Construct four
residential houses with ancillary work including access method and detailed
landscaping (Unit 13 of permission C13/0736/39/LL to be relocated with this
application and therefore the proposal included three additional houses).
Local Member: Councillor R. H. Wyn Williams
Minutes:
Construct four residential houses with ancillary work
including access method and detailed landscaping (Unit 13 of permission
C13/0736/39/LL to be relocated with this application and therefore the proposal
included three additional houses).
(a)
The Development Control Manager expanded on the
background of the application, noting that the site was within an Area of
Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and within a Landscape of Outstanding
Historical Interest.
It was reported that a Planning and Affordable Housing
Statement had been submitted as part of the application where options put
forward in discussions prior to submitting the application for providing
affordable housing were outlined. It was noted that the three possible
options were:
·
Option 1 – Developing the site for 16
residential units with 12 of them being open market houses and retaining the
four affordable houses (25%) approved under application C13/0736/39/LL.
·
Option 2 – Developing the site for 18
residential units, namely 12 open market houses and six affordable
flats/apartments.
·
Option 3 – A commuted sum of £400,000 instead of
the housing provision on the site.
The options had been discussed with the applicant and
officers expressed that it was considered that the local need in Abersoch would
be met and best served by option 1. The applicant had been advised to contact
housing associations in order to get their opinions on this. It was noted that
several housing associations were interested and that the Cynefin Group had
expressed that houses would be a better choice than flats/apartments. Also, the Tai Teg list showed that there
were 35 on a waiting list for three-bedroom houses compared with 14 looking for
two-bedroom flats/apartments. It was
considered that option 1 met the requirements in terms of ensuring a percentage
of affordable housing on development sites, in accordance with policy CH4 of
the GUDP.
It was noted that the design of the residential units in the
current application reflected what had received permission in phase 1 of the
development. It was added that although
the design was contemporary in nature, this did not necessarily mean that it
would cause significant harm to the AONB and it was considered that the
proposal would not have more than a local impact on the Landscape of
Outstanding Historical Interest.
The
development complied with the GUDP for the reasons noted in the report.
(b) Taking advantage of the right to speak, the
applicant’s architect noted the following main points:-
• Since
commencing on phase 1 of the development, work had been undertaken to address
ecological matters - the Japanese knotweed problem had been solved and the bat
house was in place;
• Trees had been planted to safeguard views from the site;
• It had been intended to create a gabion wall covered in
plants in order to improve ecology, but by now there was no need for a gabion
wall on the north-eastern boundary of the site;
• That the information gathered in terms of the affordable
housing element had shown that three-bedroom houses of a high standard were
favoured, and the Community Council supported this;
• Discussions had been held with the Design Commission for
Wales in terms of the design of the development;
• The proposal was an comprehensive development that was
in-keeping with the area.
(c) The following main points were made by the
local member (not a member of this Planning Committee):-
·
He was pleased to see that the plan included
four affordable houses;
·
Increasing the number would be an
over-development of the site;
·
The design was more urban and was not suited to
a village;
·
It was necessary to take note of the AONB Unit’s
observations and inform architects/the developer that a design such as this one
would not be approved in the area of beauty;
·
That the report was comprehensive but that he
had not been convinced that enough parking spaces had been included in the
development;
·
It was difficult to refuse the application.
Proposed and seconded – to
approve the application.
(ch) During the discussion, the following main observations were made:
·
The affordable houses should be marketed as
houses for local people to buy rather than offering them to housing
associations;
·
Object to the alien design and that not enough
focus had been given to the AONB Unit's observations;
·
That a design that was in-keeping with villages
was needed;
·
Questioned why only 25% of the plan was
affordable rather than the usual 30%.
(d) In
response to the above observations, the officers noted:-
·
That they had advised the applicant to contact
housing associations in line with the Committee's wish in the past. Housing associations could either rent
them or offer them to individuals as part of a shared-ownership scheme;
·
That the scheme would not be viable if a request
had been made for provision beyond the submitted options;
·
The houses were of the same scale and design as
the houses in phase 1 of the development that had already been approved by the
Planning Committee.
RESOLVED to
approve the application.
Conditions:
1. Commence
within five years.
2. In
accordance with plans.
3. Slates
on the roof.
4. Agree
details for external walls.
5. Agree
on natural local stone for the gabion wall.
6. To
implement the development in accordance with part 6 of the ‘Harbour Hotel,
Abersoch C13/0736/39/LL and C15/0246/39/LL update to Ecology and Method
Statement: 29 April 2015.’
7. Within
six months of the date of the permission, the approval of the Local Planning
Authority in terms of the management plan must be received and submitted, as
outlined in point 9 of the mitigation measures in the ”Harbour Hotel Abseroch: C13/0736/39/LL and C15/0246/39/LL update
to Ecology and Method Statement: 29
April 2015.’
8. The
work of eradicating Japaese Knotweed to be completed in accordance with part 6
of the Japanese knotweed Management Plan, dated 23 October 2013 prepared by Ben
Lindley from Japanese Knotweed Ltd.
9. Separate
drainage of surface and foul water from the site.
10. Not
to permit surface water to link directly or indirectly with the public sewerage
system unless agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.
11. Not
to permit surface water land drainage to be discharged either directly or
indirectly to the public sewerage system.
12 Prior
to the residential units being occupied for the first time, the parking area
must be completed in accordance with the plans and this area will not
thereafter be used for any other purpose.
13. The
use of the communal linear parking spaes to be restricted to cars only and the
parking of boats, jet-skis, caravans and motorhomes is forbidden.
14. Complete the landscaping plan in accordance with the details submitted.
Supporting documents: