Agenda and minutes

(NOTE: at 5.00 p.m. the Committee’s attention was drawn to Council Procedure Rule 9 – Duration of Meeting and, as the meeting had been underway for three hours it was RESOLVED to suspend standing orders to enable the Committee to complete the remaining business on the agenda day.  At 4:20pm, the Committee adjourned for a 10 minute comfort break reconvening at 4.30p.m.)

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors L. Bowen, J. Lewis, and E. Williams.

[Note: P.L. Emlyn left the Chamber during consideration of this item.]

The Development Management Officer (South) referred to the private site visit undertaken by the Committee earlier that day (Minute 4.1 of the Planning Committee held on the 29^th June, 2017 refers) the purpose of which had been to afford the Committee the opportunity of assessing the potential for noise pollution to occur to neighbouring properties.  He referred, with the aid of powerpoint slides, and addendum, to the written report of the Head of Planning which provided an appraisal of the site with a description of the development, a summary of consultation responses received and information on the local and national policies which were relevant to the assessment of the application. 

The Committee noted that a noise report had been submitted in support of the application, together with a management plan which sought to ensure that noise was controlled and that third parties would not be adversely affected.  The Committee also noted that the proximity of third party properties had been noted with the objector’s property located some 90m to the South/South East of the site.  Furthermore, given the small scale of the operation, it was not considered likely that there would be unacceptable noise impacts.

The Committee was advised that the Head of Planning was recommending approval of the application for the reasons detailed within her written report.

RESOLVED that planning application S/35029 be granted subject to the conditions detailed within the Head of Planning’s written report.

[NOTE: Councillor H.I. Jones, having earlier declared a personal interest in this application, left the meeting prior to the consideration and determination thereof.]

The Development Management Officer (South) referred to the private site visit undertaken by the Committee earlier that day (Minute 4.1 of the Planning Committee held on the 29^th June, 2017 refers) the purpose of which had been to afford the Committee the opportunity of viewing the site in light of the representations as set out in the Head of Planning’s report:- 

·         to gain an understanding of the developments potential impact upon the infrastructure in the area and the safety of residents.

·         to view the proposed location of the sewerage tanks/pumps and the potential for overlooking to occur.

·         to afford the whole of the committee the opportunity of visiting the site as, only 6 of its members were members of the previous planning committee which had visited the site in connection with the original outline planning application S/15702.

Prior to outlining the Head of Planning’s report on the application, the Development Management Officer (South) reported that he had received two further letters of representation the contents of which were read to the Committee and concerns were addressed.

Reference was made, with the aid of powerpoint slides, and addendum, to the written report of the Head of Planning which provided an appraisal of the site with a description of the development, a summary of consultation responses received and information on the local and national policies which were relevant to the assessment of the application.  The Committee was advised that the Head of Planning was recommending approval of the application for the reasons detailed within her written report.

Representations were received expressing concerns to the proposed development re-iterating the points detailed within the Head of Planning’s report and included the following:-

·         The development will be detrimental to the village of Bynea by way of increased risk of flooding and risk to public health because of the excessive demand placed on the public sewer.

·         The methods of surface water disposal will have a detrimental impact upon Welsh Water’s infrastructure and increase the risk of flooding to the lower parts of Bynea particularly when combined with periods of heavy rainfall.

·         The development should not be permitted until Welsh Water can give assurance that sewerage infrastructure works in and around Bynea have been completed and that the sewerage system will be able to accommodate the additional demand.

·         Highway safety concerns regarding the suitability of the surrounding road infrastructure to cater for the large volume of vehicular traffic that will be generated by the development and the impact upon local residents.

·         The local area lacks general civic amenities including access to shops and recreational facilities as well as inadequate school place provision to cater for the additional service demand.

·         The development would have a direct effect on traffic flow and congestion on roads within their neighbouring Community Council area as well as the whole area generally.

·         Unacceptable increase in traffic flow and congestion  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.2

The Development Management Officer (South) referred to the private site visit undertaken by the Committee earlier that day (Minute 4.1 of the Planning Committee held on the 29^th June, 2017 refers) the purpose of which had been to afford the committee the opportunity of viewing the site in light of the representations set out below:-

·         assess the potential impact the 19 foot structure could have on the adjacent Gorsedd Stones as expressed by CADW,

·         to look at existing play areas in the vicinity

Reference was made, with the aid of powerpoint slides, and addendum, to the written report of the Head of Planning which provided an appraisal of the site with a description of the development, a summary of consultation responses received and information on the local and national policies which were relevant to the assessment of the application.  The Committee was advised that the Head of Planning was recommending approval of the application for the reasons detailed within her written report.

Representations were received expressing concerns over the following aspects of the proposed development which reiterated the points detailed within the Head of Planning’s written report:-

·           Unacceptable over-development of a heritage site and negative impact the development would have on the character of the site.

·         The structure is not sympathetic for the area of the park, is visually dominant and would result in overdevelopment.

·         The vista of this area of the park which includes the historic Gorsedd Stones would be destroyed.

·         The views of the local people of Llanelli had not been taken into consideration. More sympathetic play areas should be included in the park which could encompass the history and ambience of the park.

·         The space net is not required by the local community and would be a waste of money public which could be better spent on maintaining current provision within the park.

·         Lack of justification for the current proposal.

·         The area to the east of the Gorsedd Stones has already been destroyed by the Council fast tracking the building of this ‘space net’ originally without planning permission. There is already destruction on this site with no proposal made to return it to its former terrain.

·         Health and safety concerns – would the structure be manned and would a trained first aider be on site?

·         Will there be public liability insurance cover?

·         Has a full geotechnical and mining survey been undertaken, and if so why did these not accompany the planning application?

The applicant’s agent and the Development Management Officer (South) responded to the issues raised.

RESOLVED that planning application S/35542 be granted subject to the conditions detailed within the Head of Planning’s written report.

Please note these minutes reflect the order of business itemised on the Agenda for the meeting which may differ from that on any webcast recording as applications with members of the public attending to speak, would have been dealt with first.