PLANS for a proposed plumber’s workshop next to the Ceredigion applicants’ previously granted “home for life” which have been repeatedly recommended for refusal have given the go-ahead.
At the May meeting of Ceredigion County Council’s development management committee, members were recommended to refuse a request by local plumber Elfyn Tandy to site a stores warehouse building and domestic garage on land adjacent to Blaenllaw, Bethania, near Llanon.
The applicants were previously, in 2021, granted permission for an open market dwelling at the site.
One objection had been received, raising concerns with the proposed design, scale, and siting of the proposed development as well as concerns of noise associated with a warehouse.
It was recommended for refusal on the grounds of visual impact “due to is scale, mass and external finishes the building is of an industrial/agricultural which is considered incongruous with the proposed domestic curtilage in which it is sited,” and “,it is considered that the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on the amenity enjoyed by the residents of neighbouring properties”.
Speaking at that meeting, the applicants Mr Tandy and his wife, a solicitor, said they intended to screen the proposed shed which would be sited near to their already granted “home for life,” and hoped to work with neighbours to reach a solution.
The application was deferred at that meeting for a Site Inspection Panel visit to view the scheme, the proposals returning to the July meeting, again recommended for refusal.
At that meeting, members heard a proposed relocation of the building to address issues had been declined by the applicants, who had said such a move would increase costs.
A call was made by Cllr Gareth Lloyd to go against the officer recommendation of refusal, instead giving deferred powers of approval to officers to see if the shed could be moved a little lower.
He was backed by Cllr Maldwyn Lewis who had said it was “important to support a local craftsman who has a need for a workshop”.
Members voted near-unanimously against the officer recommendation of refusal, with one abstention and none in favour.
