likely to lead to changes in the

population which could effect the balance between Welsh / English speakers (in a negative / 

positive way) or lead to an absolute or partial deterioration in the numbers of Welsh speakers. 

Could the development lead to a continuous increase in the proportion of non Welsh 

speaking homes 


proposal to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park, with the appropriate conditions and 

efficient monitoring, will not lead to a continuous increase in the proportion of non Welsh 

speaking homes. 

Could the development lead to the loss of Welsh speaking homes 


proposal to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park will not lead to the loss of Welsh 

speaking homes. 

Could the development lead to changes in the local Welsh traditions / culture 


proposal to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park will not lead to changes to the local 

Welsh traditions / culture. 

Mitigating Measures 

Would it be possible to mitigate negative effects


there are no significant negative economic, social or linguistic effects as a result to the intention 

to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park. 

SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS AND THE STATMENT 

82. The purpose of this report is to collect evidence to form an opinion of the need to undertake an 

assessment of the possible effect on the linguistic and cultural character of the community of 

Chwilog of the proposal to permit the use of Ocean Heights Caravan Park for an extra six week 

period during January and February every year. 

83. In order to make the assessment, information on the community relied on the recently 

published results of the 2011 Census. In the absence of direct knowledge about the usage 

characteristics and about the site’s consumers, use has been made of information collected and 

published on holiday parks’ occupancy rates and on economic impacts (including static caravan 

parks) in Wales. Some assumptions were make about how many 2 and 3 bedroomed units are 

on the site and the proportion that are let out by owners to visitors. 

84. The model used predicts that a total o 620 persons will stay during the six weeks in question. 

The usual tourism pattern would mean that the distribution would be clustered around the 

weekend nights. On the basis of an equal spread between six weekends, that would mean an 

average of up to 52 persons on the site over a weekend. At best it can be presumed that, of 

those who come from Wales (10), one or two will be able to speak Welsh. A total therefore, of 

about 50 persons who do not speak Welsh will be visiting the area at any given time during the 

period in question.

85. No evidence has come to hand about how often these persons would venture out from the park 

to the local village. Considering visitor visiting patterns, it must be assumed that they would 

spend very little time in the nearest village and that they would choose to travel to attractions 

further afield when out of the Park. 

86. Considering that the population aged 3 years and over in Chwilog was around 500 in 2011, the 

number of occasions that visitors would visit the village, and, the absence of any evidence to the 

contrary in over 40 years of the existence of the Holiday Park in the area, I come to the 

conclusion that adding an extra 50 persons to the Park who don’t speak Welsh would not have a 

significant negative effect on the Welshness of the village. 

87. It is considered therefore, that the proposal would not effect the balance between Welsh / 

English speakers nor would it lead to an absolute or contributory deterioration in the number of 

Welsh speakers. 


there are no significant negative economic, social or linguistic effects as a result to the proposal 

to extend the opening period of the Caravan Park. 

Owain Wyn B.Sc (Econ), M.Sc Town Planning, MBA, MRTPI 

April 2013

89. APPENDIX 1 – LOWER LAYER SUPER OUTPUT AREA CHARACTERISTICS 

90. Percentage of the Population in each Age Range 

91. 

92. Composition of the Neighbourhood Dwellings 

93.

94. Type of Homes in the Neighbourhood 

95. 

96. Economic Activity 

97.




PWLLHELI 

98. APPENDIX 2 VISITOR ASSUMPTIONS MODEL 

PARC CARAFANAU OCEAN HEIGHTS 

Snowdon Clwyd Tryfan Cyfanswm 

Nifer y Lleiniau a 47 28 19 94 

Nifer mewn Perchnogaeth (80%) a*.8 38 23 15 75 

Nifer nad ydynt yn cael eu rhentu (50%) a*.5 19 11 8 38 

Nifer o'r uchod sy'n cael eu rhentu (50%) a*.5 19 11 8 38 

Nifer sy'n cael eu gosod ar rent a*.2 9 6 4 19 

Cyfartaledd Deiliadaeth Chwe wythnos 

Perchnogion yn unig b 3 2 2 

Perchnogion sy'n rhentu c 5 3 3 

Unedau ar rhent ch 5 3 3 

Nifer y Gosodiadau Cyfnod Chwe wythnos 

Perchnogion yn unig (3 noson) d 1 1 1 3 

Perchnogion sy'n rhentu(5 noson) dd 2 2 2 6 

Unedau ar rhent (8 noson) e 3 3 3 9 

Cyfanswm 18 

Nifer y gosodiadau 

Perchnogion yn unig (3 noson) b*d 3 2 2 7 

Perchnogion sy'n rhentu(5 noson) c*dd 10 6 6 22 

Unedau ar rhent (8 noson) ch*e 15 9 9 33 

Cyfanswm 62 

Cyfanswm Nosweithiau Ymwelwyr (Unedau*Deiliadaeth*Gosodiadau) 

Perchnogion yn unig (3 noson) f(a*.5*b*d) 56 23 15 94 

Perchnogion sy'n rhentu(5 noson) ff(a*.5*c*dd) 188 68 45 301 

Unedau ar rhent (8 noson) g(a*.2*ch*e) 141 51 34 226 

Cyfansymiau h 385 141 94 620 

Cyfartaledd person y noson h/42 9 3 2 15 

Cyfartaledd person (penwythnos yn unig= 2 noson) h/12 32 12 8 52 

Cyfartaledd tu allan i Gymru i(a*.5*b*d )*.8) 308 113 75 496 

Cyfartaledd o Gymru j(a*.5*b*d) *.2) 77 28 19 124 

Cyfartaledd o Gymru sy'n ddi Gymraeg k((a*.5*b*d) *.2)*.8 62 23 15 99 

Nifer Ymwelwyr sy'n ddi Gymraeg l 370 135 90 596 

Nifer Ymwelwyr sy'n siarad Cymraeg ll 15 6 4 25 

Siaradwyr Di-Gymraeg 

Cyfartaledd person y noson l/42 9 3 2 14 

Cyfartaledd person (penwythnos yn unig) l/12 31 11 8 50 

Siaradwyr Cymraeg 

Cyfartaledd person y noson ll/42 0 0 0 1 

Cyfartaledd person (penwythnos yn unig) ll/12 1 0 0 2 

Nifer yr archebion 

Perchnogion yn unig (1 ymweliad) m 19 11 8 38 

Perchnogion sy'n rhentu(2 archeb) n 19 7 5 30 

Unedau ar rhent (3 archeb) o 9 6 4 19 

Cyfanswm grwpiau/teuluoedd 86 

Gwariant y dydd 

Perchnogion p(f*£10.84) 1019 

Rhentwyr ph(ff+g)*£13.22) 6959 

Cyfanswm r 7978 

Canran o wariant yn y gymdogaeth 25% 1994 

99. 

Swyddi 11.5%*5 CLLA 0.58 

Swyddi (ar benwythnosau) (dd+e)*2 awr 3.67




PWLLHELI 

APPENDIX 3




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI 

APPENDIX 4




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI 

APPENDIX 5




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI 

APPENDIX 6




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI 

APPENDIX 7




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI




PWLLHELI 

APPENDIX 8

Number: 2




Community: 

Porthmadog 

Ward: 

Porthmadog West 

Proposal: 

Location: 

CONSTRUCT BOAT STORAGE BUILDING AND CREATE VEHICLE 

PARKING AREA TO INCLUDE ERECTION OF BOUNDARY FENCE AND 

ACCESS GATES 

LAND OPPOSITE, MADOC YACHT CLUB, CORNHILL, PORTHMADOG, GWYNEDD, 

LL499AS 

Summary of the Recommendation: 

TO APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS 


1.1 The application involves changing land use to create a building for boat storage and 

creating a car park for vehicles along with a retrospective element to retain a fence and 

access gate to the site. The site is located on Cornhill, Porthmadog with the road abutting 

the site on one side and large rocks to the rear. The adjacent site is used for boat storage 

and is surrounded by a steel fence painted black. The adjacent land to the other direction 

is part of a domestic garden. The residential houses around the area are mixed with 

industrial type units/land use which mainly involve the maritime industry, sailing/leisure 

club. Consequently, there is a wide variety of buildings and land use within the area 

including several ‘yards’ surrounded by fences similar to the fence which forms part of 

the application and similar access. 

1.2 It is intended to construct the storage building in block work with a profile sheeting roof 

and a roller door on a third of it with the remainder being open. 

1.3 The site is within the development boundary of Porthmadog. The site is adjacent to a 

listed building and there are listed buildings on the other side of the road. The site also 

lies within a conservation area. The land is connected to Madog Sailing Club which is 

opposite. 



Planning Policy Wales emphasise that planning decisions should be in accordance with 

the Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Planning 

considerations include National Planning Policy and the Unitary Development Plan. 


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. 

POLICY B22 – BUILDING DESIGN 

Promote good building design by ensuring that proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at 

safeguarding the recognised features and character of the local landscape and environment. 




POLICY 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. 


Development proposals will be approved provided they can conform to specific criteria relating 

to the vehicular entrance, the standard of the existing roads network and traffic calming measures. 

POLICY CH36 – PRIVATE CAR PARKING FACILITIES 

Proposal which provide private parking facilities will be approved subject to standard criteria. 

POLICY CH48 – BOAT STORAGE FACILITIES 

Boat storage facilities will be approved provided they are in suitable buildings or if this is not 

possible, in locations where they will be unobtrusive. 


Planning Policy Wales Version 5, 2012 

The Welsh Office Circular 61/96 – ‘Planning and the Historic Environment: Listed Buildings and 

Conservation Areas’. 


3.1 The site has no formal relevant planning history. The site was empty for some years prior 

to being bought by the applicants. 




Environment Agency: 

No objection, provided that the materials are in keeping with the 

area. 

No objection, the site is outside the local roads network. 

No response.

Welsh Water: 

Conservation Officer: 


No response. 

The site is located within the Porthmadog Conservation Area and 

there are several listed buildings nearby. There is no objection to the 

application as it is not considered that the proposal would affect the 

appearance or character of the area or buildings, but it is suggested 

that the fence is painted a dark colour to be in keeping with the area. 

A notice was placed on the site and nearby residents were informed. 

The consultation period ended on 13.03.13 and six letters / 

correspondences were received objecting to the application on the 

following grounds: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The type and colour of the fence that has been erected does 

not comply with the surrounding area which is a 

Conservation Area with listed buildings nearby. 

The fence is already in place. 

Concern regarding the materials for the proposed shed’s 

external walls and roof. 

Concern regarding the roller shutter door. 

The application changes the use of the site. 

Need to consider highway matters. 

Landscaping required. 

Observations were also received which are not relevant planning 

matters, involving: 

 

 

 

Double yellow lines required to prevent parking. 

Reference to the need to receive permission from CADW. 

Condition relating to not keeping rubbish on the site. 



5.1 Due to the nature of the proposal it is considered appropriate to assess the principle under 

Policies CH48. 

5.2 Policy CH48 involves boat storage facilities and proposals for boat storage facilities will 

be approved provided the criteria can be complied with, which include locating the boats 

in existing suitable buildings or in locations where they will be unobtrusive. The type of 

boats intended to be stored here are sailing boats and it is intended to construct a shed to 

store some whilst it is possible that others will be stored outside in the compound. It is 

not considered that this will be obtrusive as this area is maritime by nature and there are 

several maritime businesses and boat storage areas along the road. It is therefore 

considered that the proposal complies with policy CH48.


5.3 Policies B22 and B25 involve the design of buildings and their materials. It is believed 

that the proposal to construct an open shed with approximately 1/3 of it being a storage 

area with a roller shutter door does comply with Policy B22 as it is considered suitable in 

terms of scale, size and form. It would not have an unacceptable detrimental effect on the 

form or character of the surrounding townscape, or the local historical environment 

(further consideration is given to this element below). Neither is it likely to have an 

unacceptable detrimental effect on prominent views as it is located against a background 

of large rocks and with similar land use nearby. The roller shutter door would be located 

on a part of the shed furthest from the road and facing away from the adjacent road. It is 

not considered that it would be visible or likely to cause any harm to the amenities of the 

area. 

5.4 Given the nature of other buildings in the area and the nature of the use of the proposed 

shed, it is considered that acceptable materials could mean that the proposal complies 

with Policy B25 and this can be controlled with conditions. 

5.5 There are listed buildings near the site and the site is located within a Conservation Area. 

Policy B3 involves developments which affect listed buildings and states that proposals 

which affect listed buildings will not be approved unless the specific criteria noted can be 

complied with. Policy B4 involves developments within or which affect Conservation 

Areas and states that they will be refused unless they maintain or enhance the character or 

appearance of the area and its setting. It is believed that the land use is suitable given 

these matters and that the proposal would not have a detrimental effect on the setting or 

character of the listed buildings or conservation areas because these types of land uses, 

fences and buildings are seen in and around the site area. This is the character of the area. 

Therefore, it is believed that the proposal complies with Policies B3 and B4; however the 

fence which has already been erected needs to be painted a dark colour to be in keeping 

with the fence on neighbouring lands. This will ensure a better appearance and will be 

suitable for the area. Also, a condition could be imposed to ensure that a suitable 

landscaping scheme is implemented in order to soften the appearance of the fence which 

is between the site and 2 Cornhill. 


5.6 Policy B23 of the UDP requires that consideration be given to any impact on the 

amenities of the local neighbourhood. Developers are expected to show clearly that the 

development safeguards the privacy of users of neighbouring properties, that it is not an 

over-development, that there will be no additional traffic or noise at a level which would 

cause significant harm to local amenities etc. 

5.7 The nature of the area has already been described in this report, and on these grounds as 

well as the neighbouring land uses, it is not considered that there would be a detrimental 

effect on the amenities of the local neighbourhood should the proposal be approved. It is 

therefore believed that the proposal complies with policy B23. 

Transport and access matters

5.8 Based on the response of the Highways Unit, it is considered that the proposal is 

acceptable in terms of policies CH33 and CH36 which involve safety on roads and streets 

and private parking facilities. It is not an uncommon use in the area and it is likely that it 

would improve the existing situation of parking and storing by creating a suitable area for 

this. 

Response to the public consultation 

5.9 It is considered that the matters raised in the objections which include the design and 

colour of the fence, suitable materials for the boat storage area and the concern that the 

development is out of character on this site which is within a conservation area and near 

listed buildings have been addressed within the assessment above. 

5.10 It is not considered that matters involving managing parking and rubbish are material 

planning issues to be considered when assessing the application. 


6.1 Based on the above assessment it is not believed that the proposal is contrary to relevant 

policies and that there are no other material planning issues that state otherwise. 


To approve – with conditions 

1. time 

2. plans 

3. materials 

4. landscaping 

5. painting the fence

Number: 3




Community: 

Llanengan 

Ward: 

Abersoch 

Proposal: 

Location: 

SINGLE AND TWO-STOREY EXTENSIONS AND ALTERATIONS 

TOGETHER WITH DOUBLE GARAGE 

SEA BREEZE, LÔN SARN BACH, ABERSOCH, PWLLHELI, GWYNEDD, LL537DY 

Crynodeb o’r Argymhelliad: 

TO APPROVE 


1.1 The application was deferred at the Planning Committee on 18 March 2013 at the Local 

Member’s request in order to undertake a site inspection. 

1.2 This is a proposal to construct single and two-storey extensions to the front and rear of 

the property, along with alterations, including extending a balcony and creating a porch 

as well as erecting a double garage within the curtilage of the property. The two-storey 

property stands behind a row of houses that run parallel with Abersoch High Street with 

the property in question on a level that is slightly lower than the road. The rear of the 

property is visible from the junction through a gap between the premises of Neigwl and 

Carisbrooke. 

1.3 The site lies within the development boundary of Abersoch and it is also within the Area 

of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). To the north and west of the property there are 

dwelling houses and to the east and south there is an unused field and back gardens. The 

property is approximately 57m from the third class county road and access is gained to 

the site through the Neigwl property access and right of way. It is understood that the 

house was once the home of the manager of the Neigwl Hotel but it has now been sold 

separately. 

1.3 The application is submitted to committee because more than three objections have been 

received. 

2. Relevant Policies 






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 B22 – BUILDING DESIGN – Promote good building design by ensuring that 

proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the recognised features and 

character of the local landscape and environment. 

POLICY B23 – AMENITIES - Safeguard the amenities of the local area by ensuring that 

proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the recognised features and 

amenities of the local area. 

POLICY B24 - ALTERING AND EXTENDING BUILDINGS WITHIN 

DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES, RURAL VILLAGES AND THE COUNTRYSIDE - 

Ensure that proposals for alterations or extensions to buildings conform to a series of 

criteria aimed at protecting the character and amenity value of the local area. 

POLICY B25 – BUILDING MATERIALS - Safeguard the visual character by ensuring 

that the building materials are of high standard and in keeping with the character and 

appearance of the local area. 

POLICY CH33 – SAFETY ON ROADS AND STREETS - Development proposals will 

be approved if they can conform to specific criteria regarding the vehicular access, 

standard of the existing road network and traffic calming measures. 

POLICY CH36 - PRIVATE CAR PARKING FACILITIES - Proposals for new 

developments, extension of existing developments or change of use will be refused unless 

off-street parking is provided in accordance with the Council’s current parking 

guidelines. 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 there is an assessed need for off-street parking and 

when 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 number of necessary parking spaces on another site nearby. 


Planning Policy Wales (Fifth edition, February 2012) 

TAN 12: Design 


3.1 C05D/0435/39/LL Extension to the side of a house and a balcony on the first floor: 

Approved 1 September 2005 

C00D/0047/39/LL Adapt a car port into a bedroom and rear hall: Approved 14 April 

2000 

2/19/401D Amended details for a house: Approved 21 November 1988 

2/19/401C Demolish and rebuild a house: Approved 25 May 1988 

2/19/401B House and garage near Neigwl: Approved 2 December 1987 




Object, due to overdevelopment of a confined site. 

No objection: the proposal retains sufficient parking and turning

provision within the curtilage and uses the same access to the 

highway, therefore unlikely to have a detrimental impact on the local 

road network. 

AONB Unit: 


Sea Breeze or Gwynt y Môr is a modern two-storey house that is of 

quite considerable size located centrally in the village of Abersoch. 

Neither the house nor the site is prominent in the landscape. 

Generally there is no objection to the application in question on the 

grounds of the impact on the Llŷn AONB but it is believed perhaps 

the glass surface area on the eastern side of the property should be 

restricted. 


The advertising period ended on 29 January 2013. Eleven letters / 

correspondences were received from five individual objectors along 

with a letter from the solicitor of one of the objectors. The 

objections were based on: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Concern regarding the size and height of the extensions and 

the garage, overdevelopment, dominates the site, an eye 

sore, not a reflection of the size of the curtilage and amenity 

area 

No objection to a smaller extension and garage 

Insensitive extensions – impact on the character and visual 

amenities of the area. 

Previous extensions on the property, the former staff house 

has been extended sufficiently. 

No justification has been submitted for an extension and 

garage of this size. 

Significant impact on the amenities of the neighbouring 

residents, overlooking the neighbour’s garden and loss of 

privacy. 

Loss of existing trees and hedges. 

From the road junction, the extension and the garage block 

the public’s view across the sea and reduces the view of St 

Tudwal’s Island. 

Need to protect important views within the AONB; creates a 

precedent to develop and affecting the AONB in the future. 

A garage was refused on appeal for a nearby house the the 

grounds of loss of view. 

Lack of parking and turning space in the curtilage, for the 

number of bedrooms; referring to the recommendation of the 

Highways Officer on the previous application. 

Access through a right of way past the Neigwl property. 

Access in and out of the site involves crossing a busy 

junction – development placing greater pressure on the 

junction and the road. 

Contrary to policies B8, B22, B23, B24, CH33 and CH36. 

Need for a condition for the withdrawal of the 

property’s permitted development rights (as the

property will have been significantly developed) 

Impose a condition restricting use of the garage for 

vehicles only and not for any other use such as ancillary 

accommodation to the house. 

Stating that the applicant’s photomontages do not 

convey the real impact of losing public views of the bay 

The roof of the rear extension is dominating 

A 70 year old palm tree – merited a Tree Preservation 

Order 

The distance of the building from the gate does not 

convey the actual setting 


As well as the above-mentioned objections, objections were 

submitted which were not valid planning objections, which included: 

Loss of view of the sea and the harbour 

Issues raised regarding the right of way 

Not able to advertise as a hotel with sea views as a result of 

the development, leading to loss of business and revenue. 

Holiday home, unnecessary holiday development. 

Principle, design and visual amenities 

5.1 Generally policies B22 and B24 of the GUDP approve proposals to extend existing 

houses and erect curtilage buildings provided they comply with the associated criteria and 

the above-mentioned policies. The proposal would involve creating an extension under 

the empty space of the existing rear balcony and extending it along the rear of the 

building. Part of it will be a two-storey extension similar to a large dormer window facing 

the sea. Also, there will be an extension extending out to the rear of the property, with the 

slope of the existing roof extending over it with a lower two-storey section providing an 

additional room in the roof space. It is also intended to erect a port on a pillar on the 

southern gable end and create a larger balcony area on the rear corner. The development 

also includes constructing a double garage with a slate roof within the curtilage of the 

property. 

5.2 A number of objectors have expressed concern regarding the size, height and scale of the 

proposed extensions and garage, claiming that it is an over-development of a site of this 

size. They also suggest that the property has already been sufficiently extended in the 

past. The form and location of the extensions take advantage of the empty space under 

the existing front balcony and the slope of the rear roof being extended over the proposed 

rear extension that is relatively small. In terms of design and finish, it is considered that 

the extensions are in keeping and respect the appearance of the existing property. An 

amended plan was received on 18 March 2013 for the garage which shows that the height 

of its roof has been reduced to 3.62m rather than 4m as in the original plan in order to 

alleviate the concerns of the objectors. It is considered that its size and height are 

acceptable for a building of this type and again, it is in keeping with the property and its 

surroundings. It is considered that this corner is the most appropriate location for the 

building, replacing the existing old garden shed. Although the garage will encroach into 

the existing garden, there is disagreement with the objectors that there will be an

unacceptable significant reduction in the amenity area of the property. It is not considered 

that what is being proposed is unreasonable in terms of size and scale in this case and the 

design and materials are in keeping with the built character of the area. Therefore it is 

considered that the proposal complies with criteria 1 and 2 of policies B22, B24 and B25. 

5.3 A number of the objectors state that approving the proposed extensions and the garage 

would have a significant detrimental impact on the views of the sea and St Tudwal’s 

Islands from a public vantage point near the adjacent junction. As a result, the applicant 

submitted photomontages to reflect the appearance of the proposal from the direction of 

the highway, showing that the development will not substantially stand out. The objectors 

also refer to an appeal that was refused 2/19/766A for the nearby Tacoma property, on 

the grounds of its impact on the prominent views from the village. Raising part of the 

roof of the rear extension will mean that some of the horizon line will be lost. However, 

bearing in mind that the property is much lower than the level of the road and junction 

and that the property and view can only be seen through a narrow gap of approximately 9 

metres between two houses, it is not considered that the proposal has an unacceptable 

detrimental impact on the visual amenities of the area in terms of extensive views across 

the AONB that would justify refusing the application. The AONB Officer does not object 

to the proposal. With regard to the above-mentioned appeal decision, it is not entirely 

relevant as this was a proposal for the erection of a garage in a gap between two houses 

much nearer to the road, and therefore, it would be a much more intrusive feature in the 

street scene. In light of the above, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in the 

context of policy B8 and criterion 3 of policy B22. 

5.4 It is also claimed that trees and hedges will be lost as a result of the proposal 

consequently affecting the visual amenities of the area. In reality, it is only the shrubs of a 

small garden that will be cleared which are not of any high amenity value. Nevertheless, 

a condition could be imposed to ensure that landscaping work is undertaken to alleviate 

any possible effects. 

5.5 Based on the above, it is considered that the design and location of the proposal is 

acceptable and reasonable in terms of size, scale and form. It is not considered that a 

development of this scale, within a built area, would have an unacceptable significant 

impact on the AONB’s extensive and important views and landscape and, therefore, the 

proposal is in accordance with the requirements of Policies B8, B22, B24 and B25 of the 

GUDP. 


5.6 Policy B23 aims to safeguard amenities and maintain the privacy of the local 

neighbourhood. In this case, the majority of the additional windows and French doors are 

to be installed on the front and side of the property looking over the property’s garden 

and an unused field in the direction of the sea. Despite the neighbour’s claims, it is not 

considered that the proposal creates over-looking or has an impact on privacy. It appears 

that the owner of the Neigwl property is unhappy with the garage element in the proposal 

as it will be visible in their view-line of the sea. The garage in its lower, amended form 

will be an improvement in this respect. Loss of view is not a planning consideration, and 

bearing in mind that the other property is on a slightly higher level it is not considered 

that the garage is likely to have an intrusive impact or overshadow the property. We 

disagree with the objectors that the proposal is an over-development as there is sufficient 

space within the curtilage for the development without compromising the amenity area

significantly. Therefore, it is considered that the impact on the neighbours’ amenities is 

not unacceptable and that it complies with the requirements of policy B23 of the GUDP. 


5.7 The proposal does not involve changing the property’s vehicular access and the applicant 

does not own the access to the county road or the right of way track. Whilst the objectors 

note that the curtilage is narrow and without sufficient turning space, the site plan shows 

to the contrary. Details were submitted by the applicant showing that a right of way also 

exists in a triangle near the access gate outside the property of Sea Breeze. The Transport 

Officer considers the parking space and the turning space to be sufficient and satisfactory. 

It is not considered that the proposed extension and the garage will create an increase in 

traffic using the site or any significant change to road safety. Therefore it is considered 

that the proposal is acceptable, in terms of parking and road safety and complies with 

policies CH33 and CH36 of the GUDP. 


6.1 Having considered the proposal in the context of relevant policies and the objectors’ 

arguments, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable. The location, form and size of 

the extensions and amended garage are reasonable for the property and are in keeping 

with the character of the building and its surroundings. A development of this size is not 

prominent and does not have a substantial impact on the landscape of the AONB or the 

important views into and out of it. Neither is there a detrimental impact on the amenities 

of nearby resident or harmful implications to roads in this case. Based on the assessment 

above it is considered that the proposal complies with the requirements of the 

aforementioned policies and is acceptable to be approved with relevant conditions. 


7.1 To approve – conditions – five years, in accordance with the plans and amended plans of 

the garage, slate roof, finish to be in keeping with the existing house, landscaping.

Number: 4

Application Number: C13/0028/35/AM 


Application Type: Outline 

Community: 

Criccieth 

Ward: 

Criccieth 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Summary of the 

Recommendation: 

RENEWAL OF PLANNING PERMISSION C08D/0478/35/AM FOR THE 

ERECTION OF 34 SHELTERED HOUSING UNITS FOR THE ELDERLY, 

WARDEN ACCOMMODATION, 2 STAFF UNITS, COMMUNAL 

FACILITIES AND PARKING FOR RESIDENTS, STAFF AND GEORGE IV 

HOTEL TOGETHER WITH LANDSCAPING 

LAND ADJ. GEORGE IV HOTEL, HIGH STREET, CRICCIETH, GWYNEDD 



1.1 This is an outline application to renew planning permission number C08D/0478/35/AM 

approved on appeal in 2010. Details relating to appearance and landscaping have been 

reserved for future consideration through an application to approve reserved matters. 

Therefore, the application to hand relates to access, design and size. 

1.2 The development involves erecting 34 sheltered housing units for the elderly, one warden 

accommodation and two staff accommodation units, and communal facilities. The 

proposal would also provide 18 parking spaces for use by the residential units’ occupiers, 

and 15 parking spaces for use by the George IV Hotel on the opposite side of the High 

Street. 

1.3 The site is currently used as a car park and garden associated with the hotel opposite the 

site. To the north of the site is the High Street, and to the south is a public car park. The 

site lies within the development boundary and also within the Conservation Area. 




Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Planning 



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 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. 


Promote good building design by ensuring that proposals conform to a series of criteria aimed at 

safeguarding the recognised features and character of the local landscape and environment. 







POLICY 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 a 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 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 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 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. 

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 development, extensions to existing development or change of use will be 

refused unless off-street parking is provided in accordance with the Council’s current parking 

guidelines, and having given due consideration to the accessibility of public transport, the 

possibility of walking or cycling from the site and the proximity of the site to a public car park. 


Planning Policy Wales – Fifth edition (November 2012) 

- Part 4.9 – Preference for the re-use of land 

- 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 

- Para. 9.2.14 – The community’s need for affordable housing 

- Para. 9.3.1 – New housing developments should be integrated and well-connected to the 

existing settlement pattern. 

Technical Advice Note 2: Planning and Affordable Housing 

Technical Advice Note 12: Design 

Technical Advice Note 18: Transport 

Technical Advice Note 20: The Welsh Language 

Technical Advice Note 22: Planning for sustainable buildings 

Supplementary Planning Guidance: Affordable Housing 

Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning and the Welsh Language 

Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning for sustainable building 

Gwynedd Design Guidance 


C04D/0392/35/LL – Erect a building to provide 41 retirement flats together with additional 

provision, and a car park and landscaping. Withdrawn 16/02/09 

C05D/0211/35/LL – Erect a building to provide 41 retirement flats together with additional 

provision, and a car park and landscaping. Refused 25/07/05 

C08D/0478/35/AM – Construction of 37 residential units to include 34 sheltered housing units 

for the elderly, warden accommodation and two staff residences, parking provision for residents 

and staff, separate parking for visitors to the George IV Hotel and landscaping. Refused – 

Approved on appeal 15/03/10 



The Members reached the unanimous decision to OBJECT to this 

application. Nearly five years have now passed since the original

application was submitted and nothing has happened on the land – 

indeed, it is in an atrocious condition and is a haven for rats. The 

appeal made by the applicants was based on a great demand for this 

type of development in the town. The site is within a conservation 

area where requirements must be proven, and particularly special 

reasons given to support an application, but since there has been no 

development, and no development has commenced in all this time, 

the Members of the Town Council are of the view that the needs test 

has failed. Therefore, the application should be REFUSED. 


Welsh Water: 

Network Rail: 

CADW: 



Biodiversity: 

Welsh Water: 

Strategic Housing Policy Unit: 

I note that this development has already been refused by Gwynedd 

Council, and was subsequently approved following a successful 

appeal by the applicant. The Inspector has stipulated conditions in 

the report, including conditions regarding introducing a 6 metre wide 

entrance, with a gradient of no more than 1:20 from the highway. 

The plans submitted include an entrance measuring approximately 

4.5 metres wide down to the car park, on a gradient of 1:10. The 

plans do not therefore comply with the Inspector’s requirements. I 

suppose, however, that the Inspector’s observations are too strict, and 

that the condition regarding the gradient could make it nearly 

impossible to provide an entrance which would comply within the 

scope of the current plan, therefore I confirm that I would be happy 

to accept a gradient of 1:12 as a compromise. Furthermore, widening 

the entrance to 5 metres would be sufficient to allow two vehicles to 

pass each other and allow a safe space for pedestrians. 

No response at the time of writing the report. 

No objection in principle – observations relating to land drainage, 

ground levels, noise and financial contribution through a Section 106 

agreement or towards the improvements to the railway network. 

Observations but no objection. 

Low risk and standard advice. 

The land is located near three grade II listed buildings, and also 

within the Criccieth Conservation Area. As this in an application to 

renew permission and that nothing has changed from the previous 

application, there is no objection to the application. 


Standard conditions. 

Having considered the prices noted for the sale of these units, they 

seem affordable and agree with the principle of receiving a 

commuted sum. Having seen how this figure was calculated, 

although initially I thought it was low, I agree with what is being 

proposed.

Social Services: 

From a strategic perspective a development of this type corresponds 

with the Gwynedd Housing Partnership Strategy and the Older 

People Commissioning Strategy (Social Services). 

We are aware of the significant increase over the next 15 years in the 

population of older people in Gwynedd, and the need for a wide 

range of suitable accommodation to address their needs. At present 

the percentage of the population of Gwynedd who are 65+ years old 

is 21.8%. The number of people over 65 in Criccieth is significantly 

higher than the average for Gwynedd. 31.5% of the population of 

Criccieth are over 65 years old. 

Any such private investment reduces the need for the Council to 

make investments itself, and offers a choice for some older people to 

be able to move to accommodation that is suitable for them. 





The consultation period ended on 21/02/13. At the time of writing the 

report, nine letters / pieces of correspondence had been received 

objecting on the following grounds: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Parking spaces for the George are too far away from the 

hotel. 

Loss o parking spaces for coaches – leading to coaches 

parking and blocking the road outside the George Hotel. 

Dangerous entrance, in a busy location and the slope is steep. 

Effect on traffic flow, especially in the summer. 

The site is an essential part of the listed hotel in historical and 

parking terms. 

Detrimental to the conservation area. 

Detrimental to the open views of the castle from this part of 

the town – contrary to policy B22. 

Density is too high, creating a built-up area. 

The design, size and density of the development is out of 

place and is different to other developments in the area. 

Too high. 

The development would create an over-provision of care 

homes in the village which is contrary to policy CH41. 

The cumulative impact from this development and the new 

extension which has already been constructed on the George 

Hotel. 

Impact and additional strain on local medical services. 

The size of the building, the roof line and design are 

detrimental to the conservation area. 

Detrimental impact on the setting of Capel Mawr which is a 

grade II listed building. 

Effect on the character of listed buildings and ancient

monuments which contribute to Criccieth’s sense of place. 

Unsuitable development in terms of scale and location. 

Is there a need for this type of development 

Effect on Criccieth as a seaside town and the tourism 

industry. 

Is the location suitable for older people when shops and local 

facilities are closing 

Will cause an imbalance between the young and the elderly 

in the town. 

Causes overlooking and loss of privacy. 

The bin collection point is opposite the bus stop. 

There are problems with Japanese knotweed on the site. 

A strain on facilities such as water and sewerage. 

As well as the abovementioned objections, objections were received 

which were not valid planning objections, which include: 

Landownership issues. 

Speculative developer. 

Suggestions for a smaller development, a different 

design/layout. 


Previous application and the decision of the appeal 

5.1 This is an application to renew an outline permission, therefore there is no change to the 

plan. The principle of this proposal has already been accepted and established by the 

Inspector in an appeal decision. This is a material planning consideration. It is therefore 

important to consider whether circumstances have changed in the meantime since 

approving the application. In respect of the appeal decision, the Inspector noted that the 

impact on the Criccieth Conservation Area and the setting of the nearby listed buildings 

were the main matters to be considered. 


5.2 In light of local policies, the Planning Inspector determined the appeal based on the policies 

of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan, therefore there has been no material change in 

the policies. 

5.3 Policies C1, C3 and CH4 are relevant to this application. Policy C1 relates to locating new 

development, and the main focus of the policy is to support developments within the 

development boundaries of towns and villages. The application site is within the 

development boundary of Criccieth, therefore the application complies with policy C1. 

Policy C3 gives priority to re-using previously developed land. Part of the site is being used 

as a car park for the George IV hotel, and consequently development on this site would 

equate to developing on previously developed land. The proposal therefore complies with 

policy C3.

5.4 Policy CH4 is relevant to this application. The policy permits erecting new housing on 

unallocated sites within the development boundaries of local centres and villages, provided 

the proposal satisfies the criteria in the policy. 

5.5 In line with what was determined in relation to the original application, providing an 

element of affordable housing for general local need within the development is essential in 

accordance with the requirements of Policy CH4 of the UDP. This was provided in the 

original application in the form of a financial contribution towards providing affordable 

housing offsite. In his appeal decision, the Inspector noted that the Council had agreed that 

such a contribution would be the most appropriate option given the specialist nature of the 

residential units proposed. The Inspector agreed that this perspective satisfied the relevant 

criteria in respect of providing a planning obligation. 

5.6 The applicant’s agent has confirmed that they are keen to continue with the terms of the 

planning obligation. The financial contribution means £134,000 towards providing 

affordable housing in Gwynedd. Information and evidence was received from the applicant 

which showed expected prices for the units, which are between £90,000 and £110,000. In 

addition to this the size and nature of the units are also affordable and meet affordable 

housing needs for a specific age. Conditions (which are also on the appeal decision) ensure 

that the units would only be provided for people over 55 years of age. Consequently the 

financial contribution continues to be acceptable and is relevant to the development. 

Following the statutory consultation process the Strategic Housing Unit had no objection to 

the proposal. The proposal therefore complies with policy CH4. 

5.7 Objectors, including Criccieth Town Council, dispute the need for this type of 

accommodation in the area, since there has been no development, and no development has 

commenced since the appeal. The Inspector noted, in relation to the previous application, 

that Gwynedd Council had confirmed, having considered demographic patterns, that there 

will be an increasing demand for this type of provision. 

5.8 Social Services have confirmed that this type of development corresponds with the 

Gwynedd Housing Partnership Strategy and the Older People Commissioning Strategy. 

Any such private investment reduces the need for the Council to make its own investment, 

and offers a choice for some older people to be able to move to accommodation that is 

suitable for them. They acknowledge that there will be a significant increase over the next 

15 years in the population of older people in Gwynedd, and the need for a wide range of 

suitable accommodation to address their needs. 

5.9 At present the percentage of the population of Gwynedd who are over 65 years old is 

21.8%. The number of people over 65 years old in Criccieth is significantly higher than the 

average for Gwynedd. 31.5% of the population of Criccieth are 65+ years old. In terms of 

the age group who would be eligible to live in the proposed units, namely people who are 

55 years old or older, the Census notes that 45.8% of the population of the Criccieth ward 

fits into this category. It is noted that the population of Gwynedd continues to age, and the 

2008 population projections support this. 

5.10 It is believed that this information is adequate to prove that the need remains in the area, 

and there appears to be no material change in circumstances since the previous permission 

which would lead to refusing the application. It is considered that the application is in 

accordance with policies C1, C3 and CH4.

Design and visual and residential amenities. 

5.11 Policies B3, B4, B22, B23, B25 and CH4 are a consideration for this aspect of the 

application. This is an application to renew an outline permission; therefore there is no 

change to the plans which were previously approved on appeal. 

5.12 The visual impact of the development which includes the effect on the conservation area, 

listed buildings and the streetscape have already been acknowledged as acceptable by the 

Planning Inspector. Since the appeal the George Hotel has constructed a substantial rear 

extension on the building. As it was a rear extension that was constructed, it is not 

considered that it will alter the impact of this development on the streetscape and the 

conservation area to a degree that would warrant refusing the application. 

5.13 The objectors’ concerns have been acknowledged and have received full consideration, and 

there is no other evidence to show a material change in circumstances since the previous 

planning permission. Therefore, it is considered that the application continues to be 

acceptable and complies with policies B3, B4, B22, B23, B25 and CH4. 

Language Statement 

5.14 This report was submitted which included specific information regarding the local area and 

population and the impact of the development on related matters. The report acknowledges 

the importance of the Welsh language and the consideration that should be given to all 

relevant issues. 

5.16 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. It 

is not considered that the scale of this proposal is unsuitable for the local community, and 

neither would it cause significant harm to the social, linguistic or cultural cohesion of 

Criccieth. There is a recognised need for housing of this particular type in the area, and the 

proposal can contribute to this need. The village has good community services and 

convenient links to Porthmadog and Pwllheli. Due to the special nature of this 

development, it is not anticipated that this type of development would attract buyers 

searching for a second home. 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. 


5.17 Policies CH33 and CH36 relate to safety on roads and streets and private car parking 

facilities. There is no objection to the proposal in terms of these policies, as a suitable 

vehicular entrance to the site and the area can be provided, and since the existing roads 

network can cope with the traffic resulting from the development. The highways authority 

has responded to the consultation and had no objection to the proposal. The objectors’ 

concerns have been acknowledged and have received full consideration, but there is no 

other evidence to demonstrate a material change in circumstances since the previous 

planning permission. With conditions, it is considered that the proposal complies with 

policies CH33 and CH36 of the GUDP.

Infrastructure matters 

5.18 Network Rail have asked for a financial contribution, either through a planning obligation 

or a Community Infrastructure Levy, in order to reduce the impact of the development on 

the rail network. Any contribution must be relevant to the application in question. No 

evidence has been submitted by Network Rail to show that the current network is 

unsuitable or substandard for the potential higher number of users that could result directly 

from this development. Furthermore, there is no evidence that this development will 

directly have a negative impact on the rail network. Subsequently it is not considered that 

this request is entirely reasonably vital for this development. 

Sustainability matters 

5.19 The national policy considerations have changed since the original application. The site is 

registered with a Sustainability Code assessor and the applicant has submitted a preassessment 

report to show that the units could reach level 3 of the code for sustainable 

homes. Planning conditions must be imposed in order to ensure compliance with reaching 

the appropriate standard of the code for sustainable homes. The application therefore 

complies with policy C7 and TAN 22. 


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 

continues to be acceptable subject to relevant conditions. 


To approve – with conditions 

1. Five years. 

2. Submit reserved matters (appearance and landscaping) within three years. 

3. Restrict use of the units to people over 55 years of age. 

4. Materials and finishes. 

5. Access and parking. 

6. Details on trees. 

7. Landscaping. 

8. Submit a plan for eradicating Japanese knotweed. 

9. Sustainability Code. 

10. Welsh Water 

11. Development to comply with the approved plans.

Number: 5




Community: 

Dolbenmaen 

Ward: 

Dolbenmaen 

Proposal: 

Location: 

FULL APPLICATION FOR THE ERECTION OF A WASTE WATER 

TREATMENT PLANT TO INCLUDE BUILDINGS, TANKS, ENGINEERING 

WORK, EQUIPMENT, TRACKS, SOLAR PANELS AND LANDSCAPING 

WATER WORKS, GARNDOLBENMAEN, GWYNEDD, LL519HZ 


TO APPROVE 


1.1 This is a full application to erect a waste water treatment plant, including buildings, 

tanks, engineering work, equipment, tracks, solar panels, landscaping and a 

temporary compound. It is a substantial development and the highest point of the 

buildings will measure just short of 10m high to the ridge but the main bulk of the 

buildings will be broken up using different materials and building levels. The 

development will be used as a waste water treatment to ensure the quality of drinking 

water in the area. 

1.2 A Welsh Water site already exists near this site. The site is located in open 

countryside and near the A487 trunk road. The site is within 350m of the boundary of 

the Snowdonia National Park. 


2.1 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and paragraph 

2.1.2 of Planning Policy Wales emphasise that planning decisions should be in 

accordance with the Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate 

otherwise. Planning considerations include National Planning Policy and the Unitary 

Development Plan. 


POLICY A1 – ENVIRONMENTAL OR OTHER IMPACT ASSESSMENTS 

Ensure that sufficient information is provided with the planning application regarding 

any environmental impacts or other likely and substantial impact in the form of an 

environmental assessment or assessments of other impacts. 

POLICY 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 B14 – PROTECTING THE LANDSCAPE CHARACTER OF 

SNOWDONIA NATIONAL PARK

Protect the landscape character of Snowdonia National Park by refusing proposals 

which are visually obtrusive and/or are located insensitively and unsympathetically 

within the landscape. 


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. 


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. 


Safeguard the visual character by ensuring that building materials are of a high 

standard and are in keeping with the character and appearance of the local area. 

POLICY B27 – LANDSCAPING SCHEMES 

Ensure that permitted proposals incorporate high quality soft/hard landscaping which 

is appropriate to the site and which takes into consideration a series of factors aimed 

at avoiding damage to recognised features. 

POLICY B32 - INCREASING SURFACE WATER 

Refuse proposals that do not include flood minimisation measures or appropriate 

mitigating 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 a development that is permitted by another policy of the Plan. 

POLICY C27 – RENEWABLE AND SUSTAINABLE ENERGY SCHEMES 

Proposals for renewable energy and sustainable energy management schemes will be 

approved provided that a series of criteria relating to the impact on the visual quality 

of the landscape and environmental and social factors can be met. 

CH19 – PROVISION OF NEW INFRASTRUCTURE OR PUBLIC SERVICES 

Proposals to provide infrastructure or public services will be approved provided they 

can conform to a series of specific criteria relating to the scale and design of the 

development, along with visual, environmental, amenity and highway matters. 


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 D5 – SPECIAL LOCATION NEEDS 

In exceptional cases, permit the location of industrial or business developments on 

sites not allocated or safeguarded for business/industry if there are true ‘special local 

needs’ which cannot be met on a High Standard Employment Site or Industrial Site.


Planning Policy Wales, Version 5, 2012 

Technical Advice Note 12: Design 

Circular 60/96 – Planning and the Historic Environment: Archaeology 


3.1 A similar application within the Snowdonia National Park was refused recently. 




Footpaths Unit: 

Environmental Health 


Gwynedd Archaeological Trust: 

Support 

No objection 

No objection as there is no impact on public rights of way 

No response 

Relevant conditions and observations on SUDS drainage system 

Archaeological reports have already been approved by the GAT 

recently, and this confirms that the area has significant archaeological 

potential. Further observations describe the exact nature and 

importance of these findings. 

In this context and in accordance with Planning Policy Wales and 

Circular 60/69, the GAT recommends that if planning permission is 

granted an appropriate alleviation plan should be secured. The 

detailed observations given by the GAT in their formal observations 

on the application outlines the measures that should be included in 

the alleviation plan and also outlines an appropriate planning 

condition to ensure this. 

Welsh Water: 

Snowdonia National Park: 

Biodiversity Unit: 

Natural Resources Wales: 

The Welsh Assembly 

Government Transportation 

Unit: 

CPRW: 

No response. 

No observations 

No negative impact on biodiversity. A landscaping condition 

is needed to secure indigenous species. Also small changes 

are needed to the area that forms the temporary compound in 

order to protect existing trees and hedges. 

No objection based on ecological issues but information on 

an appropriate working method and relevant considerations. 

No objection 

No response.

Public Consultation: Notices were placed on/around the site and 

neighbouring residents were informed. The 

consultation period ended on 4 April 2013 and no 

response had been received. 


5.1 Principle of the development 

5.2 Policy A1 requests that proposals be refused unless sufficient information is provided 

with the application concerning any significant likely environmental or other impacts 

which could include ecological matters, noise, traffic, health, archaeological matters 

etc. A number of assessments have been submitted with the application and it is 

considered that sufficient information is available in order to be able to assess the 

application in accordance with Policy A1. 

5.3 Policy C1 notes that land within development boundaries will be the main focus for 

new developments and new buildings in the countryside will be refused with the 

exception of developments which are permitted under other policies within the 

Unitary Development Plan, e.g. developments associated with providing statutory 

infrastructure such as this proposal. In cases such as this, Policy C1 requests that 

these types of developments are strictly controlled and should be spatially well related 

to existing developments. 

5.4 In the context of Policy C1, Policy CH19 involves providing new infrastructure or 

public services and it is considered that this proposal falls within this definition. 

Policy CH19 has four criterias: that the scale and design of the development is 

suitable for the location; that there will be no significant harm to the landscape, 

coastline, biodiversity or historical area/features, especially within or near designated 

areas; there will be no significant harm to the amenities of residents or nearby 

sensitive uses; that the proposal is acceptable in respect of parking, traffic and road 

safety. These criterias are also considered under more relevant policies below. 

5.5 It is also believed that Policy D5 is relevant to the proposal as specific location needs 

exists for the proposed development. This involves the need to locate industrial 

developments on unallocated sites or sites that have not been safeguarded for 

business/commercial uses. This will not be appropriate in this case due to the nature 

of the work and the process. 

5.6 It is also noted that the option of locating the proposal on another site was addressed 

and that an application to provide the same type of infrastructure was submitted to the 

Snowdonia National Park but it was refused. 

5.7 Based on the information noted above it is believed that the proposal is in accordance 

with the policies noted above and is acceptable in terms of principle. 

5.8 Visual amenities 

5.9 It is inevitable that a development of this scale will have some impact on the visual 

amenities of the area. Following the process of receiving advice prior to submitting 

the application a positive effort has been made to reduce the totality of the proposed 

buildings and also to ensure an appropriate design taking into account its location. 

5.10 Due to the site’s proximity to the Snowdonia National Park boundary which is 

approximately 350m to the north-east, the National Park was consulted and a

esponse was received stating that they had no observations on the application. 

Therefore, it is not considered that the proposal is contrary to policy B14 of the 

GUDP. 

5.11 Policies B22, B23 and B25 involve design, amenities and materials. Taking into 

account the nature of the site, the need to locate on this site and the nature of the 

buildings/development, it is considered that the proposal respects the site in terms of 

its scale, size, form, density, location etc. It is believed that the proposal seeks to 

break up the buildings by reducing the totality and carefully positioning the buildings 

within the site, using appropriate materials of an agricultural nature and colour and 

taking advantage of the natural landscape and an appropriate landscaping scheme in 

order for the proposal to blend better into the landscape. It is believed that the 

proposal incorporates good design principles in order to ensure that the proposal is as 

acceptable as possible under the circumstances where the proposal must be located 

here and where the buildings must be on the scale shown. 

5.12 Whilst there is no doubt that the proposed development will be visible, it is not 

considered that the proposal will have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the 

public prominent views across the area or views into and out the Park. Similarly, it is 

not considered that there will be an unacceptable detrimental impact on the form and 

character of the surrounding landscape or on the local natural or historical 

environment as careful consideration has been given to the location and design of the 

proposal. Archaeological matters are considered in more detail below. 

5.13 It is therefore considered that the proposal is in accordance with Policies B22 and 

B25, and the use of appropriate materials and the undertaking of an acceptable 

landscaping plan to satisfy Policy B27 can be controlled by means of appropriate 

conditions. 

5.14 General and residential amenities 

5.15 There are no houses near the proposed site; therefore it is not believed that there is 

any concern involving privacy or any concerns relating to noise or additional traffic. 

The principle and need for developing the site has already been discussed and on this 

basis it is not believed that the development would be an overdevelopment of the site. 

The proposal is therefore not contrary to Policy B23 of the UDP. 

5.16 Transport and access matters 

5.17 The Transportation Unit and the Welsh Government Transportation Unit has no 

objection to the proposal on the grounds of highway matters. Consequently it is 

considered that the proposal is in accordance with Policy CH33 of the UDP. 

5.18 Biodiversity matters 

5.19 The site is used for agricultural grazing and the land has been improved and therefore 

it is not considered that it will have a negative impact on biodiversity. The DAS states 

that it is proposed to use indigenous species for the soft landscaping work and this is 

to be applauded. In addition, the Biodiversity Unit has stated that the species used for 

landscaping should be local and it is considered that this work could be controlled 

with an appropriate condition. It is also considered that the temporary compound 

should be moved away from the trees and this could also be controlled with an 

appropriate condition.

5.20 Natural Resources Wales do not object to the proposal in terms of biodiversity 

matters but have offered conditions/observations regarding the method of working 

and work periods on the site. Based on the above, it is considered that the proposal is 

in accordance with Policy B27 of the UDP. 

5.21 Archaeological Matters 

5.22 Policy B7 relates to Sites of Archaeological Importance and requires the refusal of 

proposals which will damage or destroy archaeological remains which are of national 

importance (registered or not) or their setting. It also notes ‘In areas where there are 

likely to be archaeological remains, the developer will be required to commission 

either an Archaeological Assessment and/or a field evaluation in order to determine 

the archaeological impact of the proposed development before the Planning Authority 

determines the application…’. 

5.23 Although the site is of archaeological interest and within the broader area the site has 

not been designated as a scheduled ancient monument. Circular 60/96 Planning and 

the Historic Environment: Archaeology, states that the wish to protect an ancient 

monument and its setting is a material consideration when assessing planning 

applications, whether they are registered or not and developers should consider these 

matters from the outset. It is true that these considerations have received significant 

attention during the process of submitting the application and during the process of 

dealing with the application. In addition, archaeological reports have recently been 

approved by the Gwynedd Archaeological Trust and have confirmed that the area has 

significant archaeological potential. The detailed observations given by the GAT 

describe the nature of the findings in detail. 

5.24 In this context and in accordance with Planning Policy Wales and Circular 60/69, the 

GAT recommends that if planning permission is granted an appropriate alleviation 

plan should be ensured. The detailed observations given by the GAT outline the 

measures that should be included in the alleviation plan and also outline an 

appropriate planning condition to ensure this. 

5.25 It is therefore considered (subject to an appropriate condition) that the proposal is in 

accordance with Policy B7, Planning Policy Wales and Circular 60/69 on Planning 

and the Historic Environment: Archaeology. 

5.26 Sustainability matters 

5.27 Following the Environment Agency’s initial observations that offer appropriate 

conditions and observations on the SUDS waste water system the agent submitted 

more information which is subject to a second consultation with the Agency. If 

favourable observations are received by the Agency it is considered that the proposal 

could be acceptable in terms of Policy B32 of the UDP which involves ‘Increasing 

Surface Water’ and it is trusted that the response to this consultation will come to 

hand prior to the Committee date. 

5.28 The section of the proposal that involves locating an area of solar panels in order to 

create energy for the development is also a sustainability consideration. Policy C27 

involves such plans and requests that consideration is given to whether or not any 

significant harm would be caused to the Snowdonia National Park; that the type, scale 

and design are appropriate considering the site, the location and the impact on the 

landscape; that supplementary equipment is acceptable etc. The surface area of the 

solar panels would measure approximately 47m x 47m and they would be installed on

top of a water reservoir with the highest part of the frames approximately 2m above 

the surface level of the water reservoir. It is intended to landscape the area around the 

water reservoir in order to reduce the visual impact of the panels. 

5.29 Based on the above and subject to receiving favourable observations by the 

Environment Agency on the SUDS system, it is believed that the proposal is in 

accordance with Policy B23 and C27 of the UDP. 


6.1 Based on the above assessment, and subject to receiving favourable observations by 

the Environment Agency, it is believed that the proposal is in accordance with the 

policies noted above and that there is no other relevant planning matter that states 

otherwise. 


7.1 To delegate powers to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the application, 

subject to receiving favourable observations on the application by the Environment 

Agency and relevant conditions in relation to: 

1. time 

2. in accordance with plans 

3. materials 

4. landscaping 

5. location of the temporary compound 

6. archaeological conditions 

7. any relevant conditions noted by the Environment Agency

Number: 6




Community: 

Ganllwyd 

Ward: 

Garth 

Proposal: 

Location: 



APPLICATION FOR THE DEMOLITION OF EXISTING REAR EXTENSION TOGETHER 

WITH THE ERECTION OF A PART TWO-STOREY AND PART SINGLE-STOREY 

EXTENSION TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, TOGETHER WITH THE PROVISION OF 

FRENCH DOORS AND BALCONY TO THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. 

7, GLANDWR TERRACE, BANGOR, GWYNEDD, LL572SL 



1.1 This is an application for the demolition of an existing rear extension and the erection of 

a part two-storey and part single-storey extension to the rear of the property, together 

with the provision of French doors and a balcony to the side of the property. 

1.2 The property is a three-storey end of terrace house dating from the Victorian period, and 

there is an existing part two-storey, pitched roof and part single-storey, lean-to extension 

at the rear of the property. The existing two-storey extension measures 3.2m by 4m and 

6m high to the ridge. The single-storey extension measures 3.4m by 9.6m. 

1.3 The proposal includes partially demolishing the existing rear extensions and erecting a 

part two-storey extension with a pitched roof and a part single-storey extension with a 

lean-to roof on a slightly bigger footprint than the current one. The two-storey extension 

measures 5m by 4m and 6.1m high to the ridge. The single-storey extension measures 

4m by 9.4m. The extension provides a kitchen and dining area and a wet room, utility 

and storage room on the ground floor and a bedroom on the first floor. 

1.4 It is also proposed to replace the existing window at the side of the property with French 

doors, together with installing a balcony measuring 2m by 3m and 3.7m high in its 

entirety. In this case, the element of replacing a window for a door does not require 

formal planning permission. 

1.5 It is intended to place slates on the extension roof, but at present it is not clear what the 

finish of the extension itself will be. 





considerations include National Planning Policy and the Unitary Development Plan.


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 B24 – ALTERATIONS AND BUILDING EXTENSIONS WITHIN DEVELOPMENT 

BOUNDARIES, RURAL VILLAGES AND THE COUNTRYSIDE – Ensure that proposals for 

alterations or extensions to buildings conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the 

character and amenity value of the local area. 

POLICY B25 – BUILDING MATERIALS – Safeguard the visual character by ensuring that 

building materials are of high standard and in keeping with the character and appearance of the 

local area. 


TAN 12 Design 

Planning Policy Wales (Fifth edition) November 2012 

3. Relevant Planning History: None 


Local Member: 



Welsh Water: 

Biodiversity: 

The proposal is not in keeping with the character and appearance of 

the terrace. 

No objection 

Standard advice 

No response 

There is a low potential for the presence of bats in the extension 

which is to be demolished. However, should bats be found during the 

demolition work, the work should be stopped immediately and advice 

sought from Natural Resources Wales. 



I refer to the above application and wish to state that I do not intend 

to submit a recommendation as it is supposed that the proposed 

development would not have a detrimental impact on any road or 

proposed road. 

A notice was placed on the site and neighbouring residents 

were informed. The advertising period ended on 

11.04.2013 and at the time of writing the report, five letters

items of correspondence had been received objecting on 

the following grounds: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The proposal is not in keeping with the rest of the 

terrace which is full of Victorian character and of 

historic interest. 

It is considered that replacing the window would 

affect the cohesion and nature of the terrace. 

The terrace remains as it was originally and it is 

worth preserving. 

The proposal affects the access rights of terrace 

residents. 

Concern that the coastal land could not bear the 

weight of the balcony. 

That the proposal would be clearly visible from 

Porth Penrhyn and Hirael Bay. 



5.1 General planning policies within the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan support 

applications for the erection of extensions on residential houses provided they are 

appropriately assessed. 

5.2 Policy B24 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan involves alterations to buildings. 

The proposal includes demolishing the single-storey extension and part of the existing 

two-storey extension together with erecting a part two-storey extension with a pitched 

roof and part single-storey extension with a lean-to roof on a slightly bigger footprint 

than the current one. The extension is suitable and is in keeping with the original site and 

property. The extension is approximately 1.5m greater in width than the existing 

extension, and is more or less the same in terms of length and height. It is intended to 

install a balcony outside a window which will be replaced with French doors. The 

balcony extends 2m from the gable end of the property, and its size and design are 

considered acceptable in this case. It is intended to remove the existing chimney at the 

end of the two-storey and single-storey extension. It is considered that the extension and 

balcony are of a suitable size and design, and complement the site in this case. It is not 

considered that the proposal is contrary to the requirements of policy B24 above. 

Visual, general and residential amenities 

5.3 Policies B22, B23 and B25 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan relate to assessing 

the design of the proposal, amenities and external materials. 

5.4 The proposal involves partly demolishing a two-storey and single-storey extension at the 

rear of the property, and erecting a part two-storey pitched-roof and part single-storey 

lean-to extension. It is considered that the size and design of the extension is suitable and 

complements the site. It is not considered that the extension is excessive in terms of size, 

or that it dominates any nearby property. The extension is approximately 1.5m wider than

the current extension, whilst its height and length are the same; this is not considered 

excessive. 

5.5 It is aimed to replace a current window with French doors, but this element does not 

require formal planning permission in this case. It is also intended to install a balcony 

outside the French doors which will look out over the coast and towards Porth Penrhyn. It 

is considered that the balcony is of a suitable size and design, and does not cause 

overlooking on any residential property. 

5.6 It is intended to place slates on the roof of the extension, but it is unclear what the 

proposed materials are for the balcony, or for the finish of the extension. It is considered 

that these matters can be dealt with through a planning condition. 

5.7 As a result of the above, the proposal is suitable and matches the existing dwelling in 

terms of its size and design, and it is considered that suitable materials can be agreed for 

the proposal through a planning condition. Consequently, it is not considered that the 

proposal is contrary to the requirements of policies B22, B23 or B25 of the Unitary 

Development Plan which relate to assessing the design of the proposal, amenities and 

external materials. 


5.8 Following a public consultation, five items of correspondence were received objecting to 

the proposal, noting that the proposal is not in keeping with the character of the 

remainder of the terrace which is of historic interest; that the change to the window 

affects the cohesion and nature of the terrace; that the terrace is still in its original form 

and is worth preserving; that the proposal would impact on the residents of the terrace’s 

rights of way; concern as to whether the coastal land will be able to bear the weight of the 

balcony, and that the proposal is clearly visible from Porth Penrhyn and Hirael Bay. 

5.9 The property which is the subject of this application, or any other properties within the 

terrace, are not listed, and neither have they been earmarked as a conservation area. It is 

not considered that the proposal to hand is unreasonable or excessive, and it is considered 

that a part two-storey pitched roof and part single-storey lean-to extension with a 

footprint which is only slightly larger than the current structure, is suitable. Replacing a 

window for a door does not require formal planning permission in this case, and it is 

considered that the balcony is of a suitable size and design, with materials to be agreed 

through a planning condition. 

5.10 The path which runs along the side of the property which is the subject of this application 

appears to be in the applicant’s ownership, and there is no argument against this. The 

path is not a public footpath; therefore the allegation of access rights is a civil matter, and 

not a matter for the application. The coastal land on the side of the property does not 

seem unstable, and the applicant has not expressed concern regarding this in his 

application. 


6.1 I do not consider the proposal to be contrary to any relevant policy. The proposal is 

unlikely to have a detrimental effect on the amenities of the local area or any nearby 

properties.


To approve – conditions 

1. 5 years 

2. Ensure that the development is completed in accordance with the plans submitted 

3. External finish of the extension to be agreed in writing with the LPA 

4. The materials for the balcony to be agreed in writing with the LPA 

4. Slates on the roof 

Welsh Water note

Number: 7




Community: 

Llandygai 

Ward: 

Tregarth and Mynydd Llandygai 

Proposal: 

Location: 



REFURBISHMENT WORKS TO 26 DWELLINGS WHICH WILL INCLUDE 

THE REMOVAL OF EXISTING WALLS AND THEIR RE-CONSTRUCTION 

WITH AN EXTERNAL SMOOTH RENDER FINISH, INSTALLATION OF 

NEW WINDOWS AND DOORS AND RE-ROOFING 

2,3,5-9,11,13,16-21,23,25,26,28,29,32-34, 36-38, ERW FAEN, TREGARTH, 

BANGOR, GWYNEDD, LL574AT 



1.1 An application to carry out works on 26 dwellings which form part of a wider estate, 

which include a total of 40 two-storey semi-detached houses in the village of Tregarth. 

1.2 The houses which are the subject of this application are known as ‘airey’ houses, i.e. 

prefabricated houses which were erected for local authorities following the second world 

war. 

1.3 The proposed development involves removing the existing external walls of the houses 

which are made of concrete panels and pillars, and re-erecting new walls of insulated 

block with an external smooth render finish, and re-roofing and installing new windows 

and doors. 










POLICY B24 – ALTERATIONS AND BUILDING EXTENSIONS WITHIN DEVELOPMENT 

BOUNDARIES, RURAL VILLAGES AND THE COUNTRYSIDE 

Ensure that proposals for alterations or extensions to buildings conform to a series of criteria 

aimed at protecting the character and amenity value of the local area. 

POLICY B25 – BUILDING MATERIALS




Planning Policy Wales – Edition 5, 2012 

Technical Advice Note 12 – Design 


3.1 There is varying planning history for individual houses within the estate, including 

applications for single/two storey extensions etc. 




Support. 

A notice was placed on the site and nearby residents were 

informed. The consultation period ended on 21 March and 

eight letters / items of correspondence were received 

objecting on the following grounds: 

 

 

 

 

Incorrect/misleading plans 

Incorrect/misleading information 

Structural damage to houses and adverse impact on 

the amenities of the residents of neighbouring houses 

Parking difficulties 

As well as the abovementioned objections, objections were 

received which were not valid planning objections, which 

include: 

 

 

 

 

Matters relating to a party wall 

Technical differences in the details between this plan 

and an already-approved plan 

Lack of information regarding risk assessments, 

statements of method etc. 

Human Rights Act 



5.1.1 This plan to improve and upgrade houses of this type forms part of a long-term work 

programme by Cartrefi Cymunedol Gwynedd to improve the quality of these homes by 

insulating them to an acceptable standard, and improving them through upgrading 

materials and finishes. The principle of undertaking work of this sort in order to improve 

the quality of life of the residents of the houses is acceptable, provided the work will not

have an excessive impact on the area’s visual amenities, or on the amenities of 

neighbouring residents. 


5.2.1 These houses have been a part of the village’s landscape and a number of other villages 

in the County for a long time. The proposed work would undoubtedly change the 

appearance of the houses, and this must be considered and weighed up in the context of 

the impact on the visual amenities of the nearby area. 

5.2.2 A number of the houses in the estate have been sold to private owners, and we can see 

that some changes have already been made to some of these houses through works such 

as extending, rendering of external walls, painting etc. Although the majority of the 

estate’s houses still currently retain their original appearances, there is no longer a 

uniform character to the whole estate due to the changes that have already been 

implemented by private owners. 

5.2.3 It is intended to impose a condition to agree on the final external finish, and therefore 

although the original appearance of most of the houses will appear to change, there will 

be an opportunity to ensure that the proposed appearance is suitable to its location and is 

consistent with general appearances in the area. 

5.2.4 It is therefore considered that the proposal is acceptable and complies with the 

requirements of policies B24 and B25. 

5.3 General and residential amenities 

5.3.1 The proposed work will certainly cause some inconvenience and concern prior to and 

during the period of the proposed development, specifically for the residents of those 

houses that are joined to the houses which are the subject of this application. 

5.3.2 The concerns that have been highlighted mainly relate to the effect of the development on 

the houses that adjoin the houses which are the subject of the proposed works. Most of 

the concerns raised in the observations received are civil matters, i.e. they mainly relate 

to considerations given under the Party Wall Act and the arrangements of Cartrefi 

Cymunedol Gwynedd and their contractors during the period of the work. 

5.3.3 It is acknowledged that there will be an impact on the amenities of the residents of the 

houses adjoining the houses which will be renovated during the works, but this will be a 

relatively short-term impact, and having completed the work, there will be no likely longterm 

impact on these houses or their residents. It is therefore considered that the proposal 

would be consistent with the requirements of policy B23. 

5.4 Any other considerations – None 

5.5 Response to the public consultation 

5.5.1 As already noted, observations were received from residents of the estate regarding this 

proposal and the impact of the work on their houses during and after completing the 

work. These residents have bought their homes and some have not carried out work on

them to change them from their original ‘airey’ appearance, and are therefore concerned 

about the effect of the work on their houses due to the existing concrete pillars and panels 

being removed or broken. 

5.5.2 In response to these observations, a letter was received from Cartrefi Cymunedol 

Gwynedd explaining the background of the work, the need to improve the condition of 

the houses for their tenants, and the arrangements that would be put in place before and 

during the works. This includes appointing an independent Party Wall Inspector to 

implement the necessary process under the requirements of the Party Wall Act, namely to 

communicate with the residents affected by the work and agree on arrangements and 

responsibilities. 

5.5.3 They also note that every effort will be made to look at providing additional parking 

spaces as part of their programme of environmental improvements. 


6.1 Having considered the above and having considered all relevant matters, including local 

and national policies and guidelines and observations/objections received from 

neighbours, this proposal to carry out work on these houses is acceptable, as it would 

raise the standard of the houses for the residents, and since changes have already been 

implemented on other houses in the estate, there would be no excessive adverse impact 

on the area’s visual amenities. 


7.1 Approve – with conditions 

1. Time 

2. Comply with plans 

3. Materials 

4. A note drawing the applicant’s attention to their obligation to follow the requirements 

of the Party Wall Act

Number: 8




Community: 

Bangor 

Ward: 

Deiniol 

Proposal: 

Location: 



APPLICATION FOR THE ERECTION OF TWO BUILDINGS PROVIDING STUDENT 

ACCOMMODATION COMPRISING OF 36 BEDSPACES, INCLUDING COMMUNAL AND 

ANCILLARY FACILITIES, LANDSCAPING AND CAR PARKING. 

FORMER VICTORIA BUILDING LAND, PLAS LLWYD TERRACE, BANGOR, 

GWYNEDD, LL57 1UB 

TO DELEGATE POWERS TO APPROVE SUBJECT TO SIGNING A 106 

AGREEMENT 


1.1 Application for full planning permission to erect two buildings to provide a 36 bedroom 

student accommodation including internal communal and ancillary facilities, 

landscaping, bicycle shelters and car parking and turning space. 

1.2 The proposal would involve erecting two three-storey buildings with an external finish of 

contrasting block and brick work and a roof of natural slate. Parking spaces will be 

provided for two vehicles (including one designated disabled parking space) with 

associated turning space, two bicycle shelters accommodating nine bicycles each and 

green spaces including landscaping the front of the site. 

1.3 The proposed use is to create and provide 6 five bedroom units with a communal lounge 

and kitchen to be shared within one building, and 6 one bedroom self-contained units in 

the second building. Both buildings measure 10.5 metres high while one building has a 

floor surface area of 20 x 6 metres (a total of 360 metres over three floors) and the other 

has a floor surface area of 10 x 6 metres (a total of 180 metres over three floors). 

1.4 The site is located in a central position in the city in a location which is approximately 90 

metres from the high street and with a public car park located adjacent to the western 

boundary of the site. The nearby buildings vary in use, including residential houses/flats 

and offices. Bangor mountain abuts the site’s eastern boundary and is of a substantial 

height. 

1.5 The site lies partly within the city’s development boundaries, which has been designated 

as a sub-regional centre in the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan. 





considerations include National Planning Policy and the Unitary Development Plan.


DESIGN STANDARD – STRATEGIC POLICY 4 - Development will be expected to be of a 

good design in order to ensure that it makes a positive contribution, wherever possible, to the 

landscape, built environment and sustainable development. 

REDEVLOPING AND REUSING PREVIOUSLY USED LAND – STRATEGIC POLICY 6 - 

Priority will be given to making appropriate and suitable use of previously developed land, which 

is suitable for development, or buildings that are vacant or not used to their full potential. 

Development should make the most efficient and practicable use of land or buildings in terms of 

density, siting and layout. 

Policy B22 – Building design - Promote the design of good buildings by ensuring that proposals 

conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the recognised features and character of the 

local landscape and environment. 

Policy B23 – Amenities - Safeguard the amenities of the local area by ensuring that proposals 

conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting the recognised features and amenities of the 

local area. 

Policy B25 – Building materials - Safeguard the visual character by ensuring that the building 

materials are of high standard and in-keeping with the character and appearance of the local area. 

Policy B27 – Landscaping plans - Ensuring that permitted proposals incorporate soft/hard 

landscaping of high standard which is appropriate for the site and which takes into consideration 

a series of factors aimed at avoiding damage to recognised features. 

Policy C1 - Locating new developments – Land within town and village boundaries and the 

developed form of rural villages will be the main focus for new developments. New buildings, 

structures and ancillary facilities in the countryside will be refused with the exception of a 

development that is permitted by another policy of the Plan. 

Policy C3 – Re-using previously developed sites – Proposals which give priority to the use of 

land or buildings previously developed and located within or adjacent to development boundaries 

will be permitted if the site or the building and use are appropriate. 

Policy C7 - Building in a sustainable manner – Proposals for new 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 regarding sustainable 

buildings, unless it is not practical to do so. 

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 CH31 – Providing for cyclists – Development proposals which do not provide specific 

facilities for cycling where there are obvious opportunities for doing so will be refused. 

Policy CH33 – Safety on roads and streets - Development proposals will be approved if they 

comply with specific criteria involving the vehicular access, the quality of the existing roads 

network and traffic calming measures.

Policy CH36 – Private car parking facilities - Proposals for new developments, extension of 

existing developments or change of use will be refused unless off-street parking is provided in 

accordance with the Council’s current parking guidelines and having given due consideration to 

accessibility of public transport, the possibility of walking or cycling from the site and the 

distance from the site to a public car park. 


Planning Policy Wales - Edition 5, 2012 

Chapter 3 – determining planning decisions and enforcing them 

Chapter 4 – planning for sustainability 

Chapter 8 - transport 

Chapter 9 - housing 

Technical Advice Note (TAN) 

TAN 12: Design 

TAN 18: Transport 

TAN 20: The Welsh Language 

TAN 22: Sustainable Building 


3.1 C12/0963/11/HY – erection of freestanding sign – approved 09.08.12 

C07A/0755/11/MG – demolition of existing building and erection of 10 houses (approval 

of reserved matters under outline permission C07A/0105/11/AM) - approved 06.12.07. 

C07A/0105/11/AM – construction of 10 houses and parking spaces - approved 10.04.07 




No objection. 

