Agenda item

Conversion of outbuilding to provide an affordable dwelling, together with alterations to existing vehicular access, installation of a package treatment plant and associated works.

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Gareth Williams

Link to relevant background documents

 

DECISION: To approve

 

Standard conditions including:

 

Five years in accordance with the plans, materials, landscaping, PD restriction

 

Conversion of outbuilding to provide an affordable dwelling, together with alterations to existing vehicular access, installation of a package treatment plant and associated works.

 

Attention was drawn to the late observations form.

 

a)    The Assistant Head of Environment submitted his report after referring the Committee's decision on 10-01-22 to a cooling-off period.  A decision on the application had been deferred to enable the applicant to prepare an open market valuation of the proposed property in order to assess whether it would be possible to determine a discount to make the property affordable. The purpose of reporting back to the Committee was to highlight the planning policy issues, the possible risks and the possible options for the Committee before it reached a final decision on the application.

 

After the application had been referred, a letter was sent to the applicant's agent on 12/01/22 asking for a full market valuation of the property in order to enable the Council to assess whether it would be possible to ensure that the property remained permanently affordable by securing an appropriate discount on the market price.

 

A response was received from the agent on 11/02/22, which included an Open Market Evaluation prepared by a registered valuer to RICS (Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors) standards, following the recognised "Red Book" international approach. It concluded that the fair market price for the completed property in accordance with the submitted plans would be £275,000.

 

Given the definition of an intermediate affordable house in the LDP as a house where the prices or rents were higher than social housing rents but lower than the prices or rents on the open market, and that the applicant in this case had been assessed by Tai Teg as qualifying for an affordable house, it was not considered that the price, with a 50% discount, was unreasonable in relation to ensuring that the property would be available for a local person on an income that would not allow access to the open housing market.  It was considered that including a 50% discount in a 106 Agreement that would correspond with the consent, would keep the property affordable and within a reasonable price to those in the community that had been identified as eligible for a property of this type, was acceptable.

 

Despite the justification for the affordable element, it was considered that the existing building was not a suitable structure to be converted into a residential unit in accordance with local and national policies. It was noted that this site was in open countryside and that the building was in a dilapidated condition and had blended into the landscape. It was explained that local and national policies were totally clear that only housing for serving rural enterprises or a one planet development should be considered in open countryside, and no such justification had been offered in this case.

 

It was reiterated that the increase in the building's floor area of around 50% derived from the plan in question and was contrary to the requirements of policy TAI7 of the Local Development Plan which noted that no extensive extensions should be required to enable the development, and the building in its current form (in terms of size) should be suitable. It was obvious, from the need for vast extensions, that the application did not meet the mandatory criteria for accepting plans to convert traditional buildings in open countryside into residential use.

 

The risks to the Council from approving the application, along with the options available to the Committee, were highlighted. The officers noted clearly that the features of the application had been thoroughly assessed by the Council's officers, who firmly recommended that the application be refused as the proposal did not comply with the requirements of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan's adopted policies, local and national guidance and national planning policies.

 

b)    Taking advantage of the right to speak, the local member made the following points:

·         That the decision to approve the application at the Committee on 10-01-22 had been unanimous

·         That the open market price had been submitted

·         That the applicant qualified for an affordable house

·         This was a golden opportunity for a local young person to have a house

·         It was impossible to buy a house locally in the Botwnnog ward - a discount of 50% was needed to address the affordable element - this highlighted the housing situation of Pen Llŷn.

·         Why would a 'holiday home' be more acceptable than a 'home'?

·         That a structural report noted that the house was suitable for conversion

·         Local people had to be supported

 

c)    It was proposed and seconded to approve the application

 

When considering approving the application, the Head of Legal Services said that the reasons for approval had to be balanced carefully in order to avoid setting a precedent.

 

Option b was proposed - Approve the application with a Section 106 Agreement - The only way to make the house affordable if a high discount such as 50% is given on it.     

 

ch)   During the ensuing discussion, the following observations were made by Members:

·         We must keep our Welsh communities alive

·         Too much talk of supporting local people - we must act

·         This was an opportunity to breathe new life into a ruin

·         That the structural report noted that the ruin was sound for refurbishment

·         That an effort had been made to respond to the Committee's requests

·         This had been a Welsh home - this was a chance for it to become a Welsh home again

·         If we want to see change - we must challenge national policies

·         That the application responded to the need for affordable houses in the area

 

In response to a proposal to approve the application and a pattern of decisions that were contrary to local and national guidance, the Assistant Head highlighted the possibility that the decision could lie with the Welsh Government - the application was contrary to policies and could set a dangerous precedent.

 

In response to a question regarding the positive structural report and the officers noting contrary to that, it was noted that the report confirmed that it was possible to refurbish the building but that policies challenged the need for work beyond constructing walls and a roof - there were vast extensions within this application and therefore was contrary to policies.

 

RESOLVED: To approve with a 106 agreement

 

In accordance with the Procedural Rules, the following vote to approve the application was registered:

                       

In favour of the proposal to approve the application, (13) Councillors: Stephen Churchman, Elwyn Edwards, Louise Hughes, Anne Lloyd Jones, Berwyn Parry Jones, Gareth T Jones, Huw Wyn Jones, Eric M Jones, Cai Larsen, Edgar Owen, Gareth A Roberts, Eirwyn Williams and Owain Williams

 

Against the proposal to approve the application, (0)  

 

Abstaining, (0)

 

 

Standard conditions including:

 

5 years in accordance with the plans, materials, landscaping, PD restriction