Venue: Chamber - County Hall, Carmarthen. SA31 1JP. View directions
Contact: Kevin Thomas 01267 224027
No. | Item | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Councillors S.M. Allen, J.M. Charles, D.C. Evans and I.J. Jackson. |
|||||||||||||
DECLARATIONS OF PERSONAL INTERESTS Additional documents: Minutes:
|
|||||||||||||
Additional documents: Minutes: The Development Management Officer (South) referred to the private site visit undertaken by the Committee earlier that day (Minute 4.1.2 of the Planning Committee held on the 21st March, 2017 refers) the purpose of which had been to view the partly constructed property in light of concerns expressed on behalf of third parties on its potential impact on adjoining residential properties. He referred, with the aid of powerpoint slides, to the written report of the Head of Planning which provided an appraisal of the site together with a description of the retrospective 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 objecting to the retrospective application re-iterating the points detailed in the Head of Planning’s report which included the following:-
· The property and extension, had been constructed without any thought to its impact on neighbouring properties · The ground floor extension measuring 4.3m x5m x 9m had been constructed without planning consent · The construction of the unauthorised extension to the same level as the bedroom windows of the adjacent property at no. 17 would adversely impact on both the privacy of the bedroom and every part of the rear garden of that property resulting in a loss of privacy detrimental to the enjoyment of the home and garden, · The construction of the extension by reason of its size, depth, width, height and massing would have an unacceptable adverse impact on the amenity of the adjacent residential properties by reason of being intrusive, out of proportion, overlooking, loss of privacy and having an overbearing visual appearance, · The amended roof terrace proposals were minimal and unacceptable in that they could easily be overcome by minor works facilitating the removal of the Juliette Balconies and re-instating access to the roof terrace area at a later date, which would require planning approval, possibly retrospectively · Whilst the neighbours expressed a preference for the removal of the ground floor extension, an assurance was sought that, if planning were to be granted, use of the roof terrace would never be permitted. Furthermore, the existing rear first floor French windows should be replaced with normal windows and a pitch roof erected over the extension replacing the current flat roof. · The proposed extension of the garden was outside approved development limits and, if approved, would result in encroachment into the open countryside · Concern was expressed on the possibility of future retrospective planning applications being sought for the erection of buildings in the paddock to the rear of the development · Additional concerns were expressed on the scale and overbearing impact of the proposed extension contrary to Policy GP1 of the Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan, · The overbearing nature of the extension on the rear garden of no. 15, by virtue of its height, would result in a significant loss of ... view the full minutes text for item 3. |
|||||||||||||
Additional documents: Minutes: The Development Management Officer (South) referred to the private site visit undertaken by the Committee earlier that day (Minute 4 of the Planning Committee held on the 6th April, 2017 refers) the purpose of which had been to view the site having regard to its planning history. He referred, with the aid of powerpoint slides, to the written report, and addendum, of the Head of Planning which provided an appraisal of the site together 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 refusal of the application for the reasons detailed within her written report.
A representation was received in support of the application which included the following:- · The proposal, if approved, would add to the existing small cluster of 8 properties situated along a main highway served by a local bus route and post box facility. · The cluster of properties was situated 1.7km away from the main settlement of Pontyberem with access to a range of services including medical and shops etc · It was considered the proposal complied with part 9.2.22 of Planning Policy Wales appertaining to small groups of housing in rural communities · The developer had submitted amended access proposals to the site to improve the visibility splay onto the adjoining highway · If approved, the applicant had intimated he would be prepared to consider making a financial contribution to the provision of affordable housing within the community. · The site had sufficient room to accommodate a garden, parking facilities and turning circle
The Senior Development Management Officer (South) responded to the issues raised. Having regard to the above statement on a possible contribution to affordable housing, a view was expressed that the application should be deferred to enable officers to discuss that aspect with the applicant.
RESOLVED that consideration of planning application S/35189 be deferred to enable discussions to take place with the applicant on the policy requirement that a financial contribution be forthcoming towards the provision of affordable housing. |
|||||||||||||
Additional documents: Minutes: The Development Management Officer (West) referred to the private site visit undertaken by the Committee earlier that day (Minute 5.3 of the Planning Committee held on the 6th April, 2017 refers) the purpose of which had been to view the site. He referred, with the aid of powerpoint slides, to the written report, of the Head of Planning which provided an appraisal of the site together 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 refusal of the application for the reasons detailed within her written report.
A representation was received in support of the application which included the following:- · The proposed development had been designed to complement and not detract from the existing listed property at Mounthill · The proposal involved the demolition of the listed boundary wall and its reinstatement set back from its existing line in order to improve access to the site. It did not involve the wall’s complete removal
RESOLVED that planning application W/34901 be refused for the reasons detailed within the Head of Planning’s written report |
|||||||||||||
Additional documents: Minutes: The Development Management Officer (West) referred to the private site visit undertaken by the Committee earlier that day (Minute 5.3 of the Planning Committee held on the 6th April, 2017 refers) the purpose of which had been to view the site. He referred, with the aid of powerpoint slides, to the written report, of the Head of Planning which provided an appraisal of the site together 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 refusal of the application for the reasons detailed within her written report.
A representation was received in support of the application advising that the proposal did not seek the removal of the listed boundary wall merely, its relocation set back from its existing line to improve site access arrangements.
RESOLVED that planning application W/34931 be refused for the reasons detailed within the Head of Planning’s written report. |
|||||||||||||
AREA EAST - DETERMINATION OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS PDF 1 MB Additional documents: Minutes: RESOLVED that the following planning applications be approved subject to the conditions detailed within the Report/addendum of the Head of Planning and or reported at the meeting:-
|
|||||||||||||
AREA SOUTH - DETERMINATION OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS PDF 6 MB Additional documents: Minutes: RESOLVED 8.1 that the following planning application be approved subject to the conditions detailed within the Report/addendum of the Head of Planning and or reported at the meeting:-
8.2 that consideration of the following planning application be deferred to enable further discussions to be undertaken with the applicant and objectors in light of the representations received regarding the start time of operations at the farm, and delegated authority be granted to the Head of Planning to grant the application should an agreement, mutually suitable to all parties, be achieved
|
|||||||||||||
AREA WEST - DETERMINATION OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS PDF 1 MB Additional documents: Minutes: RESOLVED 9.1 that the following planning applications be approved subject to the conditions detailed within the Report/addendum of the Head of Planning and or reported at the meeting:-
9.2 that the Committee be minded to approve the following planning application, contrary to the Head of Planning’s recommendation, subject to the outcome of the referral of Planning Application W/34737 for Listed Building Consent to CADW, the Welsh Government’s historic environment service:
9.3 that as the Committee was minded to grant the following planning application for listed building consent, contrary to the recommendation of the Head of ... view the full minutes text for item 9. |