No objection, but in accordance with CSS Wales parking standards, 

up to 1 parking space is expected for every 25 bedspaces (for 

servicing, wardens and drop-off space) and 1 parking space for every 

10 bed spaces (for students and/or visitors), which is a total of five 

parking spaces for this application. In light of the proximity of the 

application to the city centre, local facilities, public transport and the 

nearby pay and display car park, the application’s proposed parking 

provision can be accepted, however, it is recommended that a 

financial contribution is made based on the difference in numbers

etween the desirable number of parking spaces and the actual 

number. Two recent planning appeals dealing with similar 

applications also confirm that such developments with low parking 

provision can be approved in urban/city areas. The task of 

constructing the development is likely to be frustrating in terms of 

access and transporting goods to the site, as there is no easy access to 

the site for larger vehicles. The road through the car park is narrow 

during the day, and the access to Plas Llwyd Terrace from the High 

Street is restricted for long periods. Therefore it is recommended that 

the developer should submit a construction phase plan, to be 

approved by the Street Care Manager. Additional observation: The 

site (marked red) does not abut the end of the nearby adopted road. In 

addition, there are no details as to what kind of boundary it is 

intended to construct between the parking and turning space within 

the curtilage, and the slope down to the car park. I recommend that 

the applicant should submit these details prior to approval of the 

application, or that at least a condition can be imposed for these 

details to be approved prior to commencement of the development. 

Biodiversity Unit: 

No concerns as the site has already been cleared. 

Access Officer: Acknowledge what is proposed and offers further 

observations relating to some specific aspects. 

Joint Policy Unit: The UDP does not contain a policy that deals specifically with a 

proposal of this nature. While Policy C1 encourages development 

within development boundaries, when considering whether or not 

the principle of developing student units on the site is acceptable, 

material considerations such as the fact that the majority of the 

site is on previously developed land and that the site already has 

extant planning permission, are of great importance. With this in 

mind, it is believed that consideration should be given to whether 

or not what is being proposed is an improvement of the existing 

planning permission in relation to aspects such as the visual 

impact, impact on amenities, parking provision, density of use 

etc. 

Consideration should be given to whether or not there is evidence 

of the need for providing additional student accommodation in 

Bangor. It is likely that such a provision would be beneficial in 

terms of freeing up houses of multiple occupancy for local 

residents who are in need of such housing. 

It is essential that the proposal does not affect the amenities of 

local residents in any way, and neither should it be incompatible 

in terms of its design or size. 


Welsh Water: 

Not aware of any flooding history for the site, but suggest that a 

standard condition should be included to manage surface water 

discharge. 

Not received.



Not received. 

A notice was posted on site, an advert placed in the local press and 

nearby residents were informed. The consultation period ended on 

04.04.13 and three letters/correspondences were received objecting 

on the following grounds: 

Impact on the amenities of local residents 

Noise 

Unacceptable height 

Loss / harmful impact on trees 

Sustainability matters 

Sub-standard access 

Unacceptable increase in vehicle numbers 

Unacceptable impact on existing access to nearby building 

Lack of information on the construction arrangements 

Loss of trees 

Need for residential housing rather than student 

accommodation 

In addition to the above, objections were received which were not 

valid planning objections, including: 

 

 

Land ownership 

Condition of the boundary wall 



5.1.1 The site is located directly off the high street and is relatively close to the city centre. It 

is currently a site that is partly developed due to the demolition of buildings on the site in 

light of previous planning approvals for residential development. 

5.1.2 Therefore, the principle of developing this site has already been approved. In principle, 

this application is considered acceptable. 


5.2.1 As already mentioned, this site is partially developed having demolished commercial 

buildings in accordance with planning application C07A/0755/11/MG. Following this 

demolition work, the site has been left empty and has been surrounded with a security 

fence. 

5.2.2 It is a relatively prominent site despite being to the rear of the high street, however the 

location of a public car park to the front of the site means that many visitors to the city 

pass by the site when using this car park.

5.2.3 This proposal, compared to the previously approved development (and which continues 

to be a ‘live’ permission following the demolition of buildings), is relatively similar in 

design, layout and size. It can be seen that an attempt has been made to convey aspects of 

the previous development within this design, and in comparing the plans, one can see that 

the height, form, layout and the mass of both developments match each other. The front 

elevations of the proposed buildings have changed and improved to convey what would 

be acceptable for this type of development as opposed to the previously proposed 

residential houses (which included garages on the ground floor). 

5.2.4 It is considered that this proposal retains a number of the aspects of the previously 

approved development on this site, there are elements that are common to both 

developments and the proposal to use finishes such as the mixture of brick, blocks and 

slate reflect the general appearance in the area. 

5.2.5 It is therefore considered that this proposal is acceptable since there are common 

elements to the proposal in terms of the design, form and layout of the previously 

approved buildings and that it is in keeping within the area in terms of its setting within 

the site, therefore it is believed that the proposal complies with the requirements of 

Policies B22, B23 and B25. 

5.3 General and Residential Amenities 

5.3.1 Historically, this site has been used for commercial uses, however, it has been left empty 

since these buildings were demolished, which creates an untidy appearance within the 

local area. 

5.3.2 The presence of Bangor mountain to the rear of the site protects and creates a substantial 

backdrop for the proposed buildings meaning that they would not dominate the horizon 

or the local streetscape. 

5.3.3 The living units at Plas Llwyd Terrace are located approximately 30 metres from the 

nearest side of the proposed building while the houses at Ger y Mynydd are 

approximately 35 metres away. The Victoria House building at the top of Plas Llwyd 

Terrace, is located adjacent to the development site and is currently used as offices for a 

company of accountants. It is not considered that there would be an excessive harmful 

impact on these living units due to the distance and the relationship between the site and 

the houses. It is not considered that the impact would be greater in any way than the 

impact of the previously approved development (which continues to be ‘live’ as it was 

commenced within the permitted time by demolishing the buildings). The development 

will mainly affect the Victoria House building due to the proximity of both sites to each 

other, again however, it is not considered that this impact would be any greater than the 

impact of the previous application should it be realised. For this reason, and specifically 

the planning permission that already exists for the residential development, it is not 

considered that the proposal would be contrary to the requirements of policy B23. 

5.3.4 The proposal includes green spaces with landscaping to the front of the site, and by 

including a suitable condition to accept and agree upon a landscaping plan for the site; it 

is considered that the visual impact of the buildings will be reduced by introducing 

suitable landscaping to ‘soften’ the site’s elevations; therefore, this proposal will satisfy 

the requirements of policy B27.

5.3.5 The site is located approximately 90 metres from the high street, despite the road past 

Plas Llwyd Terrace being relatively steep towards the site. This is not considered to be 

excessive and its central location within the city means that it is close to local services 

and local transport links and is therefore accessible to a wide range of users, hence, the 

proposal is considered to comply with the requirements of policy CH30. 

5.3.6 It is noted that approximately half the planning application site is located outside the 

development boundary as noted in the GUDP, with the other half located inside it. 

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 additional buildings, 

structures and ancillary facilities in the countryside will be refused (i.e. outside the 

development boundaries and outside the developed form of Rural Villages) except for a 

development permitted by another policy in the Plan. The UDP does not contain a policy 

that deals specifically with a development of this nature. The proposal cannot be dealt 

with in accordance with the UDP housing policies (namely policies CH3 and CH6 which 

refer to locating houses within the development boundary with consideration of providing 

affordable housing) or Policy CH39 (Further and Higher Education Developments) which 

refers to developments on higher education sites. As the application site is not part of the 

University’s recognised campus, it is not appropriate for the proposal to be considered as 

part of Policy CH39. It is believed that there is a need to weigh up material 

considerations when deciding whether or not the principle of siting the proposed 

development in this particular location is acceptable. It is believed that the following 

considerations are relevant for consideration in this context: 

- The majority of the site, including the part that is located outside the development 

boundary has been previously developed. Policy C3 notes that proposals will be 

“approved if they give priority, wherever possible, to re-using previously developed land 

or buildings that are located within or near development boundaries, rather than utilising 

greenfield sites, provided that the site or building and the proposed use are suitable and 

conform to the Plan’s objectives and development strategy”. 

- This site already has planning permission for ten houses (i.e. the entire site, including 

inside and outside the development boundary). It has been given to understand that the 

permission has physically commenced (as buildings have been demolished). In light of 

this physical commencement, houses can be built on this site at any time. 

5.3.7 It is believed that sufficient evidence has been submitted which states that there is a 

demand for accommodation of this nature, the condition of the site is currently 

unacceptable and therefore it is seen that there would be an improvement by developing 

the site, most of the site is on previously developed land and there is permission for 

constructing ten new houses on it. It is considered that this proposal is an improvement 

given the above matters which ensures that the proposal complies with the requirements 

of policies C1 and C3. 

5.4 Transport and access matters 

5.4.1 The number of parking spaces shown for the site is low, as the observations of the 

transportation unit can confirm, however, and consistent with similar arrangements 

involving other similar recent developments, it is intended to ask for a financial 

contribution based on the difference between the number of provided parking spaces, 

namely three, and the number that would normally be required, namely five parking

spaces. This money would be spent on either improving local roads or existing facilities, 

such as the car park located adjacent to the site. 

5.4.2 Despite the reference to the low number of parking spaces, the transportation unit does 

not object to the application, therefore it is considered that the proposal is acceptable and 

complies with the requirements of policies CH33 and CH36. 

5.4.3 Two bicycle shelters have been proposed for the site, therefore, it is considered that the 

proposal satisfies the requirements of policy CH31. 

5.5 Sustainability Issues 

5.5.1 A development of this size means that it would have to be built in line with current 

sustainability standards. To reach these standards, a detailed report must be submitted 

explaining how the development will ensure compliance with these requirements, by 

doing so, and by adding a specific condition referring to the need to submit a completion 

certificate, it will be ensured that the requirements of policy C7 will be met. 

5.6 Relevant planning history 

5.6.1 The previous application that was approved to construct 10 houses has already 

commenced on site, due to the demolition of buildings on the site. This means that the 

site can be developed lawfully without requiring any further planning approval. The 

current application has sought to demonstrate buildings of the same form, size and 

appearance as those already approved, it is not considered that the contents of this 

development would cause any greater impact than the application that has already been 

approved. 

5.6.2 In terms of the proposed use and the previously approved use, there is some difference, 

however both are for residential uses, and should the houses have been completed, there 

would be nothing to prevent the owners from letting those houses to students should they 

wish to. It is not considered that this difference in use is substantially different from what 

has already been approved and that the impact would not be any greater. 

5.7 Community Benefit / 106 Agreement issues 

See paragraph 5.4.1 above. 

5.8 Any other considerations 

5.8.1 Language and community assessment – this document which refers to the impact of the 

development on language and community matters within the area has been submitted 

with the application. There is reference to the document in the policy unit’s observations. 

5.8.2 Screening opinion – an application was submitted to screen the proposed development in 

accordance with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning Regulations 

(Environmental Impact Assessment) (Wales and England) 1999 (as amended), it was 

found that the development does not meet the required threshold for submitting a full 

Environmental Impact Assessment. 

5.9 Response to the public consultation

5.9.1 Observations have been submitted by neighbours of the proposed development site, 

which have already been mentioned. It is considered that the material concerns and 

observations have received full consideration in determining this application, however 

they are not sufficient to change the recommendation. 

5.9.2 Matters such as land ownership and boundary walls are civil matters to be resolved 

between the concerned parties, however, the applicant’s attention was drawn to the claim 

that a piece of land that had been included in the development was not within their 

ownership. Information was received in the form of land registry details to confirm that 

the developer owns the land. 


6.1 The site is partly located within the development boundaries of the city of Bangor, and is 

considered a brownfield site because of its previous use. Planning Policy Wales 

recommends developments on such sites rather than using green lands. The site has been 

in an unacceptable condition for some time now and this has disrupted the visual 

amenities of the site. 

6.2 There is increasing demand for specific residential sites for students and it could be 

argued that such developments are likely to release housing in the city from being used as 

houses in multiple occupation and will become available for local families. 

6.3 After considering all relevant matters, including local and national policies and guidelines 

and observations received from third parties, it is considered that this application is 

acceptable and that it complies with the requirements of the relevant policies and by 

imposing relevant conditions and receiving a financial contribution towards improving 

local roads/facilities, it can be ensured that the development is implemented to the 

complete satisfaction of the local planning authority. 


7.1 To delegate powers to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the application with 

conditions subject to signing a 106 Agreement regarding a contribution for improving 

local roads/facilities. 

Conditions; 

1. Time 

2. Comply with plans 

3. Materials 

4. Highways matters 

5. Submit a construction method statement 

6. Environment Agency condition 

7. Submit a BREEAM construction certificate 

8. Submit landscaping details 

9. Protect trees 

10. Note referring to the requirements of the Party Wall Act

Number: 9 




Community: 

Aberdaron 

Ward: 

Aberdaron 

Proposal: 

Location: 

REVISED APPLICATION – SINGLE-STOREY PITCHED ROOF 

EXTENSION TO FRONT AND TWO DORMER WINDOWS 

FFERM CARREG, ABERDARON, PWLLHELI, GWYNEDD, LL538LH 


TO REFUSE 


1.1 This is a revised application for the construction of a single-storey extension to the front 

of the property in order to provide a porch and dining room/conservatory along with 

creating two dormer windows. The property is a traditional stone farmhouse and the 

pitched roof extension would be located centrally on the front of the building. Due to the 

roof pattern of the extension, the first floor windows would have to be raised higher and 

new dormer windows would have to be installed above. It is intended to use stone to clad 

the extension and a slate roof. It is located in a rural site, with the property set back, but 

visible from the road between the farm buildings. The property is located within an Area 

of Outstanding Natural Beauty. 

1.2 Application no. C12/1618/30/LL for a single-storey, pitched roof extension to the front 

of the building was refused in January this year for design reasons. The current 

application is a revised design for the same proposal of erecting a dining 

room/conservatory and porch. 

1.3 The application is submitted to Committee at the Local Member’s request. 







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. 


Promote good building design by ensuring that proposals conform to a series of criteria 

aimed at safeguarding the recognised features and character of the local landscape and 

environment.

POLICY B24 – ALTERATIONS AND BUILDING EXTENSIONS WITHIN 

DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES, RURAL VILLAGES AND THE COUNTRYSIDE 

Ensure that proposals for alterations or extensions to buildings conform to a series of 

criteria aimed at protecting the character and amenity value of the local area. 


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. 

Gwynedd Council Design Guide. (April 2003) 


Planning Policy Wales (Fifth edition) November 2012 

Technical Advice Note 12: Design – June (2009) 


3.1 C12/1618/30/LL – Single-storey, pitched roof extension to the front – Refused 15 

January 2013. 

C04D/0157/30/LL – First floor extension – Approved 1 July 2004. 

2/10/71A - Extension to a house – Approved 14 February 1990. 




AONB Officer: 


Not received. 

It is assumed that the proposed development would not have a 

detrimental impact on any road or proposed road. 

Not received. 

A notice was placed on the site. There are no neighbouring residents 

to notify. The advertising period ended on 11 April 2013 but no 

observations or letters of objection had been received at the time of 

preparing the report. 



5.1 Generally, policies B22 and B24 of the GUDP approve proposals to extend existing 

houses provided they comply with the criteria and the policies. The policies presume 

against developments unless they are in keeping with and respect the character of the 

original building in terms of design. The proposed development is to be erected on the 

main façade of the stone farmhouse which is the only publically visible façade considered 

to be a traditional characteristic façade. 

5.2 The previous application, no. C12/1618/30/LL for a front extension, was refused as it was 

considered that the proposal had a significant detrimental effect on the traditional

character of the main façade of the property. Despite the revised design, by changing the 

pitch of the roof and introducing a gable on the front, it is not considered that the changes 

proposed overcome the main concern regarding the effect of the proposal on the character 

of the building. In reality, the revised design involves more interference to the traditional 

façade, due to the need to introduce two first-floor dormer windows because of the roof 

pattern of the extension, which would be foreign features. 

5.3 It is considered that the proposed extension/conservatory extends widely along the front 

of the property and has a dominating effect on it. The design of the development does not 

respect the site in terms of its scale, location or form at the front of the property and they 

are considered to detract from the main façade of the house. It is considered that the 

proposal as a whole is incongruous, unsympathetic and harmful to the character of the 

main façade of the property contrary to the recommendations of the Gwynedd Design 

Guide and the principles of good design in TAN 12 Design and the criteria of policies 

B22 and B24. 

5.4 Although the proposal would affect the character of the original property which is within 

the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, it is not considered that the proposal would 

stand out or have a negative impact on the landscape of the AONB. It is not considered 

that the proposal is contrary to policy B8. 


6.1 It is not considered that this proposal complies with the requirements of Policies B22 and 

B24 of the GUDP due to its scale, size and form and the extension would dominate the 

front façade of the property. The revised proposal does not alleviate the concerns of 

officers. The extension to the front elevation would be incongruous and unsympathetic 

and would have a harmful effect on the character of the main façade of the property and, 

therefore, it is considered that the application should be refused as it does not comply 

with the objective of policies B22, B24 and the Gwynedd Design Guide. 


7.1 To refuse – Contrary to policies B22 and B24 of the GUDP and the Gwynedd Design 

Guide (incongruous design having a harmful effect on the character of the main façade of 

the property). 

The extension / conservatory, by virtue of its design and location on the front elevation of 

the property, would appear as an incongruous feature on the house and would have a 

severely detrimental effect on the appearance and character of the main façade of this 

traditional farmhouse. The proposal is therefore contrary to policies B22 and B24 of the 

Adopted Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan July 2009, and the Gwynedd Design 

Guide.




PWLLHELI 

Number 10: 

1




PWLLHELI 

Cais Rhif: 

C12/0495/36/MW 

Dyddiad Cofrestru: 08/05/2012 

Math y Cais: Minerals 

Cymuned: 

Dolbenmaen 

Ward: 

Dolbenmaen 

Bwriad: 

Lleoliad: 



WINNING AND WORKING OF SAND AND GRAVEL AND 

RESTORATION TO AGRICULTURAL USE 

LLECHEIDDIOR UCHAF, GARNDOLBENMAEN, LL51 9EZ 

TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION 

PURPOSE 

This application was reported to the Planning Committee on 25 February 2013, and the 

Committee’s resolution was to defer consideration of the application in order to receive further 

information regarding the long-term visual impacts of the scheme of restoration, archaeological 

issues and to re-examine the transportation matters. 


1.1 The proposal is for the extraction of sand and gravel working on the site of a former quarry which 

ceased operation in 1979 but in addition, the proposals include for extraction on previously 

undeveloped agricultural land. The site, including the extraction area, ancillary land and lagoons 

is approximately 14 hectares in area and is located 400m west of Bryncir, adjacent to the Afon 

Dwyfach. 

1.2 The total mineral resource is estimated at 600,000 tonnes with the proposed operations involving 

the extraction of material should take approximately 12 years to complete. 

1.3 The details of the application only include for the winning and working of sand and gravel and 

restoration to agricultural use. This would mean that raw materials excavated from the working 

face would be stockpiled on site, ready for dispatch to the processing facility at Bryncir which has 

an existing planning permission for; ‘“Processing and packing of aggregates, concrete batching 

in addition to recycling soil and inert materials such as slate, sand and gravel”, ref. 

C09D/0375/36/LL. The material therefore would be transported to the processing facility along 

400m of single-track unclassified road which connects the application site with Bryncir Industrial 

Estate and the junction with the A487 Trunk road. There are no proposals for the processing and 

grading of materials on the application site. Restoration should be configured to make the best use 

of materials recovered as part of the mineral operation with a presumption to return the land back 

into productive agricultural use. 

1.4 The information submitted with the application included information relating to: 

Landscape Character and Visual Matters 

Ecology and Nature Conservation 

Archaeology and Cultural Heritage 

Noise 

Hydrology, Hydrogeology, Water Quality, Drainage & Flood Risk 

Soil Survey 

Traffic & Transport 

Air Quality (Dust) 

Geology 

2




PWLLHELI 




Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Planning considerations 

include National Planning Policy and the Unitary Development Plan. 


STRATEGIC POLICY 2 - THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 

STRATEGIC POLICY 3 - BUILT AND HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT 

STRATEGIC POLICY 5 - DEVELOPMENTS WHICH CREATE RISK 

STRATEGIC POLICY 7 - MINERALS 

STRATEGIC POLICY 16 – EMPLOYMENT 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

POLICY A1 - ENVIRONMENTAL OR OTHER IMPACT ASSESSMENTS. Ensure that 

sufficient information is provided with the planning application regarding any environmental 

impacts or other likely and substantial impact, in the form of an environmental assessment or 

assessments of other impacts. 

POLICY A3 - PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE 

Refuse proposals if there is any possibility of serious or irreversible damage to the 

environment or the community unless the relevant impact assessment can show beyond doubt 

at the end of that the impact can be avoided or alleviated. 

POLICY B7 - SITES OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE 

Proposals that will damage or destroy archaeological remains of national importance or their 

setting (whether scheduled or not) will be refused. A development which affects other 

archaeological remains will be permitted only if the need for the development overrides the 

significance of the archaeological remains. 

POLICY B8 - LLYN AND ANGLESEY AREAS OF OUTSTANDING NATURAL 

BEAUTY 

Safeguard, maintain and enhance the character of Areas of Outstanding Natural beauty by 

ensuring that development proposals comply with a schedule of criteria which aim to protect 

recognized features. 

POLICY B14- PROTECTING THE LANDSCAPE CHARACTER OF THE SNOWDONIA 

NATIONAL PARK 

Protecting the Landscape Character of the Snowdonia National Park. Proposals which would 

adversely affect the qualities and special character of the Snowdonia National Park will be 

refused unless they can comply with a series of criteria which aim to manage, enhance and 

protect the Park designation. 

POLICY B16 - PROTECTING NATIONALLY IMPORTANT CONSERVATION SITES 

Refuse proposals which are likely to cause significant damage to nature conservation sites of 

national significance unless they conform to a series of criteria aimed at protecting, 

enhancing and managing recognised features within the sites. 

POLICY B17 - LOCAL WILDLIFE SITES 

Refuse proposals that are likely to cause significant harm to sites of regional or local 

significance unless they comply with a set of criteria which aim to protect, promote and 

manage recognized features of these sites. 

3




PWLLHELI 

 

 

 

 

 

POLICY B21 - WILDLIFE CORRIDORS, HABITAT LINKAGES AND STEPPING 

STONES 

Safeguard the soundness of landscape features which are important to wild flora and fauna 

unless the reasons for the development outweigh the need to maintain the features and 

mitigating measures can be provided. 

POLICY B23 - AMENITIES 

Protection of the amenities of local communities through securing that proposals comply with 

a series of criteria which aim to protect recognized features and the amenities of the locality. 

POLICY B32 - SURFACE WATER 

Proposals that do not include flood minimisation or mitigation measures that will reduce the 

volume and rate at which run off reaches rivers and other watercourses will be refused. 

POLICY B33 – DEVELOPMENT THAT CREATES POLLUTION OR NUISANCE 

Protection of public health, safety or amenities, or to the quality of the built or natural 

environment as a result of higher levels of pollution. 

POLICY B35 - AVOIDING THE SPREAD OF INVASIVE SPECIES 

Ensure that measures to deal with invasive species are implemented, where a development 

involves disturbing soil which they have polluted. 

POLICY C9 - MINERAL DEVELOPMENT OUTSIDE THE LLYN AREA OF 

OUTSTANDING NATURAL BEAUTY 

To permit sites for mineral development based on a series of criteria which involve the 

principles concerning the amenities of local residents, landscape impacts, operational details 

and the means of working the material produced. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

POLICY C10 - CONTRIBUTION TO THE SUPPLY OF AGGREGATES 

To have regard to current national policy for maintaining a landbank of aggregates minerals 

and the relevant guidance in Minerals Technical Advice Note MTAN (Wales) 1: Aggregates. 

POLICY C11 - SAFEGUARDING MINERAL RESOURCES 

Safeguarding of mineral resources for future use with the identification of Mineral 

Consultation Areas (MCAs) on the proposals map. Ensure that any non-mineral development 

within the MCA do not have an unscceptable impact on mineral resources. 

POLICY C12 - BUFFER ZONES 

Planning applications for mineral extraction within the buffer zones identified on the 

proposals maps will be refused unless a new buffer zone can be provided to reflect the 

minimum distances referred to in MTAN1: Aggregates. 

POLICY C14 - RESTORATION AND AFTERCARE 

Applications for mineral working will be refused unless a scheme for restoration, aftercare 

and afteruse, including details of proposed funding is included. 

POLICY CH22 - CYCLING NETWORK, PATHS AND RIGHTS OF WAY 

All parts of the cycling network, footpaths and rights of way will be protected by encouraging 

proposals to incorporate the above satisfactorily within the development and by refusing 

proposals which will prohibit plans to extend the cycling network, footpaths or rights of way. 

If this is not possible, appropriate provision will have to be made to divert the route or to 

provide a new and acceptable route. 

POLICY CH33 - SAFETY ON ROADS AND STREETS 

4




PWLLHELI 

Development proposals will be approved only if they conform with specific development 

criteria including safe vehicular access, standard of the existing road network to 

accommodate the flow of traffic from the development and traffic calming measures. 

 

POLICY CH34 – RURAL LANES 

Development proposals will be refused if they cause an unacceptable increase in the number 

of vehicles using Rural Minor Roads where the main users are expected to be pedestrians, 

cyclists or horse riders. 


Policies, guidance and general principles set out in the Welsh Assembly 

Government Minerals Planning Policy (Dec 2000), 


Government Planning Policy Wales (November 2012), 

Welsh Office Circular 60/96 (Planning and the Historic Environment: Archaeology), 

Policies, guidance and general principles set out in the Welsh Assembly Government 

Technical 

Advice Note (Wales) 5: Nature Conservation 


Technical 

Advice Note (Wales) 11: Noise 


Technical 

Advice Note (Wales) 18: Transport 


Government Minerals Technical Advice Note (Wales) 1: AGGREGATES (March 2004) 

Policies, guidance and general principles set out in the Regional Technical Statement 2008 


3.1 In respect of the application details, the following permissions relate to previous workings within 

the first phase of the development proposals and the area that occupies the saddle between phases 

2 & 4 as well as a scheme of extraction implemented on land to the south west of the proposed 

phase 3 of operations at Llystyn Ganol; 

3.2 Grant of planning permission by Lleyn Rural District Council under the Town and Country 

Planning (Interim Development) Order 1945 & 46 for the working and extraction of sand and 

gravel on parcels 936 & 935 at Llecheiddior Uchaf – 6 th May 1947. 

3.3 ApplicationNo. 5600 – Proposed extension of existing sand and gravel pit and erection of 

temporary workmen’s hut at Llecheiddior Uchaf – Granted permission on 3 rd April 1958. 

3.4 Planning Ref. 3/4/1089 dated 2 nd May 1966 & Section 52 legal agreement dated 17 th November 

1977 between Arthur Salisbury Ltd and Gwynedd County Council ref. 2/16/51, to restore land at 

Llecheiddior Ganol following the cessation of extractive operations. 

3.5 There is a further record of land having been worked for sand and gravel and restored to 

agricultural use on land to the south of Llecheiddior Uchaf under planning permission 5179 

granted by Caernarvonshire County Council on 18 th Nvember 1957 for, ‘Proposed re-opening of 

gravel pit on Field No. 1007’. 

The following permission at the processing facility located at Bryncir is also of significance; 

5




PWLLHELI 

3.6 Planning permission C09D/0375/36/LL dated 9th April 2010 for the processing and packing of 

aggregates, concrete batching in addition to recycling soil and inert materials such as slate, sand 

and gravel”. 


Dolbenmaen Community 

Council: 


Welsh Government 



No objection, although some reservations concerning the increase in 

traffic, dangers associated with vehicles accessing the Trunk Road, the 

impacts on users of the Lon Eifion cycle network and the congestion 

that exists on market day. 

There is an opportunity to carry out improvements to the county road 

to Llecheiddior. 

First response requested further information in order to assess the full 

impacts of the proposal on the local road network and the 

requirement to upgrade by means of providing passing bays, 

Following the submission of the revised traffic assessment, no 

objection to the application but note that the total weekly transport 

movements to and from the site constitutes an average increase of 

24.6% instead of 4.47% set out in the assessment. 

Confirm that the total daily movements is not unreasonably high 

considering the applicant is expected to provide two passing bays as 

part of the application. 

Welsh Government highway authority confirm that traffic 

information supplied direct to them by the applicant, is sufficient to 

address their concerns and further advised that the department as 

highway authority for the A487 has re-assessed its position and 

subsequently does not propose to issue a direction in respect of this 

application. 

Workings should not result in any change to the existing drainage 

scheme at the site and should not have an adverse effect on any of the 

receiving watercourses beyond the application boundary, 

Any works to watercourses may require a Flood Defence Consent of 

Gwynedd Council, 

Protected species surveys required (water vole) & appropriate 

mitigation measures approved by the MPA, 

Abstraction Licence required if the proposal is to extract more than 20 

cubic metres per day. 

The submission of further information by the applicant confirmed 9 

additional trial pits excavated to a depth of 3m recorded as being dry. 

Hydrogeological impact assessment therefore not required. 

No objection to the development but concerns over the possible 

impacts on the hydrology and water quality in the Afon Dwyfach. 

Request that the planning permission addresses these concerns 

specifically, 

Possible harmful impacts of fine sediment pollution on the 

Freshwater Pearl Mussels which is a protected species under the 

Wildlife and Countryside Act and a species of principal importance 

under Section 42 of the NERC Act 2006, 

Concerns about the decline of freshwater mussel in the Dwyfach 

partly due to historic sand and gravel extraction in the catchment. 

Although the situation has improved in recent years (reduced activity 

6




PWLLHELI 

& good practice), there remains a concern that the proposal still 

presents a significant risk to maintaining high water quality in the 

Afon Dwyfach and in addition, a possible cumulative (incombination) 

impact from the effects of extraction with the existing 

sand and gravel operation at Graianog, 

The drainage associated with this development will require an 

Environmental Permit under the Environmental Permitting 

Regulations 2010, 

Agency concerned about suspended solids entering nearby 

watercourses and state that any construction work must be carried out 

in accordance with the agency’s standard conditions for work next to 

watercourses and that the applicant is advised to follow the relevant 

guidance in ‘Pollution Prevention Guidance Note 5’. Also request the 

following conditions on any planning permission; 

o Surface water lagoons of sufficient capacity to ensure that 

surface water discharged from the site is of highest possible 

standard, 

o Sufficient measures on site to ensure that vehicles leaving the 

site along the unclassified road to Bryncir do not deposit mud or 

silt into the Dwyfach. May be a requirement for improved surface 

water drainage along the highway. 

o Incorporate wetland features in the restoration concept in order to 

benefit biodiversity. 

Countryside Council for 

Wales: 

Snowdonia National Park 

Authority: 

In response to the submission of further information on the proposed 

changes to the access road and water vole survey, the CCW confirm that 

they have no objection to the proposal but append the following 

observations; 

Satisfied that the water vole survey meets the required standards and 

based upon the evidence of the report, it is unlikely that water voles 

will be impacted upon by the proposed works. However, should water 

voles be discovered at any stage during the works, work should stop 

and CCW contacted for further advice. 

Alterations to the access road to Llecheiddior uchaf may have an 

impact on animals listed in Section 42 of the NERC Act 2006 , or on 

the Local Biodiversity Action Plan. Recommend to seek advice from 

the council’s biodiversity officer and/or other nature conservation 

organisations. 

Proposal is not likely to damage the features of the Llystyn Isaf SSSI 

located 460m south of the site, 

Site partly within a candidate wildlife site. Recommend consultation 

with the Gwynedd Biodiversity on Biodiversity Action Plan matters & 

the inclusion of biodiversity in the final restoration, 

Sediment from the quarry has the potential to have adverse impacts on 

water quality of the Afon Dwyfach which supports a population of 

fresh water mussel & otter. Ensure that best available technology is in 

place to avoid sedimentation of the Dwyfach & surrounding 

watercourses 

Landscape & visual impact assessment carried out to an acceptable 

standard & recommend consultation with the National Park Authority 

with respect to visual & landscape impacts of the proposal. 

Do not consider that the location and nature of the proposed works 

will have an adverse impact on the amenity of the National Park. 

7




PWLLHELI 

Gwynedd Council Public 

Protection Service: 

Scottish Power: 

Wales & West Utilities: 

Welsh Water: 

Quarries Inspectorate: 

Welsh Government Rural 

Development Advisor: 

Gwynedd Archaeological 

Planning Service: 

Potential issues with respect to noise impacts and in particular, Hen 

Orsaf & Station House and the duration of operations during phase 1 

of the development as well as the associated noise impacts of haulage. 

No objection in principle and agree with the findings of the revised 

noise assessment but recommend that the following conditions be 

included on any grant of permission; 

Inclusion of specific noise limitations for noise-sensitive properties, 

Restriction of working Monday to Friday from 8.00am to 6.00pm, 

and 8.00am to 1.00pm on a Saturday, 

Possible restriction on daily haulage movements, 

All plant & machinery to be in good working order and fitted with 

appropriate silencers, 

All equipment fitted with white noise reversing alarms, 

Provision of soil bunding for each phase of operation between the 

working face and noise-sensitive properties in order to mitigate for 

the impacts of noise, 

Noise monitoring undertaken by the operator in agreement with the 

local planning authority, 

Noise levels for emergency working and/or soil stripping for a 

specific period within a twelve month cycle. 

No Objection 

No Response 

No Response 

No Response 

Initial concerns over soil recovery and shallow depth of soil resource 

indicated in the supporting information, 

A revised soil survey shows that the site has more soil resources than 

originally identified and it is important that these soil resources are 

maximised. Site comprises of agricultural land classification Grade 4. 

Following the receipt of further information with regard to the 

recovery and storage of topsoil depths, the developer’r restoration and 

aftercare proposals should enable the land to be restored to a 

satisfactory standard of agricultural use. 

Necessary to include agricultural restoration and aftercare conditions 

to ensure that the required standard of agricultural restoration can be 

achieved. 

Archaeological report submitted with the application meets the 

minimum standards for such work. 

Phases 1 & 2 subject to previous quarrying activity between the 1940s 

and 1970s. Report highlights however that the area is generally one of 

significant archaeological potential, i.e. Phases 3 & 4 that have not 

been subject to modern disturbance. 

Potential is high for Roman & Bronze Age deposits at this site and 

further archaeological evaluation is required to determine the impact 

of the proposals on the buried archaeological resource. 

The more recent geophysical survey report identifies numerous 

anomalies which confirms the presence of archaeological remains 

8




PWLLHELI 

across the development area but does not define the nature, character 

or extent of the remains. If well preserved archaeological remains or 

deposits survive within the development area, such remains may prove 

to be nationally important. 

Recent archaeological work at the site includes both intrusive and nonintrusive 

evaluation work consisting of a magnetometer survey 

supplemented by a targeted programme of archaeological trial 

trenching. 

Sufficient information has been gathered during the recent 

archaeological investigation to form a view on the archaeological 

potential of the site and that it is possible to impose planning 

conditions to mitigate for any potential archaeological remains that 

may be encountered during the course of excavations. 

There is potential for further archaeological remains within phase 3 

and phase 4 of the scheme of working, which exposes any future 

mitigation strategy to significant risk that extensive archaeological 

remains may be discovered. 

Gwynedd Council 

Biodiversity: 

Gwynedd Council Rural 

Services & Public Rights 

of Way: 


Countryside and Access: 

Gwynedd Council AONB 

Service: 

No objection in principle subject to conditions on the following; 

Candidate wildlife site adjacent to, and on the boundary of the 

development is of high biodiversity value, containing habitats & birds 

listed under section 42 of the NERC Act 2006 which should be 

protected. Ensure that surface water drainage maintains a flow into the 

wetland areas and measures are taken to prevent sedimentation of 

watercourses with silt, 

Site is mainly improved grassland of low biodiversity value. Retain 

hedges & cloddiau of high biodiversity value along the site 

boundaries, 

Recommend that the applicant submits a plan of reptile mitigation & 

protection during the removal of hedges & cloddiau, 

Biodiversity to feature in the scheme of restoration, 

Japanese knotweed recorded near to the site. 

Wetland habitat sensitive to changes in hydrology and it is important 

that sand and gravel excavations do not go lower than the water table 

and that ground water flow to the wetland is not altered. 

No comment as the proposal does not have a direct effect on any 

public right of way. 

Consideration should be given to the effects of increased traffic from 

the development along the unclassified road from Llecheiddior to 

Bryncir, 

The adjoining junction and surrounding area is used by cyclists, 

walkers and horse riders departing & accessing Lon Eifion, 

Lon Eifion is one of one of the most popular recreation assets in the 

area and is used frequently by local residents and tourists and is part of 

Wales’ National Cycle Route, 

The safety of all users of the Lon Eifion cycle network and the 

surrounding area should be given full consideration. 

No Response 

9




PWLLHELI 



Sustrans Cymru: 

No specific comments on the application in that the proposal doen not 

impact on any listed structure or conservation area. Recommend 

consultation with the Gwynedd Archaeological Planning Service. 

Considers that the proposal will have a large detrimental impact on 

vulnerable users of the National Cycle Network and objects to the 

development on the following grounds; 

The design of the development takes little account of the National 

Cycle Network that runs along the access lane to the proposed 

development site, 

Proposed access route also links to Regional Cycle Route 40 that is 

promoted by Gwynedd Council & Visit Wales and provides a route 

west towards Llyn, 

The application does not include a transport statement or assessment, 

No additional shared use facilities are provided from the development 

to local services, 

No account is taken of the long term walking & cycling routes that are 

proposed for the area. 

Acknowledges the amendments made to the application & the inclusion of 

passing bays. Still concerned about some elements of the proposal and 

maintains an objection on the following grounds; 

Discrepancy regarding mineral extraction rates as stated in the 

application, 

No additional signage included in the revised proposals for passing 

bays, 

Amended information on traffic movements does not not include 

pedestrian figures, 

Pedestrian & cyclist figures should provide an estimate on year round 

usage of Lon Eifion and Sustrans route NCN 8. 

Sustrans would be prepared to withdraw their objection if the following 

measures are taken into account and secured through agreement; 

Proposed traffic movements restricted to 5 loads per day, 

Suitable road signage for vulnerable road users along the county road 

is agreed and erected before operations commence. 

CPRW: 

Concern about the proximity of the proposed workings to Bryncir and 

the Lon Eifion cycle track. Residential amenity considerations and the 

impact of noise and dust, 

Development contrary to Policy C9 of the UDP, 

Impacts of traffic movements on local residents & users of Lon Eifion 

where 600,000 tonnes of material is to be removed over 12 years, 

Insufficient landscaping & screening proposals to protect the amenity 

of local residents, site visible from the National Park, 

Local landscape & value of the inherent geological features, notably 

rare glacial drumlins which would be removed by the development, 

Cumulative detrimental impact of the proposals with the existing 

quarry at Graianog, 

Justification for maintaining a landbank & suitability for secondary or 

recycled materials to substitute for primary aggregates, 

Soil classification study incomplete, 

Rural landscape of the Afon Dwyfach already under pressure from 

existing pylons, wind turbines & quarrying activity. 

10




PWLLHELI 


A notice was placed on the site and neighbouring residents were 

informed together with a press notice published on 24th May 2012. A 

total of 13 letters of objection had been received in response to statutory 

publicity highlighting the following concerns; 

Impacts on air quality, dust & vehicle/plant emissions, 

Noise impacts, 

Impacts associated with the transport of 600,000 tonnes of material, on 

20 tonne loads, to the Bryncir processing area along an unsuitable road 

which is part of the national cycle route. Safety considerations, and 

cumulative impact on Bryncir during market day, 

Poor visibility at the Junction with the A487 & lack of pedestrian 

footway, 

Impacts on users of the Lon Eifion national cycle route, 

Mud & detritus on highway, 

Impacts on the local landscape, and loss of glacial landscape of 

historical significance, 

Legacy of historic working of sand and gravel on the amenities of the 

area since 1946, 

Hydrological impacts and possible pollution of the Afon Dwyfach, 

Development should include sufficient provision for settlement 

lagoons, 

Impacts on tourism, local businesses and the local economy, 

Scale and location of proposal in relation to the village of Bryncir and 

the level of disturbance which may affect the tranquillity of the area, 

Quality & type of restoration and possible loss of agricultural land for 

future farming generations, 

Need for the mineral given the proximity of existing workings at 

Graianog & Minffordd, 

Screen bunding/landscaping required, 

Impacts on wildlife. 

The second consultation period ended on 2nd January 2013. A further 7 

letters of objection had been received during this period highlighting the 

following concerns. 

Legacy of historic working of sand and gravel on the amenities of the 

area since 1946, 

Scale and location of proposal in relation to the village of Bryncir and 

the level of disturbance which may affect the tranquillity of the area, 

Impacts associated with the transport of 600,000 tonnes of material, on 

20 tonne loads, to the Bryncir processing area along an unsuitable road 

which is part of the national cycle route. 

Impacts on tourism, local businesses and the local economy, 

Quality & type of restoration and possible loss of agricultural land for 

future farming generations, 

Need for the mineral given the proximity of existing workings at 

Graianog & Minffordd, 

Impacts on the local landscape, and loss of glacial landscape of 

historical significance, 

Hydrological impacts and possible pollution of the Afon Dwyfach, 

Screen bunding/landscaping required, 

Safety of pedestrians and cyclists using the highway between 

Llecheiddior and Bryncir which is part of the national cycle network, 

11




PWLLHELI 

Restricted visibility at the junction with the A487 and risk of accidents, 

Noise, dust and water pollution in the Afon Dwyfach, 

Structural damage to buildings as a result of vibration caused by heavy 

traffic movements through the village center. 

A total of 9 letters of have been received since the application was 

presented to committee which support the application on the following 

grounds, 

Supply of environmentally friendly local sand and gravel, 

Not in the economic nor environmental interest to import such 

products from England, 

Marine dredged sand contains salt and is of inferior quality to locally 

sourced material, 

Support the growth of a local employer and employment opportunities 

in the area,. 

Development would not have an adverse effect on the Bryncir Auction 

Centre. 

Importance to the economy of Bryncir and wider area, 

Good examples of agricultural restoration in the area, 

More stringent controls now available to protect the Afon Dwyfach 

from potential pollution, 

Facility at Bryncir used by many local busineses, 


The principle of the development 

5.1 In June 2008, the Gwynedd Council Board resolved to endorse the Regional Technical Statement 

produced by the North Wales Regional Aggregates Working Party. The North Wales Regional 

Technical Statement has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of the Minerals 

Planning Policy (Wales) and Technical Advice Note (Wales) 1: Aggregates (MTAN1), to set out 

an overarching objective to ensure a sustainable managed supply of aggregates. The main purpose 

of the statement is to set out the strategy for the provision of the aggregates in the North Wales 

region for the period until 2021. 

5.2 As Mineral Planning Authority, the Council has a duty to ensure that mineral resources are 

exploited in a sustainable way so that they can make an appropriate contribution to the area’s 

construction materials requirements. Gwynedd has a long history of mineral extraction and it 

remains an important facet of its economic and social make up. There are extensive deposits of a 

variety of materials suitable for aggregates in North Wales, particularly igneous rock and 

limestone. Deposits of sand and gravel however are more limited and are mainly concentrated in 

parts of Gwynedd, Flintshire and in particular, Wrexham. 

5.3 The Regional Technical Statement assesses the environmental capacity of each authority to 

contribute to an adequate supply of primary aggregates. The Council, as Mineral Planning 

Authority, is required to maintain a landbank of permitted reserves of aggregate minerals with 

current guidance stating a minimum 7 year landbank for sand and gravel. Graianog is the only 

active sand and gravel quarry in Gwynedd with further dormant reserves located at two sites in 

Penygroes. 

5.4 It is proposed that material extracted at the application site is used for direct building products, 

but mainly to supply mortar sand, gravel and sharp sand for builders merchants and ready mixed 

concrete outlets throughout North West Wales including the National Park, Anglesey and parts of 

12




PWLLHELI 

Conwy. The uniqueness of the coarse sand within the deposit may be used with lime to produce a 

lime mortar suitable for conservation, restoration and building works. 

5.5 National and local planning policy, as well as the Regional Technical Statement takes into 

account the contribution of secondary or recycled waste materials to meet the objectives of a 

sustainable supply of aggregates, where such materials can be used satisfactorily and realistically 

instead of primary land-won minerals. Notwithstanding, recycled or secondary materials are more 

commonly used for low-grade uses such as general fill or ‘type 1’ sub-base, which effectively 

displaces the use of high-end aggregates for such purposes. In addition, there is the technical 

capability of one type of material to interchange for another and a supply of fine aggregates for 

the high-end uses under para. ‘4’ is essential to meet the needs of the construction industry. 

5.6 As stated in the Welsh Government technical advice note on aggregates, Mineral Planning 

Authorities are required to safeguard mineral resources in their development plans in accordance 

with paragraph 13 of Minerals Planning Policy Wales which states that, “it is important that 

access to mineral deposits which society may need is safeguarded. This does not necessarily 

indicate an acceptance of working, but that the location and quality of the mineral is known and 

that the environmental constraints associated with extraction have been considered”. 

5.7 The Gwynedd UDP recognises that minerals can only be worked where they lie and the sand and 

the gravel resource at Llecheiddior Uchaf has been identified as a Mineral Consultation Area 

(MCA) under policy C11 of the Unitary Development Plan. The policy has a presumption against 

non-mineral development within a MCA in order to safeguard a known mineral resource for 

future use. The land in which the sand and gravel resources have been identified in the 

application proposals is not subject to any statutory or non-statutory, landscape or environmental 

constraints. 

5.8 The proposal for sand and gravel extraction at Llecheiddior will ensure that the Council can fulfil 

its apportionment obligations of supplying minerals for the North Wales sub-region and maintain 

a 7 year landbank of sand and gravel. There are few permitted reserves of sand and gravel in 

North West Wales and this proposal will secure an essential supply of sand and gravel for the 

local building economy. This will reduce the need to import materials from outside Gwynedd, 

thereby minimising costs and carbon emissions. The 2010 annual report produced by the North 

Wales Regional Aggregates Working Party states that, in terms of sand and gravel, the landbank 

has increased to 23 years in North East Wales, but stands at only 6 years in North West Wales, 

which is below the 7 year minimum recommended in MTAN1. 

5.9 Subject to the consideration of all other material planning considerations, it is considered that the 

development in principle and in respect of the need for the material, complies with National and 

Regional Planning Policy and Guidance as well as the requirements of Policy C10 of the Unitary 


Visual Amenities 

5.10 The CCW state in their consultation response that the Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment 

submitted with the application has been carried out to an acceptable standard and which provides 

an assessment of the impacts of the proposal on the local landscape and a range of receptors with 

varied sensitivity in the area. The site is located within the Afon Dwyfach lowland valley, 3,600 

metres due east of the AONB boundary and 1500 metres due west of the National Park. In 

response to consultation, the National Park authority stated that they did not consider that the 

location and nature of the proposed works would have an adverse impact on the amenity of the 

National Park. 

5.11 The landscape and visual assessment has taken into account of the CCW’s online landmap 

information and states that the most striking visual feature is the rolling green miniaturised 

13




PWLLHELI 

landscape of small hills within and surrounding the site created by previous excavations, 

specifically, the Upper Afon Dwyfach lowland & open lowland valleys which is of moderate 

value and of local importance. In addition, the application is included within the following 

landmap classifications; 

Llanystumdwy geological landscape of outstanding value (lowland plateau) with past glacial 

processes and superficial deposits of boulderclay, alluvium and glacial sands and gravels as 

a significant contributor to the geological character of the area. 

Historic Landscape of the Afon Dwyfach corridor includes the fields alongside the Afon 

Dwyfach, stretching from Graianog quarry in the north, to Hendy in the south. Many 

archaeological sites (relict and buried) have been recorded (and excavated) at the former, 

many in advance of gravel extraction. The assessment also lists hedgebanks, cloddiau, stone 

& earth banks as the traditional type of field boundary which is characteristic of the area. 

5.12 The LVIA states that the extractive operations and stockpile store will have a detrimental but 

temporary short-term impact on the landscape due to the colour, texture and landform of each 

phase of extraction. It further concludes that the landscape impact of the proposal is of low to 

medium significance with the impact on field boundaries high. The geological report further 

confirms that the scheme has been prepared to limit the amount of land taken out of agriculture at 

any time to include a progressive scheme of restoration. 

5.13 The proposal outlines description of the six phases of development, progressing in sequence from 

phase 1 to 4C. Representations have been submitted in response to publicity on the application to 

the effect that phases 1 & 4 will be exposed to properties and viewpoints to the north. 

5.14 In response, revised proposals including full detailed plans plotted on a topographical survey base 

show the direction of working together with the areas set aside for the storage of soils and 

overburden. In order to further mitigate the impact of the proposals, the respective phases have 

been sub-divided in order to minimise the amount of land taken out of agriculture at any given 

time. Notwithstanding, areas set aside for the storage of soils and overburden could also serve as 

a landscaping screen along the northern extent of the phase 4 extraction area and that the 

boundary may be supplemented with dense tree planting to act as a shelter belt once the 

plantation has matured. This could be provided by a planning condition requiring the 

implementation of screen landscaping, so that a shelter belt be established prior to operations 

commencing in phase 4. 

5.15 In response to the submission of further information on the recovery and storage of the topsoil 

resource, the Welsh Government Department for Environment, Agriculture and Food confirm 

that the restoration and aftercare proposals should enable the land to be restored to the required 

standard. It is considered therefore that the principle of a phased development in accordance with 

the methodology stated in the application details is acceptable. 

Soils, Soil Movement & Restoration 

5.16 The application proposes that 600,000 tonnes are extracted over 12 years, and that a progressive 

scheme of restoration be completed 12 months after final extraction. 

5.17 Annex C to MTAN 1, emphasizes the importance of the soil resource on sites that are to be 

excavated and that a soil survey is essential in order to secure high standards of reclamation and 

restoration on sand and gravel sites. 

5.18 The rural development adviser re-affirmed this position by stating that such a survey should be 

undertaken by suitably qualified personnel to identify the location of soil types and their quantity 

as well as the thickness of topsoil and subsoil layers in order to determine whether satisfactory 

reclamation can be achieved. 

14




PWLLHELI 

5.19 A detailed analysis of the soil resource has been produced which includes information on its 

conservation during site working and the appropriate use thereof for the purposes of the 

restoration plan. The report also describes the total soil resource on site, confirming the depths of 

topsoil & subsoil that are intended to be stripped together with an estimate of the amount of 

topsoil and subsoil that will be available for the restoration plan. In response to consultation, the 

rural development adviser confirmed that the submitted proposals for restoration and aftercare 

should enable the land to be restored to an acceptable standard of agricultural use. 

5.20 There is therefore sufficient information submitted with the application to quantify the in-situ soil 

resource, its conservation during site working and its use in the restoration and afteruse of the 

site. It is normal practice with sand and gravel workings that a 5-year scheme of aftercare to bring 

the site to an acceptable level of agricultural use is submitted at a later stage in accordance with 

the requirements of a planning condition. The aftercare conditions will specify amongst other 

requirements appropriate site maintenance, husbandry, soil conservation and appropriate use in 

restoration, field boundary construction, site preparation/ripping of substrate and an annual 

review of aftercare. The conditions should also require that a detailed plan showing the final 

contours to be achieved in restoration to ensure that the proposed final landform reflects the 

gently undulating character of the existing & surrounding landscape. 

5.21 The application therefore complies with the requirements of Policy C14 of the UDP and Policy 

C9(9) ‘scheme of afteruse of the site and details of the restoration and aftercare required to 

achieve it’. 


5.22 A number of objections have been received which highlight issues concerning potential nuisance 

and the impact of the proposal on residential amenities. The proposal does not include any on-site 

processing of material, as this will be undertaken at the existing facility at Bryncir. The impact of 

the proposals therefore may be assessed solely on the extractive operations, soil stripping and the 

movement of soils & overburden associated with restoration. 

5.23 The sequence of operations and method of working will be a key factor with respect to amenity 

considerations, specifically air quality, dust, vehicle/plant emissions, noise and provision of 

adequate screening to mitigate for such impacts. 

5.24 The initial response of the Public Protection Service highlighted potential issues with respect to 

noise impacts and in particular, Hen Orsaf & Station House and the duration of operations in 

phase 1 of the development. Initial concerns have also been expressed as to the methodology 

applied to the measurement of background noise and the consultation response concludes by 

stating that it may be expedient to apply stringent planning conditions on the development with 

specific noise limitations imposed on each dwelling. 

5.25 In response to the submission of further details, the Public Protection Service re-affirmed its 

position by stating it had no objection in principle and agree with the findings of the revised noise 

assessment but recommend that the following conditions be included on any grant of permission; 

o Inclusion of specific noise limitations for noise-sensitive properties, 

o Restriction of working Monday to Friday from 8.00am to 6.00pm, and 8.00am to 

1.00pm on a Saturday, 

o Possible restriction on daily haulage movements, 

o All plant & machinery to be in good working order and fitted with appropriate silencers, 

o All equipment fitted with white noise reversing alarms, 

o Provision of soil bunding for each phase of operation between the working face and 

noise-sensitive properties in order to mitigate for the impacts of noise, 

o Noise monitoring undertaken by the operator in agreement with the local planning 

authority, 

15




PWLLHELI 

o Noise levels for emergency working and/or soil stripping for a specific period within a 

twelve month cycle. 

5.26 The proposed area of working at its nearest point, is located over 400m from any residential 

property and the amended plans mitigate for the impact of the proposals, where the respective 

phases have been sub-divided in order to minimise the amount of land taken out of agriculture at 

any given time. Notwithstanding the transport and haulage implications of this proposal, the areas 

of extraction and ancillary land associated with the winning and working of minerals complies 

with the criteria for buffer zones as defined in Mineral Planning Policy Wales, MTAN 1 and 

policy B12 of the Unitary Development Plan, where a buffer of 100 metres is applied to sand and 

gravel workings. 

5.27 With the imposition of appropriate planning conditions in respect of noise limitations, noise 

monitoring, dust and the provision of a screening bund along the northern boundary of Phase 4, it 

is considered that there would be no adverse impact on amenities of local residents and that the 

development conforms to policy B23 of the UDP (amenities). 

Traffic access and Public Rights of Way 

5.28 One of the major concerns with this application is that the material will be transported off-site for 

processing along a 400m length of single-track, unclassified road which connects the application 

site with Bryncir Industrial Estate and the junction with the A487 Trunk road. 

5.29 Although the proposal does not affect any public footpath or public right of way, the single track 

lane that connects with the A487 is also used by cyclists departing the Lon Eifion recreational 

route. The route also features on the Sustrans national cycle network that runs along the county 

road to the proposed development site and which provides a link to Regional Cycle Route 40 that 

is promoted by Gwynedd Council & Visit Wales as a route west towards Llyn. 

5.30 The applicant has been requested to address certain anomalies with respect to transport and 

haulage movements and submit a revised traffic impact assessment for consultation. 

5.31 Essentially, traffic impacts associated with this proposal affect both Gwynedd Council as local 

highways authority and the Welsh Government as highway authority for the A487 Trunk road. In 

their initial response, the Welsh Government Transportation Department directed that the 

application remain pending until a transport assessment is submitted to address the anticipated 

transportation impacts during all phases of development. The planning authority has since 

received a formal response from the Welsh Government Transportation department confirming 

that traffic information submitted by the applicant is sufficient to address their concerns and have 

further advised that the department as highway authority for the A487 has re-assessed its position 

and subsequently does not propose to issue a direction in respect of this application. 

5.32 In response to consultation on the original proposals, Gwynedd Council transportation service 

confirmed that it had no objection to the proposal, subject to a maximum daily output of 8 loads 

per day, and that the applicant enters into an agreement with the local highways authority to 

provide two passing bays and the formation of a turning space into the proposed quarry. 

5.33 The amended details submitted by the applicant confirms the haulage movements associated with 

the sand and gravel proposal to be 14 loads per day, or a total of 28 movements, based upon a 15 

tonne payload generating a movement of loaded material every 40 – 45 minutes. The traffic 

assessment refers to specific evidence gathered in March of this year on the current usage of the 

County road between Llecheiddior Uchaf and Bryncir. The traffic count confirms that the Mart 

and Industrial estate accounts for the vast majority of the existing use (84.5%) with cars and light 

goods vehicles forming 93.5% of the total movements. The assessment concludes that the 

proposed increase in traffic as a consequence of the development is minor. 

16




PWLLHELI 

5.34 Policy CH33, safety on roads and streets and policy CH34, rural lanes are relevant here and in 

respect of the latter, development proposals will be refused if they cause an unacceptable increase 

in the number of vehicles using rural minor roads where the main users are expected to be 

pedestrians, cyclists or horse riders. 

5.35 In response to the consultation on the revised traffic details, Gwynedd Council Transportation 

Unit confirmed that the assessments and conclusions candidate are acceptable. Following the 

introduction of the revised traffic assessment, an error is noted in the weekly total transport 

movements in and out of the site, which equates to an increase of 24.6% instead of 4.47% set out 

in the assessment. However, in response to consultation Gwynedd Council's Transportation Unit 

confirmed that the total daily movements are not unreasonably high considering the applicant is 

expected to provide two passing bays as part of the application. There is no longer any objection 

to the levels of transport 14 loads a day. 

5.36 The development therefore complies with Policy C33 and Policy C34 of the Unitary Development 

Plan. 

Biodiversity Matters 

5.37 Both the Countryside Council for Wales and Gwynedd Council Biodiversity section have no 

objection to the proposal and confirm in their consultation responses that the development is 

unlikely to impact on the Llystyn Isaf SSSI designation some 460m south of the site. They also 

highlight the fact that the proposal is located partly within, and adjacent to a Candidate Wildlife 

Site which is subject to policy B17 of the Unitary Development Plan and contains habitats and 

birds listed under section 42 of the NERC Act 2006. 

5.38 It is requested that biodiversity features in the scheme of restoration although the expectation is to 

restore to agricultural use, which is largely dependent upon the availability and quantity of the 

soil resource together with the application of appropriate husbandry during the aftercare period. It 

would be possible for biodiversity to feature in the scheme of restoration and the construction of 

field boundaries would compliment this element. It is critical however that the scheme of 

restoration makes best use of the soil resource, with an appraisal of the site drainage 

characteristics in order to achieve the end-use objectives. 

5.39 With respect to groundwater and surface water management, both consultees make specific 

reference to the wetland habitat to the east of the proposal and the potential for sediment from 

extractive & ancillary operations to have an adverse impact on water quality and the alteration of 

hydrology and water flows to the Dwyfach & associated wetland which supports a population of 

freshwater mussel and otter. Conditions should ensure that the best available technology is in 

place to avoid sedimentation of the Dwyfach and surrounding watercourses. 

5.40 Specific reference is made in the CCW in response to the recommendations of the ecological 

assessment for further survey work to establish the presence of water vole. In response to a water 

vole survey prepared on behalf of the applicant, the CCW are satisfied that it is unlikely that 

water voles will be impacted upon by the proposal. 

5.41 Further reference is made in the biodiversity officer’s report to a reptile survey, specifically the 

removal of cloddiau & hedges which have the potential to support this species. Whilst it is 

unlikely that phases 1 & 2 of the development will require the removal of field boundaries & 

hedgerow, a reptile avoidance strategy for the remaining phases of development has been 

produced in accordance with the recommendations of the biodiversity officer’s letter. 

5.42 It is considered therefore that in respect of biodiversity matters and subject to appropriate 

conditions, the development and complies with National Planning Policy guidance as well as 

Policy A1, A3, B16, B17 & B21, of the Unitary Development Plan. 

17




PWLLHELI 

Archaeological Matters 

5.43 It is recognised in the archaeological report that the surrounding area is of high archaeological 

potential, and although part of the application area has been worked under a previous grant of 

permission for mineral extraction, phases 3 & 4 have not been subject to modern disturbance. The 

area is potentially rich in buried features, particularly from pre-history exemplified by the 

discovery of Bronze Age artefacts and known sites within the vicinity of the study area. 

5.44 The archaeological planning service stated in their initial response that further archaeological 

evaluation is required in order to determine the impact of the proposals on the buried 

archaeological resource. They further recommended that the application be deferred pending the 

submission of fuerther information to include both intrusive and non-intrusive evaluation work 

consisting of a magnetometer survey supplemented by a targeted programme of archaeological 

trial trenching. Essentially, an archaeological evaluation must be undertaken before any a 

decision is taken on the application, as it is not known what possible impacts this scheme may 

have on the buried archaeological resource within the site. 

5.45 GAPS refer to paragraph 6.5.2. of Planning Policy Wales 2012 which states; “ ….If important 

remains are thought to exist at a development site, the planning authority should request the 

prospective developer to arrange for an archaeological field evaluation to be carried out before 

any decision on the planning application is taken. The results of any assessment and/or field 

evaluation should be provided as part of a planning application. If this information is not 

provided, authorities should consider whether it is appropriate to direct the applicant to supply 

further information, or whether to refuse permission for inadequately documented proposals”. 

5.46 The applicant has since commissioned a team of archaeologists to conduct a full archaeological 

evaluation in accordance with the request of Gwynedd Archaeological Planning Service and 

Cyngor Gwynedd Planning Service to include a detailed mitigation strategy devised for any 

archaeological remains that may survive within the development area. 

5.47 The results of the evaluation show that none of the features identified in the magnetometer survey 

were nationally important remains that required in situ preservation but that the area retains 

significant archaeological potential requiring further mitigation should the proposal be granted 

approval. 

5.48 In response to consultation, Gwynedd Archaeological Planning Service confirmed that sufficient 

information has been gathered during the recent archaeological investigation to form a view on 

the archaeological potential of the site and confirm that appropriate planning conditions may be 

imposed to mitigate for potential archaeological remains that may be encountered during the 

course of excavations. 

5.49 The Archaeological Planning Service state however that there is potential for further 

archaeological remains within phase 3 and phase 4 of the scheme of working, given the low 

percentage sampling rate employed for the evaluation. Consequently, this exposes any future 

mitigation strategy to significant risk that extensive archaeological remains may still be 

discovered at the site. 

5.50 Subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions to record any archaeological remains that may 

be encountered in phases 3 & 4 of the scheme, the proposal therefore complies with the 

requirements of national planning policy, circular 60/96 and policy B7 of the Unitary 


The Economy 

5.51 Gwynedd has a long history of mineral extraction and it remains an important facet of its 

18




PWLLHELI 

economic and social make up. Sand and gravel is essential for the local building economy and a l 

ocal source will reduce the need to import materials from outside Gwynedd, thereby minimising 

costs and carbon emissions. The uniqueness of the coarse sand within the deposit may be used 

with lime to produce a lime mortar suitable for conservation, restoration and building works. 

5.52 The development would provide direct employment for 6 persons with indirect employment 

mainly in the haulage and sales sectors for an additional 4 persons. 

5.53 It is considered that the proposal is likely to make a positive contribution on the economy, culture 

and Welsh language in accordance with Strategic Policy 16 of the Unitary Development Plan and 

Policy A2. 

Surface Water, Hydrology & Hydrogeology 

5.54 The application details propose an average depth of extraction of 5m with all extraction above the 

water table and restricted to a depth of 1m above the top of the peat/boulder clay horizon so as 

not to disturb the groundwater flows. The water table is recorded as being quite high in some 

parts of the site and there appears to be a dynamic relationship between the sand and gravel 

deposits, the underlying boulderclay and groundwater which feeds into the wetland to the north 

east of the extraction areas. The relevant chapter on groundwater states; “The sands and gravels 

are highly permeable so that rainwater quickly soaks into the ground, then flows along the top of 

the underlying peat/boulderclay horizon to emerge as springs and seeps along the line of 

contact”. 

5.55 The Environment Agency in their first consultation response requested that no excavation shall 

take place below the depth of the water table until such time as a Hydrogeological Impact 

Appraisal has been completed in order to protect the local water environment and prevent the 

derogation of the groundwater resource at the application site. Having assessed the cross-sections 

& trial pit logs, the Agency requested further clarification from the applicant on any excavations 

below the water table and that a hydrogeological impact appraisal considers the impact of the 

development on groundwater resource and water quality, with particular reference to the springs 

on the eastern boundary which feed into the Afon Dwyfach. 

5.56 In response, the applicant addressed the possibility of groundwater being encountered during the 

extractive operations with the submission of further information confirming 9 additional trial pits 

excavated to a depth of 3m recorded as being dry. The Environment Agency confirmed by return 

that a Hydrogeological impact assessment was therefore not required. It is considered therefore 

that the proposal meets with the requirements of Policy A1, A3, B32 & B33 of the Unitary 


Surface Water Management 

5.57 The supporting statement makes reference to surface and ground water management where it 

states that, “water management include surface drainage channels, ground water control, 

sedimentation ponds for the collection and storage for run-off water and the control of silt”. It 

also states that most of the overburden, waste rock and silt arisings from aggregate washing will 

be disposed of ‘off-site’, to waste tips or lagoons at the existing Bryncir processing facility. It 

further states that there are no obvious surface water features, watercourses, ponds & standing 

water within the area of the development nor any evidence of field drains and that surface water 

soaks into the soil and gravel horizons during periods of heavy rainfall. Springs & seeps are 

however located to the east of the proposal area, comprising of wet & waterlogged peat and clay 

alluvium, further discharging into the Afon Dwyfach by a series of tributaries & ditches. 

5.58 In response to consultation, the Environment Agency had no objection to the development but 

stated that the workings should not result in any change to the existing drainage scheme at the site 

and should not have an adverse effect on any of the receiving watercourses beyond the 

application boundary. The Agency further state that they would wish to see their concerns over 

19




PWLLHELI 

the possible impacts on the hydrology and water quality in the Afon Dwyfach and Freshwater 

Pearl Mussels addressed in any planning permission. 

5.59 The Freshwater Pearl Mussels is a protected species under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 

and a species of principal importance under Section 42 of the NERC Act 2006 and the Agency 

state concerns about the decline of freshwater mussel in the Dwyfach, partly due to historic sand 

and gravel extraction in the catchment. 

5.60 The drainage associated with this development will also require an Environmental Permit under 

the Environmental Permitting Regulations 2010, but in order to mitigate for the potential impacts 

of fine silt run-off from the extraction site, the Agency request that the following be addressed; 

Settlement pool modelling required to ensure no siltation of the Afon Dwyfach which 

supports a population of Freshwater Pearl Mussels & Salmanoid spawning, with a 

minimum of 3 lagoons as indicated on the amended plans, to be of sufficient capacity to 

ensure that surface water discharged from the site is of highest possible standard. 

Any construction work must be carried out in accordance with the agency’s standard 

conditions for work next to watercourses and that the applicant is advised to follow the 

relevant guidance in ‘Pollution Prevention Guidance Note 5’. 

Sufficient measures on site to ensure that vehicles leaving the site along the unclassified 

road to Bryncir do not deposit mud or silt into the Dwyfach. May be a requirement for 

improved surface water drainage along the highway. 

5.61 It is considered therefore that with the imposition of planning conditions to ensure that the water 

quality of the adjacent wetland and Afon Dwyfach is not affected by the extraction of mineral, the 

proposal meets with the requirements of Policy A1, A3, B32 & B33 of the Unitary Development 

Plan. 


5.62 The main concerns raised by third parties in response to consultation the application consists 

mainly of the potential impact of noise, dust, traffic, potential nuisance, local tourism and the 

impact of the proposal on the amenities of Bryncir. 

5.63 Letters of support identify the need for a local supply of sand and gravel and that the proposal 

will contribute to the local economy and provide employment opportunities in a rural area. 

5.64 The Local Planning Authority has considered these objections as material considerations in 

preparing a recommendation for this application. Furthermore, the material considerations 

relevant to this proposal have been assessed having regarding to the relevant planning policies 

and guidance. 


6.1 A proposal for mineral extraction at Llecheiddior Uchaf needs to be assessed against planning 

policy and the authority consulted widely on this application to ascertain the potential impacts of 

the development. There are no overriding planning policy issues sufficient to warrant refusal of 

planning permission and sufficient information has been submitted to overcome the initial 

concerns listed below; 

Archaeological assessment and mitigation, 

Visual amenity, soil recovery and restoration to an acceptable standard of agricultural 

use 

Transportation issues and the impact of the development on the safety of road users. 

20




PWLLHELI 

6.2 In terms of the need for the mineral, the development is acceptable in principle and would 

maintain a minimum 7 year landbank of sand and gravel and it would contribute to infrastructure 

of primary sand and gravel reserves in Gwynedd and conforms to regional and local mineral 

planning policy requirements (specifically Policy C9, C10 & C14), 

6.3 It is considered that the proposal is likely to make a positive contribution on the economy, culture 

and Welsh language in accordance with Strategic Policy 16 of the Unitary Development Plan and 

Policy A2, securing jobs for 6 local employees. 

6.4 There are no properties located within 100 metres of the sand and gravel workings (Policy B12 

Buffer Zones) and It is considered that planning conditions and environmental controls are 

sufficient to control the potential impacts of noise, dust and working hours at the site and there 

would be no adverse impact on the residential amenities of the area (Policy B23). 

6.5 It is considered that with the imposition of planning conditions will ensure that the water quality 

of the adjacent wetland and Afon Dwyfach is not affected by the extraction of mineral, and there 

would be no adverse impact on groundwater, the local water environment or on biodiversity and 

the proposal meets with the requirements of Policy A1, A3, B32 & B33 of the Unitary 


6.6 The site will be the subject of a phased restoration and aftercare plan to return the site to 

productive agricultural use. A detailed analysis of the soil resource has been produced which 

includes information on its conservation during site working and the appropriate use thereof for 

the purposes of the restoration plan. The scheme of restoration will also include the reinstatement 

of field boundaries and hedgerows in the interests of the biodiversity of the area (Policy C14, B17 

& B21). 

6.7 The site will be the subject of a phased programme of extraction with the respective phases subdivided 

in order to minimise the amount of land taken out of agriculture at any given time and to 

mitigate for the short-term impact of the quarrying proposals on the local landscape. The 

boundary of the site may be supplemented with dense tree planting in order to screen the 

development from properties located to the north of the Phase 4 of workings (Policy C9). 

6.8 The location and nature of the proposed works will not have an adverse impact on the amenity of 

the National Park (Policy B14). 

6.9 The results of the archaeological evaluation show that none of the buried remains identified in the 

magnetometer survey are of national importance. Subject to the imposition of appropriate 

conditions to record any archaeological remains that may be encountered in phases 3 & 4 of the 

scheme, the proposal complies with the requirements of national planning policy, circular 60/96 

and policy B7 of the Unitary Development Plan. 

6.10 In response to consultation on the revised traffic details, Gwynedd Council Transportation Unit 

confirmed that the applicant’s assessments and conclusions are acceptable, and there is no longer 

any objection to the proposed haulage levels of 14 loads per day. The development therefore 

complies with Policy C33 and Policy C34 of the Unitary Development Plan. 


7.1 To Grant Planning Permission subject to the following conditions; 

Duration of Working, 12 years from the date of commencement, 

Construction of two passing bays along the County highway from Llecheiddior to Bryncir prior to the 

commencement of extractive operations, 

Permitted Operations & Compliance with the Submitted Details/Plans, 

21




PWLLHELI 

Screen landscaping along the northern extent of the proposed workings, 

5-yearly Review of operations, 

Soil conservation, location & quantity of soil/restoration media held in storage areas, 

Sequential restoration to agricultural use to follow the extractive phases of development, 

Restoration of field boundaries and hedgerows, 

5-year aftercare plan to be agreed with the mineral planning authority to include appropriate 

husbandry, cultivations, soil nutrient assessment, grassland management, provision of water supplies 

& drainage proposals, 

Surface water drainage infrastructure & settlement lagoons to be installed with the agreement of the 

planning authority in advance of each phase of extraction, 

No extraction below the water table, 

Scheme of archaeological recording & mitigation to be agreed and implemented, 

Dust controls & noise limitations, 

Inclusion of specific noise limitations for noise-sensitive properties, 

Restriction of working Monday to Friday from 8.00am to 6.00pm, and 8.00am to 1.00pm on a 

Saturday, 

Restriction on daily haulage movements to 14 loads per day (total of 28 movements), 

All plant & machinery to be in good working order and fitted with appropriate silencers, 

All equipment fitted with white noise reversing alarms, 

Provision of soil bunding for each phase of operation between the working face and noise-sensitive 

properties in order to mitigate for the impacts of noise, 

Noise monitoring undertaken by the operator in agreement with the local planning authority, 

Noise levels for emergency working and/or soil stripping for a specific period within a twelve month 

cycle. 

Measures for the control of Japanese Knotweed. 

22

Planning Applications - Cyngor Gwynedd

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?