Agenda item

Vary condition 5 on planning permission C21/0575/00/LL so that 3 of the dwellings must be used for residential use within class C3 and 3 of the dwellings used for either use class C3 or use class C6

 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Rob Triggs

 

Link to relevant background documents

DECISION: To refuse

 

The proposal to amend the condition to use 3 of the units for holiday accommodation C6 use class is unacceptable on the basis that the combined number of second homes and holiday accommodation in the Barmouth Town Council area is 18.40%, which is over the threshold of 15% and is considered to be an over-provision in the Supplementary Planning Guidance:

Tourist Facilities and Accommodation.  As a result, the Local Planning Authority has not been convinced that the development will not lead to excessive accommodation of this type in the area as noted in criterion v of Policy TWR 2 of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan. 

 

 

Vary condition 5 of planning permission C21/0575/00//LL so that three of the dwellings must be used for residential use within the C3 use class, and three of the dwellings to be used either within C3 or C6 use class.

 

Attention was drawn to the late/additional observations form - a letter dated 16 November 2023 had been sent to the Members and the Planning Unit responding to the report.

 

a)      The Senior Planning Officer highlighted that this was an application to vary condition 5 of planning permission C21/0575/00/LL so that three of the dwellings were to be used for residential use within use class C3, and three of the dwellings to be used either within use class C3 or C6.  Application C21/0575/00/LL had been approved on 6 December 2022 for the conversion and change of use of a single dwelling into 6 one-bedroom flats.  It appeared that the previous permission had not yet been implemented and that it remained as one house. Condition 5 of permission C21/0575/00/LL stated: -

 

"The living unit/s hereby permitted must only be used for residential use within the C3 Use Class as defined by the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) and not for any other use, including any other use within C Use Classes."

 

Since the application related to the variation or removal of a condition, it was explained that it was necessary to consider whether the condition remained relevant under the national guidance and met the six criteria in the Welsh Government Circular: The Use of Planning Conditions for Development Management.  In addition, the Members were reminded of the changes that had been made to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order last year in respect of the use classes of residential units, with C3 use remaining for a sole or main residence. Two additional use classes had been introduced (class C5 second home use in a different manner to a sole or main residence, and class C6 for short-term holiday lets). Furthermore, a report was presented to the Cabinet on 13 June 2023 outlining the matters and the justification for issuing an Article 4 Direction to enable the management of the transfer in use from residential houses to holiday use (second homes and holiday lets).

 

In this context a condition was placed on permission C21/0575/00/LL, restricting the occupancy of the units to permanent residential dwellings (C3), and consideration was given to the relevant housing policies at the time.

 

Policy TWR2 was considered and although the proposal complied with most of the criteria, the application failed on criterion 5 of Policy TWR 2 of the LDP, which notes that the development should not lead to an over-provision of such accommodation in the area. Although a Business Plan had been submitted with the application (which met the policy requirements), Supplementary Planning Guidance: Tourist Facilities and Holiday Accommodation notes that applications for holiday accommodation should not be approved when 15% or more of the housing stock is in holiday use (including second homes and dedicated holiday accommodation).  It was highlighted that the Council Tax figures (July 2023) confirmed that the combined number of second homes and holiday accommodation in the Barmouth Town Council area was 18.40%, therefore contrary to criterion 5 of TWR 2 and the guidance included in the Supplementary Planning Guidance.

 

It was highlighted that a Planning Statement accompanying the application included arguments in favour of the proposal, noting that this would be a small and non-substantial increase in the holiday accommodation numbers - the proposal would provide a mix of permanent residential units and holiday flats and would ensure that there is not an excess of empty buildings at any given time of the year. Three holiday flats would not place excessive pressure on services during the main season. With 6 flats already approved, the holiday use would not cause any different negative impact in terms of noise, disturbance or an increase in traffic. The flexibility to use a percentage of the flats for holiday use would be more financially viable and would assist to fund the maintenance of the building and provide an opportunity to set lower rents for the C3 permanent housing flats, thus making these more affordable to local people. 

 

Whilst appreciating the developer's arguments, it was noted that the Planning Guidance was completely clear in its guidance, and that the proposal was not considered to be an extraordinary case where diversion from the policy was justified. It was concluded that the condition which restricted the use of the six units to use class C3 continued to comply with the Welsh Government Circular. Therefore, it was considered that the proposal to amend the condition to use three of the units for mixed use as a house and C6 use class holiday accommodation, was unacceptable.

 

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

·         Currently, the site was a single house with permission to convert the house into 6 one-bedroom flats in use class C3. The proposal sought to vary condition 5 to approve up to three flats for use as short-term holiday accommodation.

·         That 17 Marine Parade was a part of a terrace of nine properties - and that every other property, at present, was for holiday use.

·         That the Business Plan submitted showed that the current provision of one-bedroom self-catering accommodation with sea views and free parking was low; and that there was high demand for this type of accommodation.

·         That Policy PS 14 acknowledged the importance of non-serviced tourist accommodation for the tourist industry all-year round.

·         That Policy TWR 2 supports the conversion of existing buildings into holiday accommodation buildings, provided that specific criteria are met; paragraph 6.3.65 notes "The policy therefore aims to support the principle of providing high quality self-serviced holiday accommodation in sustainable locations."

·         That Part 5 of Policy TWR 2 refers to a development that does not lead to an over-provision of such accommodation within the area - this was the grounds for the officer's refusal of the application.

·         However, paragraph 6.3.76 clearly states that the purpose of Part 5 of the policy is to seek to prevent a rationale which would approve the redevelopment of existing buildings in the countryside for holiday use to be converted into residential use if not viable, due to an over-supply of self-serviced accommodation. Obviously, this does not apply to the proposal because the applicant has permission to convert the building into six flats.

·         It was acknowledged that the combination of holiday accommodation and second homes in Barmouth was slightly higher than the 15% threshold in the SPG, but this is guidance, and not policy - therefore one should not be too strict with this threshold. 

·         The proposal, when compared with the current situation, would offer two additional permanent accommodation and three additional holiday flats - the percentage of second homes and holiday homes in Barmouth would only increase by 0.2% as a result.

·         That the SPG also states that there is control over the numbers of holiday accommodation in the area due to the lack of housing supply, impact on local services, community facilities and house prices. The proposal would have a positive impact on all, and more importantly, would provide houses that will meet the local need at an affordable price.

·         The implications of refusing the application were the possibility that the extant permission would not be implemented, and consequently, that the property would be used as a single dwelling, a second home or holiday accommodation under PD rights.

·         That she disagreed that the proposal conflicted with Policy TWR2, particularly when the proposal, when the policy was read correctly, was placed in the context of its purpose, as noted in the plan. Even if it was found that there was conflict, there is no substantial harm, and any conflict would outweigh the economic and social benefits of the proposed development.

·         Respectfully asked the Members to approve the application.

 

c)    A question had been received via e-mail from the Local Member, asking about the changes to planning legislation where new C5 and C6 use classes were introduced, which noted that permitted development could move between C3, C5 and C6 unless Article 4 was in place. As Article 4 was not yet in place, why was this application for planning permission being made, was this not covered under permitted developments.

In response, the Assistant Head of Department noted that Article 4 did not apply here but as the Committee had approved the conversion of a house into six flats in November 2022, in order to meet the need for housing, this had been done with planning conditions which restricted the use of the six flats as C3 main residence only - as a result, planning permission was required to vary the condition before being able to change to a mixed C3 and short-term holiday accommodation use. Consequently, the development in question required planning consent since the rights to change had been removed from the original permission.

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

 

e)    During the ensuing discussion, the following observations were made by the member:

·         There was a lack of houses in the area and beyond.

·         That local people were unable to get houses.

 

RESOLVED: To refuse

 

The proposal to amend the condition to use three of the units for C6 use class holiday accommodation was unacceptable on the grounds that the combined number of second homes and holiday accommodation in the Barmouth Town Council area was 18.40% which was more than the 15% threshold considered to be an over-provision in Supplementary Planning Guidance: Tourist Facilities and Accommodation. As a result, the Local Planning Authority has not been convinced that the development will not lead to an excess of accommodation of this type in the areas as noted in criterion v of Policy TWR 2 of the Anglesey and Gwynedd Joint Local Development Plan.