Amended application to C16/0314/08/LL for the erection of 9 houses to include 3 open market houses and 6 affordable dwellings together with drainage works, ground works and formation of accesses.
LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Gareth Thomas
Minutes:
The discussion on this application was chaired by the Vice-chair.
Revised
application of C16/0314/08/LL to erect nine houses to include three houses on
the open market and six affordable houses together with drainage, landscaping
work and creating accesses.
(a) The Development Control Manager
elaborated on the background of the application and noted that
the six affordable houses were on
land outside but bordering the development boundary, whilst the three open market houses
were mainly within the boundary.
It was noted that a number of objections received
referred to concerns regarding the adjacent road and the impact of the
development on road safety and movements along the road. It was recognised that
the road was narrow in places, however, considering that part of the site had
been used in the past as a commercial printing works it was considered that
there would be no additional unacceptable impact stemming from this proposal.
It was reported that following the receipt of
observations from the Transportation Unit the application had been amended to
provide a new system of entrances to the open market housing to include the
provision of a new footway along the front of the site and the internal
arrangement of the estate. Consequently, the Transportation Unit was satisfied
with what was proposed.
Confirmation had been received from the Strategic
Housing Unit that the submitted information was consistent with the information
to hand regarding the local need for affordable units. It was considered that
this mixture of housing was appropriate to satisfy the general demand for
affordable housing.
It was noted that it would have to be ensured that
the units that satisfied different tenures (i.e. open market housing and
affordable housing) were developed jointly and there was no possibility that
only open market housing would be developed. In this case, Cartrefi
Cymunedol Gwynedd (CCG) were partners in the scheme
and as usual in cases where the Housing Association did not own the land or was
an applicant (when the application was considered), a standard 106 Agreement
would be drafted to ensure that the houses were transferred to the Association
who would then ensure that the units would be available to satisfy local need.
Attention was drawn to the confirmation that had
been received from the Joint Planning Policy Unit regarding the conclusions of
the language assessment submitted, this stated:
“On the whole, it is deemed that neither the
nature or scale of the proposed development is likely to have any detrimental
impact on the Welsh language. This
application entails that 6 of the 9 proposed houses will be affordable, this
should satisfy local needs for housing and assist the existing community
population".
The
development complied with the GUDP for the reasons stated in the report.
(b)
Taking
advantage of the right to speak, the applicant’s agent noted the following main
points:-
·
That it was a mixed
housing development with three open market houses and six affordable houses for
CCG;
·
That the open market houses were situated within
the development boundary and the affordable houses were on an exempt site near
the boundary;
·
There was a lack of affordable housing in Gwynedd
and the proposal would assist the Council to reach its targets in terms of
providing affordable housing;
·
It was not easy to provide land for affordable
housing and although there were other possible sites in Penrhyndeudraeth
they were not released or offered for affordable housing;
·
A flooding problem in Porthmadog
meant that housing could not be provided there and therefore Penrhyndeudraeth had been earmarked by the Council for
future additional housing;
·
The need for affordable
housing had been proven and enquiries had been received from local people for
the open market houses;
·
It would be an
opportunity to improve the appearance of this ugly site;
·
Work would be undertaken
to widen the road.
(c) The local member (not a member of this Planning Committee)
objected to the application and he made the following main points:-
·
There was over-development
in the application site area;
·
The open
market housing were partly within
the development boundary with one house
partly outside;
·
His concern
regarding access as there was no
room to turn a car in the curtilage of the open market houses;
·
That the road
was narrow, busy and visually restricted;
·
Reference was made
to creating a new access to the existing house, however, no plans had been
submitted;
·
That the language
statement received was extremely weak;
·
Concern that
approval would be given to move the development boundary a little and the impact of additional housing on Porthmadog.
(ch) In response to the local member’s
observations, the Senior Planning Service Manager noted that the objections
were in the context of the impact on residential amenities, the narrow road and
traffic concerns and consideration should be given to conducting a site
inspection visit.
In
response to a comment by a member, the Development Control Manager noted that
two of the open market houses were totally within the boundary and the majority
of the open market house was within the development boundary and therefore it
was considered to be within the boundary.
Members
noted their concerns that if the six affordable houses were transferred to a
housing association then the allocations policy of the housing association
would not be local to the specific area. In response, the Senior Solicitor
noted that when a housing association was a partner with a developer that
Council undertook and trusted that the housing associations would act in
accordance with their allocations policy. He added that the Strategic Housing
Unit could be requested for more information.
It was proposed and seconded
to defer the application in order to conduct
an inspection site visit and
to receive more information
regarding CCG's allocations policy and confirmation from the Strategic Housing Unit of the need.
A
member suggested that a local lettings condition should be considered for the
affordable houses as imposed on the approval for the Bryn Garmon
estate, Abersoch where any tenant had to live less
than six miles from the site.
A member noted that the access should
be re-examined.
RESOLVED to defer the application.
Supporting documents: