Petrol station and charging hub at Land By Muriau Park Hotel, Caernarfon

What was proposed

The application proposed a petrol station, electric vehicle charging hub, retail building, new access and landscaping, including facilities for cars and heavy goods vehicles.

“Proposal: Proposed petrol filling station, electric vehicle charging hub, retail building and creation of new access and associated works to include landscaping.”

“The development also includes an electric vehicle (EV) charging hub south of the fuel canopy and north of the new access road, providing 11 charging bays under a canopy, along with the associated infrastructure. Four jet-powered car wash bays are proposed, along with car parking, parking spaces for bicycles, and space for two caravan-towing vehicles. The plan also includes landscaping, in- cluding a small outdoor seating area.”

Officer report

Planning history

No relevant planning history was identified for the site.

“Relevant Planning History: No relevant planning history on site…”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended refusal because the proposal raised unresolved concerns about disturbance, ecology, contamination, flooding, agricultural land and design.

“Species Regulations 2017, to assess the proposal against Chapter 6 of Planning Policy Wales in relation to green infrastructure and a step-by-step approach, or to assess the impact of the proposal in terms of groundwater or land contamination or flooding impact in respect of policies PCYFF 2 and PS6 of the LDP. Recommendation: To Refuse To refuse – reasons .1.”

“.3. The test of the likely significant impact suggests that the proposal may cause a significant impact on the Glynllifon SAC, particularly the smallest horseshoe bat, which is a feature of this SAC, as a result of its location of the proposal, the evidence that the area is used by lesser horseshoe bats and that the proposal affects the hedges used by the bats.”

Officer report

What residents said

Public objections concerned agricultural land, traffic, road safety, the countryside, biodiversity, bats, light, noise, neighbouring properties and local businesses.

“Public Consultation: The application was advertised and letters / correspondence were received objecting on the basis of:”

“Location on good quality agricultural land. • Increase in traffic and activity in the area. • Concerns about road safety. • Outside the development boundary. • Concerns about the visual impact of the development. • Loss of green space and damage to biodiversity. • Potential impact on local bats. • Lack of obvious need or demand for the development. • Prominent development within the landscape.”

Officer report

Who spoke

An objector described environmental, business and traffic concerns, while the applicant’s agent asked for deferral and disputed or sought to address several objections.

The committee’s decision

The committee refused the application because of disturbance, ecological uncertainty, missing infrastructure and contamination information, flooding, agricultural land loss and intrusive design.

“Insufficient information had currently been submitted as part of the application to assess the impact as a result of any contamination in the land. To this end, it cannot be confirmed whether the proposal complied with the requirements of criterion 7 of Policy PCYFF 2 or Policy PS6 of the Anglesey and Gwynedd LDP 2011-2026.”

“Insufficient evidence has been submitted as part of the planning application to demonstrate that full consideration has been given to the loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land. It was therefore considered that the application was contrary to the requirements of criterion 6 of Policy PS 6 of the Anglesey and Gwynedd LDP 2011-2026, as well as the advice given in paragraphs 3.58 and 3.59 of Planning Policy Wales.”

Minutes