skip to main content

Agenda item

Renewal of planning permission reference C08A/0568/24/LL and C09A/0532/24/LL for the erection of 24 dwellings including 12 affordable dwellings, alteration to present access and creation of estate roads (amended scheme to that originally submitted)

 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Aeron Maldwyn Jones

 

Link to relevant background documents

Minutes:

Renewal of planning application number C08A/0568/24/LL and C09A/0532/24/LL for the erection of 24 dwellings, to include 12 affordable houses, alterations to the existing entrance and the creation of estate roads (amended plan to the plan originally submitted).

 

(a)       The Planning Manager elaborated on the background of the application, noting that the 

application had been deferred at the Committee held in January 2018 in order to discuss the concerns of the Members with the applicant, relating to the location of the open space within the site. In addition, further consultations were held with Welsh Highland Railway, Wales and West Utilities (gas) along with the Building Control Unit on the basis of the suitability of locating the open space in the proposed site. The opinion of the Council's Health and Safety Advisor was received in terms of safety assurance. It was noted that the application still included 24 houses, with 12 of these being affordable houses, and it was highlighted that the need for housing had been confirmed.

 

The concern about the distances between the houses was highlighted, and reference was made to the response in paragraphs 5.9 to 5.11 of the report. In terms of affordable housing, although registered landlords would be managing the development, there would be a need to ensure that the 12 houses would be affordable in perpetuity, and therefore an appropriate condition would be required for this. It was noted that the proposal was unusual, but the development included a suitable mixture of housing that would meet the need for various houses in the area. It was added that such a development was to be welcomed.

 

In response to the main concern, namely the location of the open space, it was reported that further discussions had been held with the applicant. It was added that officers had re-consulted with Welsh Highland Railway, Wales and West Utilities (gas) and the Building Control Unit and the Council's Health and Safety Advisor and the responses still confirmed that the development complied with all requirements of the bodies and that they had no objection to the location of the open space. It was added that, therefore, it would be difficult to refuse the application because the evidence was contrary to this. It was added that an appeal had been lodged by the applicant based on a lack of decision by the Committee, and therefore attention was drawn to the short period of time that the Committee had to make a decision in order to avoid an appeal (this was in accordance with the arrangements of the Planning Inspectorate).

 

The officers remained of the opinion that the proposal was acceptable in terms of relevant local and national policies for the reasons noted in the report.

 

(b)     The local member (not a member of this Planning Committee) noted the following main points:

·         That he did not disagree with the principle that houses were needed on the site, but not in its present form. The location of the play area was a cause for concern

·         The applicant had had an opportunity to modify the plans in accordance with the comments and concerns of the Committee and the local community, but had chosen to ignore this.

·         That the open space was located near the railway, and although the agent noted that an anti-climb fence would be installed, children would find a way of going over or around the fence;

·         That the open space was near a gas sub-station - the location endangered the safety of children

·         That a protest had been held locally, stating that the safety of children was more important than building houses

·         New plans had been created by the local community but the applicant had not accepted the invitation to discuss with them

·         That the location of the bungalow for the disabled needed to be changed, as it was far from the main road

·         That it was possible to change the layout of the site to correspond to the wishes of the local community and ensure the safety of children which was an important priority; 

·         Asked that the Committee object the application as the location of the open space was certainly in the incorrect place, and the location of the bungalow for the disabled.

 

(c)     It was proposed and seconded to refuse the application as the open space was in an unsuitable site near the railway and gas pipe

 

(ch)   In response to the above observations, the Officers noted:

·         That they accepted that there was support for housing in the area and the need for affordable housing

·         The main aspect of the objection was the open space. Additional consultation had been carried out with Wales and West Utilities, Welsh Highland Railway, the Building Control Unit and the Council's Health and Safety Advisor. Their observations were acceptable and they had not objected to the development

·         That the appeal had already been lodged due to the delay in the decision

·         Should an application be refused, the proposer and the seconder would be required to defend the Council in an appeal

·         That the application in question was being discussed and the information / plans submitted by objectors should not be considered. It was emphasised that the plan in question complied with local and national planning policies.

·         That the open space was more than what was required, therefore there was an option to get a buffer and a fence in addition to the fence proposed by the applicant; 

 

(d)     In response to an observation that the applicant had not reassessed the plan in accordance with the requirements of the Committee, it was noted that they were not required to assess their plans as no policy matters asked them to modify

 

(dd)   During the ensuing discussion, the following main observations were noted by members:

·         That the element of affordable housing was to be welcomed and the development would help to safeguard schools and the Welsh language;

·         That housing ensured a future for local children and people

·         That it was possible to mitigate the reasons for refusal in reasonable methods

·         Another location in the village could be considered for the playing field

·         That children could be taught about the railway concerns

·         That the community plan needed to be considered and priority needed to be given to the safety of children

·         A suggestion to impose a condition to move the playing field

·         It could not be accepted that it was acceptable to have children in an area of risk

 

(ff)     A proposal was made and seconded to hold a registered vote

A registered vote was called on the recommendation and over a quarter of the Members present voted in favour of this.

 

In accordance with the Procedural Rules, the following vote was recorded:

 

RESOLVED to refuse the application as the layout of the site was unsuitable with the open space in the incorrect location due to its proximity to the gas sub-station and the railway, and the associated risk to children. 

 

In favour (7) : Councillors Louise  Hughes, Elin Walker Jones, Eric Merfyn Jones,

Dilwyn Lloyd, Gareth A. Roberts, Eirwyn Williams, Gruffydd Williams

 

Against (4) :  Councillors Stephen Churchman, Anne Lloyd Jones, Edgar Wyn

Owen, Cemlyn Williams

 

Abstaining (1) : Councillor Huw Wyn Jones

 

Supporting documents: