Agenda item

Residential development of 4 affordable dwellings together with associated accesses and parking (amended scheme to that originally submitted).

 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Elwyn Jones

 

Link to relevant background documents

DECISION: To delegate the right for the Assistant Head of Environment Department to refuse the application on the grounds of the following reasons: -

1.      The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy PCYFF 2 (development criteria) of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan 2017 as it does not comply with all relevant policies within the Plan that relate to proposals to develop affordable housing.

2.      The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy TAI 8 (appropriate housing mix), Policy TAI 15 (affordable housing threshold and distribution), Policy TAI 16 (exemption sites) along with the advice contained in the Supplementary Planning Guidance: Affordable Housing and Technical Advice Note 2: Planning and Affordable Housing as no firm evidence has been received from the applicant which undoubtedly confirms that the need for affordable housing on an exemption site in Rhiwlas has been proven and that the price of the houses themselves is affordable for local people.

3.      The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy PS 1 (the Welsh language and culture) along with the advice contained in the Supplementary Planning Guidance: Maintaining and Creating Distinctive and Sustainable Communities as no firm evidence has been received which confirms that the development meets the needs of the local community that would protect and/or promote the Welsh language in Rhiwlas.

 

A residential development of four affordable dwellings together with associated accesses and parking (amended scheme to that originally submitted)

 

a)    The Planning Manager explained that this was an application to erect four affordable dwellings for local need on a site on the outskirts of Rhiwlas village. He noted that this was an amended application to that submitted to the Planning Committee in February 2018 for five affordable dwellings, which had been deferred on the following grounds: (i) to ask the developer for evidence of a real need for three-bedroom social housing in the village of Rhiwlas; (ii) to receive confirmation whether or not a registered housing association was interested in the units as well as (iii) information about waiting lists for social housing in the area.

 

It was noted that the application contained the following elements:

·         Erect 2 two-storey, two-bedroom houses and erect 2 two-storey, three-bedroom houses in the form of a terrace.

·         Provide separate accesses for each house along with private driveways for off-road parking.

·         Provide domestic sheds/storage as well as a laundry drying area at the rear of the houses.

·         Culverting approximately 26m of the ditch that ran through the eastern corner of the site.

                

It was reported that the site was located outside the development boundary as included in the LDP but directly abutted the boundary. It could therefore be considered as an exemption site.

 

It was noted that the principle of constructing affordable housing on the site was established in Policy TAI16 of the Local Development Plan (exemption sites) which noted that a development immediately adjacent to a development boundary must be for 100% affordable housing if it could be shown that there was a proven local need for affordable housing that could not be met on a site within the development boundary.

 

The indicative supply level for Rhiwlas over the lifetime of the Plan was noted as nine units. Two units had been completed in the village between 2011 and 2020, and the figure for the land bank within the village was one unit. Considering this information, approval of the application on the site would be supported against the indicative supply level.

 

The planning application for five dwellings had been deferred by the Planning Committee in 2018 because the developer was required to evidence a real need for three-bedroom social housing in the village of Rhiwlas. In the meantime, the applicant had reduced the number of dwellings from five to four, nevertheless he had not presented robust or clear evidence to confirm that the need existed for three-bedroom social housing in Rhiwlas despite having submitted a Planning Statement and Affordable Housing Statement to support the application. It was highlighted that the Affordable Housing Statement referred to the need for social housing in the village based on figures in the Council's Housing Options register, which showed that 38% needed a two-bedroom house and 24% needed a three-bedroom house out of a total of 98 people. It was added that these were figures for the Penisarwaun Ward in general and not specifically for Rhiwlas (it would be difficult to identify who might have shown their willingness to move to/live in Rhiwlas should the opportunity arise).

 

Furthermore, it was noted that the Local Member had already noted that there was a greater need for social bungalows/single-storey dwellings for the elderly in the community rather than three-bedroom houses as 50% of the three-bedroom social housing stock in Rhiwlas was underoccupied. It was added that residents were reluctant to re-home as there were no single-storey dwellings/smaller bungalows available within the village. To this end, therefore, the need for social affordable housing in Rhiwlas was not considered to have been proved indisputably.

 

In relation to the provision of intermediate affordable housing in Rhiwlas, Tai Teg figures showed that there was no need for two-bedroom houses and there were only two people on the register for three-bedroom houses (to buy), and in response to the statutory consultation process, the Housing and Property Unit had confirmed that there was no need within the village for intermediate affordable housing.

 

Although the application was considered acceptable based on capacity and location, it was not considered that the applicant had presented robust evidence to confirm beyond doubt that the need for the type of affordable housing proposed here was proven for the village of Rhiwlas.  It was considered that the current proposal was not acceptable in principle and that it did not satisfy the relevant policy requirements.

 

b)    Taking advantage of the right to speak, the applicant made the following observations:

·           There had been interest in the site since 2008 where there had been discussions with North Wales Housing about providing 10 units. They had had to reduce the number of units because of the impact on habitat

·           They had intended to build five dwellings in response to local needs, but they now proposed four

·           They were happy to discuss and revise the application to secure a design that met the village's needs (the scheme had already been revised at least five times)

·           The land was approved in the former Local Development Plan

·           They were happy to revise the application if that was the committee's wish

 

c)    Taking advantage of the right to speak, the Local Member made the following observations:

·         The application had gone back and forth several times since he had become Councillor in 2017

·         He implored developers to consider building bungalows in Rhiwlas

·         There were enough three-bedroom dwellings – these were underoccupied

·         The builder's work was to be commended

·         Concern that people who were looking to down-size had to move out of the community

·         He welcomed bungalows, but was not supportive of this scheme for three-bedroom dwellings

 

          ch)   It was proposed and seconded to refuse the application.

 

 In response to a question regarding the applicant's willingness to consider building bungalows and the offer to withdraw the application so that further discussions could be held with the officers to avoid costs, the Monitoring Officer noted that a decision was required on the application in question.

 

RESOLVED: To delegate the right to the Assistant Head of Environment Department to refuse the application for the following reasons:-

 

1.    The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy PCYFF 2 (development criteria) of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan 2017 as it does not comply with all the relevant policies within the Plan that relate to proposals for developing affordable housing.

 

2.    The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy TAI 8 (appropriate housing mix), Policy TAI 15 (affordable housing threshold and distribution), Policy TAI 16 (exemption sites) together with the advice contained in the Supplementary Planning Guidance: Housing Mix and Technical Advice Note 2: Planning and Affordable Housing, as no robust evidence has been received from the applicant that  confirms beyond doubt that the need for affordable housing on an exemption site in Rhiwlas is proven and that the valuation of the actual dwellings is affordable for local people.

 

3.    The proposal is contrary to the requirements of Policy PS 1 (the Welsh language and culture) together with the advice contained in the Supplementary Planning Guidance: Maintaining and Creating Distinctive and Sustainable Communities, as no firm evidence has been received which confirms that the development meets the needs of the local community which would protect and/or promote the Welsh language in Rhiwlas.