Agenda and minutes

Planning, Regulatory & General Licensing Committee
Thursday, 14th October, 2021 2.00 pm

Venue: Hybrid Meeting: Via MS Teams/Abraham Derby Room at the General Offices, Ebbw Vale - if you would like to attend this meeting live via Microsoft Teams please contact committee.services@blaenau-gwent.go

Contact: Democratic Services  6139

Media

Items
No. Item

1.

Simultaneous Translation

You are welcome to use Welsh at the meeting a minimum notice period of 3 working days is required should you wish to do so.  A simultaneous translation will be provided if requested.

Minutes:

It was noted that no requests had been received for the simultaneous translation service.

 

2.

Apologies

To receive.

Minutes:

An apology for absence was received from Councillor M. Day.

 

3.

Declarations of Interest and Dispensations

To consider any declarations of interest and dispensations made.

Minutes:

The following declarations of interest was made:-

 

Councillor B. Willis

Item No. 4 – Planning Applications Report

C/2021/0133 –

Plot, Land east of Whitworth Terrace, Tredegar

 

4.

Planning Applications Report pdf icon PDF 4 MB

To consider the report of the Team Manager Development Management.

Minutes:

C/2021/0243

LlysBery, 28 Tanglewood Drive, Blaina,

Abertillery,NP133JB

Retention & completion of decking area, walls, landscaping & enclosures

 

The Team Leader advised that the application sought permission to retain and complete a raised decking area within the front garden of a detached residential property. The Planning Officer outlined the application with the assistance of visual photographs and diagrams as detailed in the report.

 

 

 

 

The Team Leader further referred Members to the consultation and advised that no objections had been raised and it had been requested that the application be presented to Committee by a Ward Member who did not consider the development to have a harmful effect on the street scene.

 

In terms of planning assessment, it was reported that the proposal had been assessed against policies DM1 and DM2 of the adopted Local Development Plan and the adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance in relation to raised decks, balconies and retaining walls. The Planning Officer advised that the Local Development Plan stated that the development proposals should be appropriate to the local context in terms of type, form, scale and mix. The proposals must be of good design which reinforced the local character of the area or positively contributed to the area’s transformation, therefore the Planning Officer noted from the report that the introduction of the raised decking area was an unsightly and very prominent addition within the street scene and would be contrary to policy within the Local Development Plan. The development was situated to the front of the dwelling and was highly visible within the street scene. The visibility of the development was also increased due to the elevated position of the existing dwelling. The decking extended the width of the existing gable, however it also projected further to the side of the dwelling. It was added that due to the 2.9m projection of the decking and its extension which was wider than the existing gable, it was determined that the development was particularly large in scale. The Planning Officer advised that although the street scene consists of dwellings which vary in scale and design the dwellings to the east and south are set at a higher level than the road. The Officer was of the opinion that this proposal could set a precedent for similar developments which would have a detrimental impact on the character of the streetscape.

 

The Team Leader reminded Members of the recent appeal decision in relation to the retention of decking at Hawthorne Glade, Tanglewood which was dismissed due to the adverse visual impact and loss of privacy to neighbouring properties.

 

 

The Team Leader concluded that due to the scale, mass and siting, the raised decking was considered to be an unduly dominant feature that would have an adverse visual impact upon the street scene and noted the officer’s recommendation that the application be refused.

 

At the invitation of the Chair, the Applicant addressed the Committee.

 

Mr. Llewellyn informed the Committee that he built the property in 2003 and have undertaken landscaping  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

5.

Appeals, Consultations and DNS Update October 2021 pdf icon PDF 151 KB

To consider the report of the Service Manager – Development and Estates.

 

Minutes:

Consideration was given to the report of the Service Manager Development & Estates.

 

Councillor K. Rowson left the meeting at this juncture.

 

RESOLVED that the report be accepted and the information contained therein be noted.

 

6.

Planning Appeal Update: Maes Y Dderwen, Charles Street, Tredegar Ref.: C/2020/0282 pdf icon PDF 148 KB

To consider the report of the Planning Officer.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Consideration was given to the report of the Planning Officer.

 

The Service Manager Development and Estates spoke to the report which detailed the decision of the Planning Inspectorate in respect of a planning appeal against the refusal of planning permission for the construction of a 5 bedroom supported living unit and associated works at Maes Y Dderwen, Charles Street Tredegar.

 

The Service Manager noted the reasons provided by the Committee for refusal in relation to parking, suitability of location, loss of amenity space and not in the best interest of the community. 

 

The Service Manager advised that the Inspector had disagreed with these reasons for refusal and had felt that there was lack of evidence to support the reasons provided for refusal. The Inspector was satisfied that subject to the imposition of conditions the development was acceptable, allowedthe appeal and planning permission was granted for the development.

 

The Service Manager Development and Estates further outlined the Appeal Decision Notice and reiterated the reasons were rejected due to lack of evidence. The Service Manager appreciated that Members disagreed with the officer’s recommendations on occasions, however it was important that the necessary evidence was provided to support decisions made by Members.

 

The local Members were disappointed with the appeal decision and another Member advised that she had presented the Inspector with additional evidence on an issue in her Ward, however it was ignored.

 

The Service Manager stated that no local Members came forward to support the reasons for refusal, therefore the only evidence provided was the Minutes of the Meeting.

 

A Member suggested that going forward the Committee assist the officers in any way possible in order for reasons for refusal against an officer’s recommendation be presented. It was added that comments from the Police should also be sought in certain instances.

 

RESOLVED that the report be accepted and the appeal decision for planning application C/2020/0282 be noted.

 

7.

Application: C/2021/0103 Site: Former Job Centre, Tredegar Proposal: Conversion of former office into 11 room bed and breakfast facility with residential unit, associated parking provision with internal and external alterations and decking pdf icon PDF 173 KB

To consider the report of the Service Manager – Development and Estates.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Consideration was given to the report of the Service Manager Development & Estates.

 

The Officer advised that the report had been requested at the last Committee as Members deferred the application to gain responses from local Police, Tredegar Town Council and the Fire Authority as well as seek further clarification on reasons for refusal. The Officer spoke to the report and provided an overview of the key points.

 

It was reported that the main concerns raised by local Members were the problems experienced in the Town Centre from similar establishments. However, the Officer reported that the facility of concern had planning permission for a hostel and pointed out that the current application was for B&B and conditions have been proposed which may address concerns. If the applicant wished to change the use further planning permission would be required.

Therefore, the Officer stated that her recommendation remained unchanged and the application be granted.

 

The Chair invited the Ward Member to address the Committee at this juncture.

 

Councillor S. Thomas, Tredegar, Central and West Ward welcomed the comments received from the Local Police in respect of the application. The information provided supported concerns raised by local Members and the Ward Member felt that it would be difficult for the Police and Local Authority to monitor proper uses. The Ward Member stated that if the application was granted the people of Tredegar would have very little recourse to refuse the development.

 

The Ward Member advised that the developer operated similar establishments in other areas under the guest house application which were used similarly as the facility in the Town Centre. The report detailed the costs of appeal, however in this instance the refusal would be supported by the Local Police, local Members and the community.

 

The Ward Member offered his support if the decision was appealed and would be happy to provide the necessary evidence. The Ward Member thereupon asked the Committee to refuse the application due to the current issues being experience in Tredegar Town Centre.

 

Another local Member supported the comments raised and felt that it was not a suitable local for a B&B. The Member welcomed tourism to Tredegar, however this building was more suited to offices rather than a B&B. It was felt that when applications for businesses within Town Centres are submitted it would be good to see business plans to ascertain what the applicant had planned for the development and how it would bring benefits to the Town Centre. The Member supported the Ward Member that the application be refused.

 

It was proposed and seconded that the application be refused. The reason for refusal was that the development would have an unacceptable impact on the surrounding area given existing issues that exist.

 

Therefore, upon a vote being taken 12 voted in favour of the amendment and 1 abstained from voting. It was thereupon,

 

RESOLVED that planning permission be REFUSED.

 

8.

Potential DNS Schemes for Wind Farms pdf icon PDF 286 KB

To consider the report of the Team Manager Development Management.

 

Minutes:

Consideration was given to the report of the Team Manager Development Management.

 

The Service Manager Development Management outlined the report which had been presented to make Members aware of consultation with Welsh Government in respect of four scoping directions which have been submitted for wind farms. It was reported that the wind farms would be located at MynyddCarn-y-Cefn, Mynydd Llanhilleth, Maenmoel and Abertillery and an overview of the areas was provided.

 

The Service Manager Development Management advised that not all planning applications would be submitted to the Council. The schemes for renewable energy that generated above 10 Megawatts was called a 'Development of National Significance' and these schemes were submitted to Welsh Government to be decided by an independent Planning Inspector, however the Council would be formally consulted on any subsequent planning applications.

 

It was reported that all Members would have an opportunity to submit questions if the schemes are forthcoming.

 

RESOLVED that the report be accepted and the information contained therein be noted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9.

List of applications decided under delegated powers between 23rd August 2021 and 24th September 2021 pdf icon PDF 185 KB

To consider the report of the Senior Business Support Officer.

 

Minutes:

Consideration was given to the report of the Senior Business Support Officer.

 

RESOLVED that the report be accepted and the information contained therein be noted.

 

10.

Enforcement closed cases between 9th July 2021 and 30th September 2021

To consider the report of the Service Manager Development.

 

Minutes:

Having regard to the views expressed by the Proper Officer regarding the public interest test, that on balance the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information and that the report should be exempt.

 

RESOLVED that the public be excluded whilst this item of business is transacted as it is likely there would be a disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 12, Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).

 

Consideration was given to the report of the Service Manager Development.

 

RESOLVED that the report which contained information relating to a particular individual be accepted and the information contained therein be noted.