Erection of a two storey affordable dwelling, new access and timber shed
LOCAL
MEMBER: Councillor Aeron
Maldwyn Jones
Minutes:
Erection of a two
storey dwelling, new access and timber shed
(a) The Development Control Officer elaborated
on the background of the application, and noted that it was a re-submission of
an application for the erection of an affordable house, an access and a timber
shed that was refused in August 2015 under the Council’s delegated rights. This
latest application had been amended on the following grounds:-
• The size of the site has been reduced
from 2,049m² to 1,157m².
• The house was located 1.83m closer to
the nearby county road.
• The design of the roof and some windows
had been revised.
It was
explained that the site did not adjoin a property that had been highlighted in
red on the Saron inset map, which had been designated
as a rural village in the GUDP, with the closest house located 21m to the west
with the county road and road into the estate separating the application site
from the house itself. It was noted that the proposal would therefore result in
erecting a dwelling in the countryside without any physical links to the
general development pattern of the rural village of Saron.
The
principle of developing residential dwellings in the countryside had been
included in a number of policy documents and strategic advice provided by the
Council and by the Welsh Government, as referred to in the report.
In
relation to the affordable element, no firm evidence had been submitted as part
of this current application to convince the LPA that there was a real need for
an affordable house on this particular site. The requirements of the SPG:
Affordable Housing state clearly that ‘applicants must prove that they are
local, that they cannot afford a house on the open market, that they live in an
unacceptable situation such as an overcrowded house and that they require
another accommodation’.
The
Committee was reminded that decisions on planning applications should be made
in accordance with the approved development plan, unless material
considerations indicated otherwise. The factors
to be considered had to be relevant planning matters. In this particular
case, it was noted that the information submitted was not sufficient to enable
this application to be approved contrary to the Council’s adopted policies and
guidance and the advice contained in Welsh Government documentation. The Local
Planning Authority concluded that the site was unsuitable for the erection of a
dwelling (affordable or not) as it was not a site that could be interpreted as
an infill site and it was not located immediately adjacent to a highlighted
building on the Saron infill map. The design, form
and scale of the proposed dwelling were unacceptable and no sufficient evidence
had been received with the application that convinced the Local Planning
Authority that the applicants were in real need and were eligible for an
affordable house in the rural village of Saron.
Attention was drawn to the additional
observations that had been received.
(a)
Taking advantage of the right to speak, the
applicant’s agent noted the following main points:-
·
This application was a response to a similar
application which was refused in August 2015 – adaptations had been submitted
in accordance with the officer’s requirements, and evidence had been included
to prove the need for an affordable house
·
Accept that the applicant did not qualify for an
affordable house but that he was assessed when earning a high salary for a
temporary post with no permanent status.
·
The family would maintain and strengthen the
community – response to CH5
·
The Supplementary Planning Guidance on New Houses
in rural villages allowed exceptions – this had not been addressed by the
officer
·
Draft Deposit Plan – relevant consideration status
– wording was different to the Local Development Plan
·
Local residents had taken advantage of the
opportunity to scrutinise and discuss the applicant’s intention
·
The dwelling met local needs
·
Not contrary to the general development pattern
(b)
The following main points were raised by local
member (not a member of this Planning Committee):-
·
Saron was a
rural Welsh village that would welcome a new Welsh-speaking family
·
Having ascertained the overall views of local
residents; no objection to one house being built in the field (a
suggestion that there could be a legal undertaking to ensure that there would
be only one house in the field)
·
A successful open night had been arranged to share
information about the proposal
·
Considered that the original application site was
better, but having discussed with the applicant, agreed on the current site
·
Hedges partially concealed the site
·
The site was within a 30mph zone
·
There was a lack of bedrooms in their current home
·
The site was ideal
·
Approve the application, but ensure that only one
house would be built on the site.
In response to the above observations, the Senior
Planning Service Manager noted that it was only in exceptional circumstances
that houses were approved in the countryside, and that decisions should be made
in accordance with current policies. It was emphasised that the applicants had
been assessed by Tai Teg, and it was found that the
applicant did not qualify for an affordable house. It was added that the
location did not conform to the requirements of the Local Development Plan and
was completely contrary to policies. Approving the application would set a
dangerous precedent.
(ch) It was proposed and seconded to approve the
application contrary to the officers’ recommendation for the following reasons:
·
The application was an exception to the policies
·
It was a development within a rural village
·
Local need for a house
(c)
In response to a question, the Development Control
Manager noted that although the development was adjacent to a site which was
highlighted in red on the inset map, it was separated physically by a county
road which meant that they were not adjoined (a policy which was regularly
implemented). It was confirmed that the Tai Teg
assessment had considered the applicants as a couple and that their salary
level meant that they did not qualify for an affordable house but due to the
confidential nature of the information submitted to the assessment, this could
not be shared.
In response to the wording of the Draft Deposit
Plan which referred to a development ‘directly opposite’, the Senior Planning
Service manager emphasised that the Deposit Plan had not been adopted and
therefore the observation was irrelevant.
(dd) During
the subsequent discussion, the following observations were made in favour of
the application
·
The plans had been adapted following discussions,
and therefore it was possible that approval had been considered?
·
Need to support and protect Welsh-speaking families
·
Approve on the grounds that the development would
be an exception
(d)
During the subsequent discussion, the following
observations were made against the application:
·
The policies had not changed since August 2015
·
There were no planning reasons for approving the
application
A request was made for a registered vote.
(e) In
accordance with the Procedural Rules, the following vote to approve the
application was a registered vote:
In favour of the
proposal to approve the application, (3) Councillors: Simon Glyn, Gruffydd
Williams and Owain Williams.
Against the proposal
to approve, (8) Councillors Elwyn Edwards, Gwen Griffith, Anne T.
Lloyd Jones, June Marshall, Michael Sol Owen, W. Tudor Owen, John Pughe Roberts and Hefin
Williams
Abstaining, (0)
It
was proposed and seconded to refuse the application.
RESOLVED to refuse the application in
accordance with the officers’ recommendation.
1.
The
proposal is unacceptable in principle and is contrary to the requirements of
Policies C1, CH5 and CH9 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan, the
Supplementary Planning Guidance: Building New Houses in the Countryside, New
Houses in Rural Villages and Affordable Dwellings, Technical Advice Note 2 on
Affordable Dwellings, Technical Advice Note 6 on Planning for Sustainable Rural
Communities together with Planning Policy Wales, Chapter 9 as it does not meet
the criteria regarding the siting of new dwellings in rural villages and, as
such, it would involve erecting a new dwelling in the open countryside without
any justification.
2.
The
proposal is unacceptable and contrary to the requirements of Policy B23 and C1
of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan, Gwynedd Design Guide, Supplementary
Planning Guidance: Building New Houses in the Countryside, Technical Advice
Note 12 on Design together with Planning Policy Wales, Chapter 9 Housing as it
would involve creating a discordant feature in the open countryside.
3.
The proposal is unacceptable and contrary to
the requirements of Policy CH5 of the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan,
Supplementary Planning Guidance: Affordable Dwellings, Technical Advice Note 2
Affordable Dwellings and Planning Policy Wales, Chapter 9 Housing as no
indisputable evidence has been submitted that a local community need has been
proven for an affordable dwelling on this site
Supporting documents: