Agenda item

Proposed siting of a twin lodge as an annex with decking

 

LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Elfed Wyn ap Elwyn

 

Link to relevant background documents

DECISION: To delegate powers to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the application subject to the following conditions:

 

1.     5 years

2.     In accordance with plans

3.     Agreement required on any external lights

4.     Green infrastructure statement.

 

Proposed siting of a twin lodge as an annex with decking.

 

Attention was drawn to the late observations form.

 

a)           The Planning Manager highlighted that this was an application to site a chalet in the form of a twin lodge to be used as an associated annex to the main property, as well as installing a decking and a ramp which would measure approximately 0.5m high at its highest point and surround the proposed chalet. It was elaborated, because of its construction as a twin lodge and its location within the property's curtilage and its use (which would be supplementary to the use of the main property), the chalet would not require planning permission, therefore it was highlighted that only an assessment for installing the decking and ramp was required.

 

It was reported that the site of the proposed development was located outside any development boundary, and within a Landscape of Outstanding Historic Interest area and within 500m of a scheduled Monument.

 

It was explained that the proposed decking and ramp were to provide accessible access to the chalet, and it was considered that the location of the decking was acceptable where existing vegetation would mitigate any impact to the south west. It was not considered that the decking would have a significant detrimental impact on the amenities of nearby residents, as it would be located on the side of the chalet facing the curtilage of the property which was the subject of the application. It was elaborated that the closest dwelling was approximately 15m from the proposed decking, and reference was made to an objection that had received based on installing additional lighting on the site. It was acknowledged that lighting could lead to a nuisance for nearby residents, and to this end it was considered appropriate to impose a condition to agree on any external lighting on the decking.

 

It was acknowledged that objections had also been received from nearby residents, and the observations included a reference to the chalet and the impact on the current sewage handling system on the site, but as there was no need for planning permission for the chalet, these matters were beyond what could be controlled through the application in question.

 

It was concluded that a condition could be imposed to carry out biodiversity improvements.

 

         The officers recommended approving the application.

 

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

·        The only reason for submitting the application was because of his father's disability and the site that he currently lived in was unsuitable – he lived in one room, was unable to have a shower and often fell. 

·        The situation was heartbreaking and therefore they were presenting an application to make his parents' lives easier, and his life easier to be able to be near his family to support them

·        The chalet's layout would mean access to a bathroom and more space to move – he was currently only able to get out of bed into the chair

·        The stairs to the existing house were unsuitable and it was difficult having to use various equipment to get him into the house and out with the stairs.

·        It was not an easy decision as the house had been a family home going back centuries, which had never been sold, but due to the health of his parents, these steps would have to be taken

·        A local, Welsh family – his parents had worked throughout their lives until his father had a stroke, and as a result, everything had had to change completely.

 

c)      The Local Member had declared a prejudicial interest and therefore did not speak on the application                     

 

ch)    The approval of the application was proposed and seconded

 

c)           During the ensuing discussion, the following observation by the Member was noted:

·        Given the circumstances of the application, it was a surprise that the Community Council objected

 

In response to a question regarding the fact that planning permission was not required for a twin lodge, it was noted that a twin lodge was defined as a caravan and if a caravan was sited within a property curtilage as supplementary use to that property, planning permission was not required.

 

RESOLVED: To delegate powers to the Senior Planning Manager to approve the application, subject to the conditions.

 

1.            5 years

2.            In accordance with plans

3.            Agreement required on any external lights

4.            Green Infrastructure Statement condition.