GwelYFenai

This note sets out a response to the planning committee report, specifically the individual reasons for refusal of the Gwel y Fenai Planning Application. Each reason for refusal is listed with the response in italics below:

7.1

To refuse – reasons

Developers Response

1

Welsh Language

It is not considered that sufficient information has been submitted as part of the application to

ensure that the proposal would not adversely affect the Welsh Language and Culture. The proposal

is therefore contrary to the requirements of policy PS1 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local

Development Plan 2017 together with the SPG on Maintaining and Creating Distinctive and

Sustainable Communities and TAN 20 Planning and the Welsh Language.

An assessment of the effects of the Proposed Development on Welsh language and has identified beneficial and neutral effects on the Welsh language. Comments from the Authority’s Language Unit dismiss the jobs created on the industrial development as having no guarantee of delivery. This fundamentally, underestimates the contribution the proposal can make to the local economy, creation of local jobs and the future well-being of the Welsh language. There are no other developments proposed in Gwynedd where over 120,000 sq feet of employment floorspace can be created. The positive impact of this proposal on potential job creation and retention is therefore significant and, if anything the assessment of impact on Welsh language, is conservative – reaching an overall conclusion of positive.

In addition to the industrial floorspace the direct jobs created on the leisure park will enhance the Welsh language, creating direct permanent and part time jobs at all skill levels.

Additionally, the fact that the holiday accommodation provided at the development will be managed as rental accommodation under one management, rather than as second-homes for sale will further provide a safeguard against impact of permanent in-migration.

Further, the provision of purpose-built holiday accommodation can reduce pressure on conversion of existing housing stock within Caernarfon and its rural hinterland to holiday accommodation in the form of second homes; self-catered holiday accommodation; and, Air BnB’s.

To secure a positive impact the following mitigation measure can be adopted to enhance beneficial effects.

·        Commitment to provide a Welsh name for the development as is evident from the outset with the name Gwel y Fenai.

·        External signage for the Proposed Development will be bilingual (Welsh first then English).

·        Commitment to supporting the local supply chain where possible during construction through early and proactive engagement with the potential supply chain in order to maximise benefits for businesses in Gwynedd and Anglesey.

·        Commitment to source construction and operation labour locally, where possible with active engagement with organisations such as Grwp Llandrillo Menai and a commitment to apprenticeship schemes.

·        Commitment to dedicating part of the hub building as a Welsh Language resource centre to be used by visitors and available to the local communities.

It is proposed that a Welsh Language Mitigation and Enhancement Strategy can be provided prior to commencement of the development, to be informed by discussions with the Local Planning Authority and Hunaniaith – Menter Iaith Gwynedd. This can be conditioned or subject to a Section 106 Agreement as part of the development.

2

Loss of Employment Land

Sufficient information has not been submitted as part of the application which sets out how the

proposal complies with Policy CYF 5 Alternative Uses of Existing Employment Sites, and

therefore, the proposal does not comply with the requirements of the Policy. The proposal must

therefore, be considered contrary to the requirements of Policies CYF 1, CYF 5 of the Anglesey

and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan 2017 together with the Supplementary Planning

Guidance: Change of use of community facilities and services, employment sites and retail units.

This reason for refusal relates to the loss of some employment floorspace on the Ferrodo site as part of the overall development. Firstly, none of the floorspace on the Ferrodo site is currently usable as employment in its current condition. The Economic Assessment and Socio-economic chapter of the ES has addressed this issue and the proposal has the support of the Council’s Economic Development Unit. Far from resulting in the loss of employment floorspace the proposal brings back int use over 120,000 sq ft of commercial/industrial floorspace which has been vacant in its entirety since 2008 and, prior to that only used partially.

Early dialogue with the Planning Authority as far back as February 2019 (prior to the submission of the application) confirmed that the Authority had no issue with the reduction in employment floorspace and would also not resist a further reduction. That said, the applicant believes that the re-creation of 120,000 sq ft of employment floorspace on this site is important to the local economy and is in active discussion with 3 end users who would if the application is approved commit to taking up much of the floorspace created.

3

Policy context and number of chalets

The proposal is situated on an open and visual coastal site which forms the front elevation of

extensive views of Snowdonia from the Anglesey AONB. This particular development falls within

the LCA01 (Bangor Coastal Plain) Landscape Character Area and the Landscape Sensitivity and

Capacity Study notes that within each area contributing to the National Park’s setting there is

typically, no capacity for static caravan park / holiday lodge developments. However, outside these

areas there may be some capacity for small to very small holiday lodges / caravan park

developments that have been well designed and situated. The Study defines very small

developments as up to 10 units and small developments between 10 – 25 units. The information on

proposed landscaping is sketchy and does not include sufficient detail to confirm that it would be

acceptable in terms of type and scale. To this end it is therefore considered that the proposal is

contrary to the requirements of criteria 1i) and1ii) of policy TWR 3, point 3 of policy PS14 together

with policies AMG 3 and PCYFF 4 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local Development Plan

2017 and the ‘Isle of Anglesey, Gwynedd and Snowdonia National Park Landscape Sensitivity and

Capacity Study’ (Gillespies, 2014) as the proposal would lead to an abundance of static caravan

sites or permanent alternative camping sites and would have a detrimental visual impact on the

Anglesey AONB and the local landscape.

Having discussed the proposal at length with Gwynedd Council Officers including Senior Planning Officers over a three-year period this specific reason for refusal which points at an “in principle” policy objection to more than 25 chalet/lodge units has only been raised in formulating the committee report.

Discussions have been ongoing with senior Gwynedd Council officers, including members of the planning team in relation to this proposed development since early 2018. Whilst comments were made and received questioning the number of chalet/lodges to the north of the cycle track at Plas Brereton and in relation to the, initial “regimented” layout at Gwel y Fenai, not once has the overall number of units been raised as a concern with refence to planning policy and guidance.

The committee Report now suggests that the “guidance” referred to above as the ‘Landscape Capacity and Sensitivity Study of Anglesey, Gwynedd and Snowdonia National Park’ (Gillespies, 2014) effectively places an embargo on schemes of over 25 chalets/lodges in the landscape character area within which the site is located. However, the document referred to was produced to inform the JLDP process on a number of matters and, as noted in the executive summary in bold text:

It is important to note that this report represents a strategic study and is not prescriptive at an individual site level. It does not replace the need for the Councils or Park Authority to assess individual planning applications or for specific local landscape and visual impact assessment as part of formal EIA on a case-by-case basis.

The Gillespies Report is therefore not prescriptive enough to bring someone to the conclusion that the siting of circa 170 chalets/lodges on this unique previously developed site is unacceptable. As envisaged by Gillespies – there are sites, such as the current planning application site where, at individual site level a higher number of chalets/lodges could be acceptable subject to detailed Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment and/or EIA. In this case that assessment concludes that the development can be acceptable, subject to appropriate mitigation.

4

Trunk Roads Highways Objection

The Welsh Government’s Economy and Infrastructure Department has confirmed that it is holding

objection to ensure that arrangements can be made whereby vehicles will not accumulate on the

A487 trunk road at peak times and the Council’s Transport Unit is concerned about the same

impact. To this end, the Local Planning Authority is not convinced that the plan would provide a

safe access to the proposal, and therefore it does not comply with the requirements of criterion 1iii)

of policy TWR 3, nor policies TRA 1 and 2 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local

Development Plan 2017 which ensures suitable access and road safety.

Welsh Government Highways and the Council’s own highways department have been consulted on this proposal on a number of occasions and raised no objection. It is clear that the development will not commence until the Caernarfon by-pass has been completed and will be operational. As such is it clear that the traffic volumes on the A487 will not be such where movements to and from the site will need to rely on waiting for gaps in busy through traffic to enter and leave the site. The hub building: drop off zone and car park is sufficiently set back to avoid queuing onto the highway. Peak flows will also be broader than they would have been with shift patterns at the former Ferrodo site.

5

Scale of the Hub Building

The leisure hub building which includes ancillary facilities to the holiday park, which will also be

open to the public, together with 51 holiday units is substantial in bulk and height and would be

fully visible above the existing trees which largely conceal existing buildings. To this effect,

therefore, it is not considered that this part of the proposal complies with the requirements of

criterion ii of policy TWR 2 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local Development Plan 2017.

Criteria ii of Policy TWR requires that the proposed development is appropriate in scale considering the site, location and/or settlement in question. In this case the hub building is comparable, though lower in height than the development at Victoria Dock, Caernarfon, which has no intervening screening when viewed from the AONB and lies within the essential setting of the World Heritage Site. In that case a planning balance judgment will have been made with the economic benefits of the development weighing in favour of the development. In the case of the Gwel y Fenai Development similar considerations come into account. The hub building will be visible from Anglesey, but only as a small part of the overall landscape view, with the backdrop and scale of Snowdonia still being the principal element. Tall buildings and structures within this vista have been accepted in the past, including the Victoria Dock development, student accommodation in Bangor and wind turbines on the Caernarfon Airfield site. The visibility of a building or structure does not therefore place an embargo on its approval.

In the case of the hub building, it has to be of a certain height, not to accommodate holiday apartments but to provide the wet weather attraction of the water park and associated facilities as indicated in the section below. Given the need to provide a structure of this height, the presence of other tall structures, intervening vegetation, and higher landscape backdrop, combined with the fact that the Ferrodo site has been a visual detractor in the landscape historically, the planning balance must point towards the height and scale of the hub building being acceptable.

6

Requirement for a Structural Report for Plas Brereton

It is acknowledged that the proposed work on the Plas Brereton building is minimal and includes

closing openings on the ground floor. However, the building is situated in the open countryside

and the plan has been submitted to retain the building and use it as self-contained holiday units,

therefore, it is considered that it is appropriate to ensure the structural condition of the building

before it can be confirmed as suitable for conversion. To this end, this part of the proposal is

contrary to the requirements of criteria 3i and iii of policy CYF 6, point 4 of policy PS14 of the

Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local Development Plan 2017 together with SPG ‘Replacement

Dwellings and Conversions in the Countryside’ and paragraph 3.2.1 of TAN 23 Economic

Development.

This suggested reason for refusal is spurious and even acknowledges that the works to Plas Brereton are minimal and could in any case be covered by a condition. In that case, it is not reasonable to suggest that, as a very small element of the overall scheme, the proposal in its entirety is unacceptable unless a structural report is presented relating to Plas Brereton. A detailed condition report is included within the Heritage Assessment and there is no indication that the building is structurally unsound. Planning consent has been granted in the recent past for its conversion without the need for a structural survey.

7

Impact of holiday new accommodation on existing provision

No evidence or information was submitted regarding the impact of the new holiday units within

the Plas Brereton building and the leisure hub on the accommodation already available in the area.

The Local Planning Authority is therefore not convinced that this part of the proposal would not

lead to an excess of such accommodation in the area. Therefore, the intention is contrary to criterion v of policy TWR2, point 3 of policy PS14 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local Development Plan 2017 together with SPG: Holiday Accommodation.

This matter is given attention within the Economic Assessment Report and the socio-economic chapter of the ES. There is clear reference to the fact that the holiday accommodation provided is of a type not available locally and does not compete with existing serviced accommodation. This point is acknowledged in the response from the Economic Development Unit, in that there is no objection to the development based on the potential impact on existing businesses. Many tourist attractions in Gwynedd and North Wales point to the lack of adequate short-stay accommodation for their customers as one of the major issues affecting their businesses and the local economy generally.  Examples such as Zip World report that many customers visit their sites but have to stay further afield in the Liverpool and Chester area. Consequently, the additional spend to the local economy is lost.

8

Impact on Town Centre Businesses.

No information has been submitted in relation to how the facilities in the leisure hub that will be

available to the public comply with Policy MAN 6 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local

Development Plan 2017 and in particular the impact of the proposal on Caernarfon town centre.

Therefore, to this end, it is considered that it is not possible to confirm whether the proposal is

acceptable in this respect, nor with respect to point 6 of policy PS16 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey

Joint Local Development Plan 2017.

The committee report points to a need to assess impact on town centre businesses from the uses within the hub building. Again this is a point which has been raised for the first time by officers at the point of drafting a committee report. It has not been raised during over two years of discussion. That said, the hub building provides an indoor leisure facility which cannot be accommodated on town centre sites in Caernarfon or Bangor and, due to being an essential component of the overall proposal, it cannot be disaggregated from the overall proposal. The hub and the ancillary facilities within the hub building, must be co-located on this site with the proposed holiday accommodation. It will provide the additional benefits of an all year, wet weather attraction open to the public which is unique to the area and will not compete with or be detrimental to the viability of town centre businesses.

As acknowledged in the consultation response from the Economic Development Unit, the proposal will not be detrimental to town centre businesses and, with additional measures built into conditions or a Section 106 Agreement, further benefits to the town centre of Caernarfon can be secured to improve links between the site and the centre.

9

Design and Visual Appearance

The proposal as a whole is considered contrary to the requirements of criterion 7 of policy PCYFF

2, the principles of policies PCYFF 3 and PCYFF 4 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local

Development Plan 2017, because the proposal would have a detrimental effect on the

characteristics of the local area, the proposal does not add to or enhance the character and

appearance of the site and it does not respect its context, and because of the lack of suitable

landscaping.

As indicated above, the proposed hub building may be visible above the current tree line. However, the proposed lodges and much of the hub building and reconfigured industrial units will be mitigated by significant additional planting, the detail of which can be secured by planning conditions.

The Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment concludes that, overall the visual impact is acceptable and safeguards are suggested to require details of tree retention; replacement tree planting and micro-siting details of lodges prior to development commencing.

10

Noise Impact

There is no noise assessment or information as to the effect of the proposal on the amenities of the

users of Lôn Las Menai and to this end, it is considered that there is potential for a significant

adverse effect to arise from the development in terms of noise and increased use of the Lôn Las

Menai path. Therefore, the proposal is considered to be contrary to the requirements of criterion 7

of policy PCYFF 2, and criteria 4 and 10 of policy PCYFF 3 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint

Local Development Plan 2017.

The proposed development is on a lawful industrial site where there would have been, and can still lawfully be, significant industrial activity. Construction noise can be controlled by condition requiring a Construction Environmental Management Plan prior to commencement of development. That is standard practice. During the operation phase of the development noise emitted from the site will be minimal, with any noise generated within the water park and hub building being inaudible at the site boundary. That was not and would not be true of the former Ferrodo buildings should they be re-used for their lawful use without the mitigation and noise attenuation which can now be designed into the refurbished buildings.

11

Biodiversity

It is not considered that sufficient current information has been submitted as part of the application

to ensure that the proposal would not adversely affect biodiversity, protected species or trees on

the site. Therefore, the proposal is contrary to the requirements of policies PS19 and AMG 5 of the

Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local Development Plan 2017 together with TAN 5: Nature

Conservation and Planning.

With reference to the points made about further ecology surveys; updated surveys may well be needed for licence applications, but given that the surveys were completed and submitted with the original application, well within the two year window referred to and that we have subsequently been requesting clarification on biodiversity comments for quite some time, WHEN ? we trust that  determination can now be made based on the substantial information and surveys which you have.

There are new issues being raised now which have not been raised by the Biodiversity Unit in the past and those issues are being raised so late in the day that it seems to the applicant that this is merely another attempt to deliberately delay determination, through the request in this response for additional surveys which cannot be carried out until May 2022. Condition?

Concerns relating to the lighting scheme can be conditioned – if the current lighting scheme is viewed as unacceptable, a simple condition requiring the submission of an alternative scheme prior to the installation of lighting can be imposed. In any event additional detail on lighting was submitted on the 1st November 2021.

12

Biodiversity and HRA

The Council’s Biodiversity Unit has confirmed that it believes that insufficient information has

been provided to enable the Local Planning Authority to undertake a Habitats Regulations

Assessment (HRA) and to determine the likely impact on the Menai Strait and Conwy Bay SAC

and the Skerries SPA. HRA assessment requires information to demonstrate, to a high level of

certainty, that the proposal will not have any adverse effect on the designated species and habitats

of the site, and to this end, it cannot be confirmed that the proposal does not comply with the

requirements of the Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 and that the proposal will not adversely

affect the SAC or SPA. The proposal is therefore contrary to the requirements of policies PS19 and

AMG 4 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local Development Plan 2017.

Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) – a HRA is required. Noted, Gwynedd Council are the Competent Authority and are required to complete the HRA but it is clear that there is sufficient information to complete the HRA. The issue in question seems to relate to the potential impact of gull displacement as far afield as the Skerries SPA and the potential for the relocated gulls to impact breeding tern colonies at Ynys Feurig, Cemlyn. The prosect of re-location as far afield as the SPA’s referred to is minimal and can be factored into your HRA. It should also be noted that the majority of the roof of the Former Ferrodo building, which provides the nesting areas for gulls is to be retained/reformed in a similar manner to the existing. Mitigation can be designed into the scheme to encourage gull nesting on the retained buildings.

With reference to assessment of the displacement of gulls, the committee report is not clear and the Authority’s view must be balanced with the response of NRW. NRW acknowledge that further gull surveys are not required.

A detailed site management plan can be produced to secure the long-term future of retained grassland and to improve the quality of the woodland areas, this can be conditioned.

The committee report notes that the HRA assessment requires information to show, to a high level of certainty, that that the proposal will have no adverse impact on the sites designated species and habitats and recommends that the following information is provided to enable the LPA to make this assessment.

A full and detailed Pollution prevention plan detailing any likely sources, pathways and receptor sites for construction related pollution which may affect the SAC habitats. This can take the form of a site wide project Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP).

Most importantly, this site is currently a significant environmental threat to the SAC, as evidenced by previous pollution events. The “do nothing” scenario is not an option. The only way control can be secured over future pollution threats is through remediation as part of this development. We have already clarified that a CEMP would be submitted for approval to comply with planning conditions prior to commencement of development. This will include measures for Pollution Prevention and best practice will be implemented, including details of emergency spill procedures and incident response plan but we contend it is not required now and not required to enable the Authority to complete its HRA.

Comments in relation to tree felling or clearance have been addressed where we believe that it would be prudent to condition further assessment of which trees may need to be removed and which retained. This could be done through the imposition of a suitable condition, which could also cover the approval of the micro-siting of individual or chalet groups where it is considered that avoidance of certain trees or root protection zones is essential. It is not prudent at this stage to carry out a detailed assessment of every single tree on the site.

13

Impact on the Listed Park and Garden at Llanidan Hall

There are significant concerns about the visual impact of the proposal from the Listed Park and

Garden at Llanidan Hall, and there is insufficient information in relation to the LVIA to ensure that

the proposal will not have a significant impact on the setting or views from the Park and Garden.

It is therefore considered that the proposal is contrary to the requirements of policies PS20 and

AT1 of the Gwynedd and Anglesey Joint Local Development Plan 2017 on this matter.

The response from the Gwynedd Archaeological Planning Service notes that overall, the proposed development would result in both positive and negative impacts on the historic environment at Plas Brereton, the impact is felt to be predominantly beneficial though they have some concerns regarding the impact of the Gwel y Fenai (Ferodo) development upon the setting of the Llanidan Hall Grade II* Registered Historic Park and Garden. Some design mitigations are sought, such as potential reduction in building height and use of muted tones.

As indicated above, when you take the proposal as a whole, a reduction in building height of a waterpark building is not feasible. A reduction in height makes the use unviable. However, design alterations such as the use of muted tones, living walls and strengthening of the landscaping to the north can be incorporated.

Again, the height of the hub building must be viewed in its broader context. It is not of such significant height as to be a skyline feature and, in comparison to the Victoria Dock development, the wind turbines at Caernarfon Airport and the skyline student accommodation at Bangor, when viewed from Anglesey, the hub building would not be a single isolated feature of scale within the landscape.

Overall Conclusion

Viewed individually, the suggested reasons for refusal have broken the proposal into individual elements and rigidly applied individual policies to each component part. There is no detailed assessment of the planning balance despite the fact that the developer has been engaged in discussions with the Local Planning Authority for almost 3 years.

A pragmatic approach was evident in 2019 where, following a meeting to discuss amendments to the proposal the following was noted.

Notes relating to the meeting held between Leonie; Rhys; Dewi and Cara Owen and Idwal Williams of Gwynedd Council.

Meeting held on the 21st of February 2019 at Gwynedd Council Offices:

LPA pleased that the layout is now less regimented and working with existing topography – this was a direct response to earlier concerns
LPA feel the scheme works better without the broader mix of uses which initially included the football pitch/floodlights; stand-alone A3 restaurant; Diving Centre; and, Biomass Unit
LPA pleased to hear that discussions were advanced with Landal – holiday park operator
LPA had no issue with the reduction in employment floorspace and would also not resist a further reduction – so no concern at that stage on the loss of employment land. However, the quantum of floorspace has been retained at over 120,000 sq ft.
LPA raised some concern about the access to the employment land and questioned whether there was an established access to the former Ferrodo site from the Griffiths Crossing entrance. Concern related mainly to the conflict with Lon Las Menai Cycle Route as opposed to the capacity and layout of the road junction. Crossing points can be improved.
With reference to the main building and apartment block – LPA had a preference for the apartments and main vista to face westwards in an arc with the pool/external area to the east
Reference was made to the need to comply with the recent SUDS Regulations, despite the fact that an existing drainage connection was available – this led to a significant change to the proposal
LVIA Viewpoints from Anglesey should be agreed directly with Ed Henderson of IoACC – these were discussed prior to completion of the LVIA

Comments in relation to Plas Brereton were summarised as follows:

Main concern and most likely a matter where LPA will draw a line was that all lodges should be sited to the south of the Lon Las Menai
Landscape to the north of the Lon Las Menai felt to be too open to views from the Menai Strait and LPA would have an objection in principle to lodges on this area
Lodges shown on the remainder of Plas Brereton land felt to be too similar to those on Gwel y Fenai and higher quality would be sought
Diversion of Lon Las Menai would not overcome objections
If additional number of units required to ensure viability LPA encouraged us to look at higher density on areas to the south of Lon Las Menai – this could include walled garden areas at Ty Coch/Plas Brereton – subject to assessment of impact on Listed Building and setting.

It is clear from the above that, there was no objection raised to the principle of the loss of employment floorspace; no requirement for a structural survey for Plas Brereton; no overall concern on the number of chalet/lodges or new build units; and, a view that the scheme should focus mainly on the holiday park as the principal use.

Additionally, it was made clear that chalet/lodges on the north side of Plas Brereton were at odds with the LPA’s view on acceptability. The principal changes to the scheme since that date have focussed on the principal concerns, notably:

·        All but 4 of the chalet/lodges at Pals Brereton now to the south of Lon Las Menai

·        Development connected to the Main sewer system – subject to conditions

·        Layout of units at both Ferrodo site and Plas Brereton less regimented

·        Additional assessment provided on landscape and visual impact and heritage impact

The matters addressed above also reflect concerns raised by members of the public at the pre-application consultation events, where concerns specific to the layout related primarily to the units which were proposed to the north of Lon las Menai at Plas Brereton. These have since been removed.

It should be noted that, overall, the response to public consultation on the proposals showed that 90% of respondents were in favour of the development. This is still evident today with comments still being received overwhelmingly in favour both directly to the applicant and via social media.

A number of respondents raised the importance of the Welsh language, and the developer has taken cognizance of those responses. From the outset a commitment to the Welsh language has been shown and this is now further demonstrated by a willingness to agree, prior to commencement of development a site/proposal specific Welsh Language Strategy, which will include, as a minimum an on-site facility for the promotion of the Welsh language and a strategy and commitment to ensure that local employment is maximised during construction and operation.