Twin lodge annex with decking at Glan Dwyryd, Tanygrisiau, Blaenau Ffestiniog

What was proposed

The application proposed a twin lodge annex with timber decking and a ramp around its southern and western sides.

“Description: This is an application to site a chalet in the form of a twin lodge for use as an associated annex to the main property, and to install decking and a ramp measuring approximately 0.5m in height at its highest point, to surround the southern and western elevations of the proposed chalet. The decking and ramp will be constructed from treated timber.”

“It is noted that the application form states that it is intended to site a chalet in the form of a twin lodge on the site, and the agent has confirmed that the exact chalet has not yet been chosen. ⁠This type of accommodation falls under the definition of a caravan within Part III of the Caravan Sites Act 1968 (amended 15/11/2019), subject to appropriate sizes.”

Officer report

The site

The site was outside a development boundary, within a historic landscape, near a scheduled monument and served by the A496.

“The proposed development is located outside any development boundary, is within a Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest area and within 500m of a scheduled Monument. It is served by the A496 class I road.”

“This application is submitted to the Planning Committee as a member of the Planning Department's staff has submitted observations on the application.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

An earlier application for a two-storey extension was approved with conditions in 2015.

“Relevant Planning History: C15/0635/03/LL - Erection of two storey extension - Approved with Conditions 28-10-2015 4. Consultations: Community/Town Council: The Town Council has discussed the above application and has decided to raise an objection. The Council has received letters of objection from the site's neighbours, and also believes that the site is located outside the development boundaries.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the decking was suitable in scale and materials, would protect neighbouring amenities, and could provide accessible access.

“Visual amenities 5.3 The proposal entails the erection of decking and a ramp to provide accessible access to the proposed chalet, a building of substantial size and height on the western outskirts of an industrial estate. In terms of scale and size, the development is commensurate to the chalet which is surrounds.”

“General and residential amenities 5.5 Several objections were received from the site’s neighbours based on the siting of the chalet on the site. However, only the decking requires planning permission, and as already noted, such a chalet can be sited on the site's curtilage for ancillary uses to the main dwelling without permission, and therefore only the impact of the decking on the neighbouring amenities can be assessed here.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The town council objected, transport officers had no objection, and public protection raised concerns about whether the septic tank was sufficient.

“Public Protection Unit: Observations 17/04/25 Having assessed the attached additional information regarding the septic tank, provided by Don Westeley, the Public Protection Service is of the opinion that the septic tank is insufficient for the proposed development. As [name withheld] calculations show, it does not appear that the existing septic tank is sufficient for the addition of a 2- bedroom lodge.”

Officer report

What people said

Residents objected on amenity, design, drainage, lighting and countryside grounds, while supporters cited care needs and unsuitable existing accommodation.

“Public Consultation: A notice was posted at the site and nearby residents were notified. The advertisement period ended on 29/11/24 and correspondence was received objecting on the following grounds: • Objection to the annex based on it being a new house in the countryside, its design, size, noise impact, overlooking neighbouring land, insufficient cesspit and septic tank with incorrect details, reduction in light, incongruous in the area, light pollution • ⁠Changing the…”

“Correspondence was received supporting / providing observations on the grounds of: • The family member's existing home is not suitable for them, the chalet would enable the family to provide them with care. • A shortage of care packages currently available to the family member, and the chalet would enable the applicant to provide care there.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant described his father’s disability, the unsuitable existing accommodation and the family’s need to provide support nearby.

Committee discussion

Members noted the community council’s objection and confirmed that a twin lodge used as supplementary accommodation within the curtilage did not require permission.

“In response to a question regarding the fact that planning permission was not required for a twin lodge, it was noted that a twin lodge was defined as a caravan and if a caravan was sited within a property curtilage as supplementary use to that property, planning permission was not required.”

Minutes

The decision

The committee delegated approval to the Senior Planning Manager, subject to conditions covering time, plans, lighting and biodiversity improvements.

“RESOLVED: To delegate powers to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the application, subject to the conditions.”

Minutes