Application for the conversion
and extension of attached garage to annexe and erection
of new garage
LOCAL
MEMBER: Councillor Sion Jones
Minutes:
Application
for the conversion and extension of attached garage to annexe and erection of new
garage.
(a)
The Development Control Manager elaborated on the
background of the application noting that it had been deferred at the Planning
Committee meeting on 30 November 2015, in order to facilitate the speaking
arrangements. It was explained that the dwelling was a detached one and a half
storey house within a substantial curtilage on the outskirts of the village of
Bethel, and is located outside the development boundary of the village.The existing property was a 4-bedroom house with 2
of the bedrooms on the ground floor. The existing linked garage was
single-storey and linked to the side of the dwelling. The proposal involved the
conversion and extension of the linked garage to create an annexe.An
explanation was given of the definition of an annexe, and it was noted that no
information or justification has been offered in relation to the purpose of the
annexe which was the subject of the application. It was noted that the size of
the annexe was larger than the approved size of a two-storey two-bedroom
affordable house, and that the annexe would equate to building a new house in
the countryside.
It was
considered that the proposal was contrary to policy CH9 of the UDP in addition
to national guidance. It was also considered that the two-storey garage and
proposed extension to the house would be likely to create an alien feature and
would have an unacceptable impact on the existing building and the visual
amenities of the area, and would therefore also be contrary to the requirements
of policies B24 and B22.
(b)
Taking advantage of the right to speak, the
applicant noted the following main points:-
·
The dwelling would share the same entrance and post
code
·
There was no intention to create two houses – the
intention was to construct an extension, not a new house
·
Creation of a family unit
·
The intention was for the applicant and her husband
to live in the annexe and make the house available for their daughter and
family to live there
(c) The
following main points were made by the local member (not a member of this Planning
Committee):-
·
The neighbours had sent a letter noting their
support
·
No objections had been received
·
This was not a house in the countryside –
emphasised that this was an extension
·
A substantial lack of houses in Bethel
·
The extension would provide the family with an
opportunity to come together
·
An opportunity for a young family to live within a
Welsh community
·
The Community Council supported the application
(d)
In response, the Senior Planning Service Manager
noted that the application was unusual as the size of the annexe was so large.
The Committee was reminded of the need to be consistent and careful in
considering the policies and that approving the annexe would be contrary to
fundamental planning policies.
(e) It was
proposed and seconded to undertake a site visit.
RESOLVED to undertake a
site visit
Supporting documents: