Application
for the conversion and extension of attached garage to annexe and erection of
new garage
LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Sion Wyn Jones
Link
to relevant background documents
Minutes:
Application
to extend and convert an attached garage into an annexe and construct a new
garage
The members
had visited the site.
(a) The
Development Control Manager elaborated on the background of the application,
and noted that the application had been deferred at the Planning Committee held
on 30.11.2015 to hold a site visit. The applicant had been requested to
consider changing the size and design following the discussion at the Committee
on 30.11.2015, but no response had been received. It was highlighted that the
existing dwelling was a detached house within a substantial curtilage on the
outskirts of the village of Bethel. The property was located outside the
village's development boundary and was defined as a site which was within open
countryside in terms of the Unitary Development Plan's policies. It was explained
that the existing property was a four bedroom house with two of the bedrooms on
the ground floor, and the attached existing garage was single-storey and
attached to the side of the dwelling. The proposal involved converting and
extending the attached garage in order to create an 'annexe' and to erect a
detached garage with a storeroom above. It was added that the Local Member had
called in this application for a decision from the Planning Committee.
The proposal was for the conversion and
extension of an attached garage to form a self-contained annexe on the side of
the existing property. A residential annexe could be defined as accommodation
which is supplementary to the main house which is of appropriate scale and
located within its curtilage. It should be specifically used for this purpose
i.e. not as a separate house. The internal floor area of the existing property
(from the measurements on the plans which include an additional utility and
dormer windows) measured approximately 157 square metres, while the proposed
annexe would measure approximately 127 square metres. In order to place the
size of the annexe in context, it was highlighted that the size of the annexe
would be larger than the approved size of a two-storey two-bedroom affordable
house (90 metres squared). It was noted that to all intents and purposes the
annexe was a new house that could exist totally separately from the existing
property on the site. The annexe would equate to a new house in open
countryside without justification, and the proposal was therefore contrary to
Policy CH9 of the UDP and national guidance.
In addition, it was considered that the two-storey garage and the
proposed extension to the house would be likely to create an alien feature and
would have an unacceptable impact on the existing property and the visual
amenities of the area. It was considered that the proposal was also contrary to
the requirements of policies B24 and B22.
(b) The
local member (who was not a member of this Planning Committee) made the
following observations:
• The application was a reasonable one
and that he supported it
• Appreciated the family's wish to
provide an annexe for extended family
• Residents and neighbours of Penrhos, Bethel supported the application
• The proposal did not involve
constructing a brand new house - it was an extension
to some extent
• Only officers objected to the
application - no local objection
• Accepted
the need to adhere to policies but common sense needed to be used in some
circumstances
• There
was an intention to use local builders and to use in-keeping material so that
there would be no visual impact
• Welsh communities had to be supported
(c) Proposed
and seconded to approve the application contrary to the recommendation
(ch) In response to the proposal, the Senior
Planning Service Manager noted that the application was an unusual one - it was
an application for an annexe which was similar to a large house and that there
was no doubt that the property was situated within open countryside. It was
added that, if the intention was to approve the proposal, it had to be ensured
that there was control over keeping the annexe as part of the house. It was
added that the recommendations noted in the report were robust, but it was
suggested, in response to the proposal, for the committee to consider imposing
a 106 Agreement on the property to ensure that it could not be sold separately
and to impose a condition to ensure an internal link between the main dwelling and
the annexe.
(d) During the discussion, the following
observations were made:
• Set a 106 Agreement to ensure what
was being sought
• Accepted that the suggestion was a
creative one
• Outlined
the importance that there was a connecting link between both dwellings - this
to be included as a condition
• That
approving the application was contrary to policy and was likely to set a dangerous
precedent
Resolved: To approve the application subject to
the applicant signing a 106 Agreement to ensure that the main dwelling and the
annexe could not be sold separately and standard conditions relating to:
1 Time
2 In
accordance with the plans
3 Slate
4 Materials
5 Ensure
an internal link between the main dwelling and the annexe
Supporting documents: