Agenda item

Application for the conversion of a public house to 5 flats together with rear extension and parking area

 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Linda Ann Wyn Jones

 

Link to relevant background documents

To defer the decision in order to receive more information about drainage matters

 

          

 

Attention was drawn to the late observations form that had been received - in response to observations from the Local Member, consultation had taken place with the Council's Flood Risk Management Unit, and a swift response had been received. It was noted that the Department had no knowledge of the situation, although it was intended to investigate the complaint. No timetable had yet been set for this work.

 

a)    The Planning Manager elaborated on the background of the application, and noted that the application had been submitted to the Planning Committee on 02.03.2020 when it had been decided to arrange a site visit for members. In the meantime, it was reported that the applicant had informed the Council that he had submitted an appeal to the Planning Inspectorate due to a lack of decision by the Council on the application (no date yet received).

 

Members were reminded that this was an application to convert a public house into five residential, self-contained flats, along with the creation of parking spaces and an entrance.  It was noted that the site was located within the development boundary of Blaenau Ffestiniog and that the use of the building as a public house had ceased since early 2017. The proposal would involve internal changes to create the flats on the three floors. The exterior changes were restricted to the side extension and the slight alteration of the layout of the ground floor window and door openings on the rear elevation.

 

Additional photographs and a video were shown as it had not been possible to undertake a site visit due to Covid-19 restrictions.

 

Policy TAI9 permits the sub-division of existing properties into self-contained flats provided they conform to the relevant criteria: it was not considered that the proposal to convert the building into five flats would be contrary to the policy aims of TAI 9.

 

Reference was made to Policy TAI15 that stated that every development was required to achieve an appropriate mix in terms of tenure, types and sizes of affordable housing, which is supported by Policy TAI 8 and the SPG: Housing Mix. It should be noted that the Strategic Housing Unit stated that there was a recognised need for one and two bedroom flats in the town. It was considered that the amended application provided an appropriate mix of accommodation in an existing building that met a recognised need for housing in the town.

 

Policy TAI 15 (Threshold of Affordable Housing and their Distribution) stated an expectation that at least 0.4 of the units should be affordable, in accordance with the information submitted. Information had been received from the applicant stating that he had investigated purchase/rental prices within a one-mile radius of the site as part of the development. Although the officers did not disagree with the prices, the valuation was not based on the Red Book, and there were other minor deficiencies in the information submitted. In the circumstances, it was considered that the application could be approved subject to imposing a condition to agree on affordability matters for one of the units before issuing any permission.

 

In the context of the visual, and general and residential amenities, it was noted that these had been fully assessed, and that no objections had been received in relation to these matters. It was added that the Transportation Unit had no objection to the proposal, although it recommended that appropriate conditions should be imposed on any permission. Having considered all the relevant matters, including local and national policies and guidance, as well as local objections, it was considered that the proposal was acceptable and that it satisfied the requirements of the relevant policies.

 

 

b)    Taking advantage of the right to speak, the Local Member made the following points:-

 

·         She apologised for the information that had come to hand at the last minute, expressing concern about the recent flooding on the application site.

·         The former owner of the Wynnes had drawn her attention to a water culvert located under the existing extension at the rear of the building.

·         Flooding had occurred approximately 20 years ago on the site, and again in August 2020.

·         Welsh Water had not yet had an opportunity to investigate further

·         Local people were concerned, as some of them recalled the past flooding

 

c)    It was proposed and seconded to approve the application.

 

d)    During the ensuing discussion, the following observations were made by members:

·       It was noted that more information was needed regarding the flooding prior to making a decision

·      The principle of the development had been approved, but further investigation was needed regarding the concerns about flooding

·      The area needed houses, not flats

·      The location was unsuitable for a house in multiple occupation

·      The Council's Drainage Department should investigate the matter, not Welsh Water

·      Assurance was required that the building had a fire escape

·      There were insufficient parking spaces for the number of residents who would occupy the flats

·      Concern about the outstanding appeal on the application

 

e)    In response to the comments, the Planning Manager noted:

-       Safety matters were within the remit of the Building Control Unit

-       The Transportation Unit considered that six parking spaces were sufficient for the site - the site was accessible and there was a good bus service

-       The Planning Unit had consulted the Council's Drainage Department about the flooding matters

-       He was confident that the Committee would meet again before the date of the appeal

 

f)     An amendment was proposed to defer the decision in order to receive more information about drainage matters

 

g)    A vote was taken on the amendment.

 

RESOLVED: To defer the decision in order to receive more information about drainage matters