Residential development of 4 affordable dwellings
together with associated accesses and parking (amended scheme to that
originally submitted).
LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Elwyn Jones
Decision:
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.
Minutes:
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.
Supporting documents: