Nine affordable care flats at Plas Newydd Residential Home, Criccieth

What was proposed

The application sought to demolish the vacant building and construct nine affordable, one-bedroom independent living flats with extra care for people over 55.

“This is a full planning application to demolish the existing building and redevelop the site by erecting a new building to provide nine independent living flats (C3 use) with extra care service for the over 55s.⁠ These living units would be provided as affordable units.”

“Specifically, the proposal involves the erection of a four-storey building which would be slightly taller than the existing building and set back within the site compared to the existing building. The internal layout would be as follows: • Ground floor – main access and reception/foyer along with community areas for residents and staff in the form of a shared living area, external decking/terrace to the rear, office, toilet and kitchen plus one living unit.”

Officer report

The site and its history

The site lies within Cricieth’s development boundary beside the A497 and railway, and the existing building was formerly a care home.

“The site is situated within the existing development boundary of the town of Cricieth with the A497 class 1 road running parallel to the front of the site and beyond the rear of the site, it is seen that land owned by the Cambrian coast railway lies directly adjacent.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended refusal because the proposed building would harm the area’s character and appearance and significantly affect neighbouring residents’ living conditions.

“This is a proposal to demolish an existing three-storey building and replace it with a new four- storey building. Whilst elements of the proposal are acceptable, it is not considered that the proposal has succeeded in this case in securing a building that is of acceptable design, scale and appearance as it would be detrimental to the visual amenities of the local area and the context of the site.”

“It is not considered that the design of the proposal, in terms of its siting, scale and massing would add to or enhance the character and appearance of its site context nor fully integrate into the context of the immediate streetscene and its prominent location in this part of Cricieth.”

Officer report

What residents said

Residents objected to the building’s design, height, bulk, loss of light, overlooking, parking, safety, infrastructure and demolition impacts.

“This type of development is needed here in Cricieth but this building is not suitable for such a development. • The plans show no resemblance to the houses next door. • Concern the development will mean a lack of light for the houses next door and possibly no privacy, as there are more windows on the sides.”

“Loss of a building of quality and character that blends to its location and with adjacent buildings and is in good condition • Detrimental effect on the residential amenities of nearby residents/loss of light/overlooking from the rear balcony • Oppressive scale and height • The design results in introducing an incongruous feature that is completely incompatible with the current development pattern • Lack of infrastructure • There is no need for such a resource in Cricieth,…”

Officer report

Who spoke

An objector supported refusal, the agent argued that housing need and affordability outweighed design concerns, and the local member opposed the application.

The decision and reasons

The committee delegated refusal because the proposal would not integrate into the streetscape and would have a significant adverse effect on neighbouring residents’ amenities.

“⁠It is not considered that the design of the proposal, in terms of layout, scale and mass adds to enhancing the character and appearance of the site context nor does it fully integrate within the context of the immediate streetscape and its prominent location in this part of Cricieth.”

“Due to the scale, mass and location and certain features to be included in the proposed development, it would lead to an intrusive and domineering impact on adjacent properties and their curtilage. It is therefore considered that the proposal would have a significant adverse impact on the amenities of residents of local properties contrary to criterion 7 of policy PCYFF2 of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan, 2017.”

Minutes