Issue - meetings

Erection of one affordable dwelling with associated access, parking and landscaping (revised scheme).

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Craig ap Iago

Link to relevant background documents

DECISION:

·         To defer the application in order to receive written evidence of the applicant's situation with Tai Teg.

·         Consider reducing the footprint of the dwelling

·         Consider options to separate the land / reduce the size of the land plot

Application for erecting an affordable dwelling with access, parking and associated landscaping (amended plan).

Attention was drawn to the late observations form which contained observations from the Policy Unit.

a)         The Development Control Team Leader highlighted that this was a full application for erecting an affordable dwelling with access and a parking space, together with associated landscaping. It was noted that the site was located within an agricultural field on the outskirts of the village of Penygroes along a narrow road that turned into a public footpath at the far end that ran between the field that was the subject of the application and the last house in the village (Glaslyn). It was explained that the application was a resubmission of that refused under reference C21/0430/22/LL, and previously C20/0853/22/LL.

It was noted that the proposal submitted included an e-mail from the agent, dated 15.07.2022, attaching a Tai Teg letter dated 28 November 2019, stating as follows: "Your application has been approved. You can now proceed to search for a property on the Tai Teg website and to make an application should you find a suitable property. Please note:- it is important that you read the following in order to understand what needs to be completed should you apply for the property." It did not appear that the applicant had been assessed in detail for constructing his own affordable house and although the Council requested further evidence of the applicant's need for an affordable self-build house with the application, it did not receive a response in the lifetime of the application, and these discussions went back to March 2023.

The application was submitted to the Planning Committee at the Local Member’s request.

In the context of the principle of the development, it was explained that the site was located outside the Penygroes development boundary as noted in the LDP. Policy PCYFF 1 ('Development Boundaries') stated that proposals outside development boundaries would be refused unless they were in accordance with specific policies in the Plan or national planning policies or that the proposal showed that its location in the countryside was essential.   Policy TAI 16 'Exception Sites' stated that provided it could be shown that there was a proven local need for affordable housing which could not be delivered within a reasonable time-scale on a market site within the development boundary, as an exception, proposals for 100% affordable housing plans on sites immediately adjacent to development boundaries that formed a logical extension to the settlement would be granted.

It did not appear from the information submitted with the application that the application site touched the development boundary, with a gap between the site and the development boundary (which appeared to be a public footpath). In planning policy terms the site was defined as a location in open countryside and, therefore, was not relevant to be considered in terms of Policy TAI 16, 'Exception Sites', which was supported in the Supplementary Planning Guidance 'Affordable Housing'.

In this respect, paragraph 6.4.36 of the LDP  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8