Plans refused for historic Shire Hall destroyed in arson attack

Dale Spridgeon – Local democracy reporter

A scheme to develop residential units at a historic Welsh hall destroyed by an arson attack has been rejected by planners.

Shire Hall in Llangefni was destroyed by a fire in December 17, 2023. The cost of damage to the building has been estimated at around £2m.

The owner of the Grade-II listed Victorian building, Tristan Haynes, previously said on hearing about the fire he had been left in a state of “utter shock and disbelief”.

He had previously submitted an application to build six residential units, together with associated development, in May 2023.

Conditions

In July 2024, the scheme was approved but subject to conditions that a S106 agreement for a financial contribution of £49,999 to be paid towards affordable housing.

There was also a requirement for management and maintenance of an embankment wall between the building and Afon Cefni.

Head of development and planning Rhys Lloyd Jones told a meeting of the planning and orders committee on Wednesday (September 3, 2025) that “no progress has been made”.

The applicant had previously requested more time to arrange funds and a further four months had been given.

Mr Lloyd Jones said: “Although the applicant supplied solicitors details last week, he has confirmed in an email yesterday, that he does not have the funds to pay the council’s legal fees.

“The planning authority has no option but to refuse the application due to the lack of progress to complete a S106 agreement.”

Cllr Ken Hughes felt there was a “weakness” in the decision and that the council was on “shaky ground”.

Costs

He proposed approval, arguing that the applicant had five years to start work and sign a 106 agreement. He also felt there was potential for legal costs to be made against the council.

But Mr Lloyd Jones explained the five year rule only applied when permission was granted.

He said: “The application is not acceptable without the 106 agreement and a contribution to affordable housing.

“Without this, it’s contrary to policy, it would be refused and the inspector would support that decision.

“We feel we have given the developer sufficient time to commit, and the five years you refer to is only relevant if permission has been given. The applicant does not have permission.

“The committee made a recommendation to approve the application as long as a 106 agreement was signed. It was not signed. There is no permission. No contribution has been made, so it is contrary to policy.”

He brought in Ben Standing, the council’s legal advisor, who said: “We, as a planning authority, have statutory time limits within which to determine applications.

“At the end of that, if a section 106 has not been entered into, we are within our rights to refuse. It’s not uncommon, there can be a number of months up to a year or more, to allow someone to sign.

“At any point this could come back to committee, should there be any policy changes, or any reason we wanted to go back to committee, we can reconsider it.

“There isn’t currently a planning consent, there isn’t any prospect at the moment of a 106 being entered into, there isn’t a realistic prospect at the moment for planning consent to be entered into.

“I don’t think there is any risk to the council in refusing at this stage.”

‘Sad’

He added if the applicant wished to re-submit at a later stage, and was able to progress it, the council would “look at it”.

He said: “There is no basis for a claim against the council, because it is up to the applicant to submit and have a 106 agreement, but that hasn’t been done.”

Cllr Geraint Bebb said it was “very sad it has reached this position, but he has had over a year to complete the 106 agreement”.

He proposed accepting the officer’s recommendation to refuse, seconded by Cllr Jackie Lewis, achieving eight votes.

A counter proposal by Cllr Ken Highes, seconded by Cllr Jeff Evans, failed with only two votes.