Erect 4 affordable dwellings, construction of an estate road and new vehicular access
LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor
Sion Wyn Jones
Link
to relevant background documents
Minutes:
Erect
four affordable houses, create a new estate road and a new vehicular access
a)
The Development Control Manager elaborated on the
background of the application and noted that the decision had been deferred at
the Committee on 13 March 2017 in order for the members to visit the site and to obtain details from
the land drainage plan and the statutory consultees' views. It was highlighted
that this was a full application to erect four two-storey affordable houses on
a site near a residential area of the village near the development boundary as
designated by the Gwynedd Unitary Development Plan Proposals Map -
consequently, it was defined as a site located in open countryside.
Attention was drawn to the relevant policies in the report along with
the responses to the consultation. It was explained that the site abutted the
development boundary and was in keeping with policy CH7 which permitted
proposals for affordable houses on suitable rural exception sites immediately
on the boundary of villages or centres. It was reiterated that the southern
side of the site abutted the development boundary near Bron Gwynedd estate;
therefore, the site could be a rural exception site. Policy CH7 only approved
developments for affordable housing when the need had been proven - a Planning
and Affordable Housing statement was received with the application proving the
need for these houses. Observations were
also received from the Council’s Strategic Housing Unit, acknowledging the need
for this type of affordable houses in the area.
It was
highlighted that the objections were on the grounds that sites, within the
development boundary, had not been developed yet and that the Local Development
Plan provided new sites for more houses in the village. In response, it was
noted that policy CH7 did not require other sites within the development
boundary to satisfy the need initially and all that was required under the
policy was a proven local need for affordable housing.
It was
highlighted that other objections referred to previous objections for
residential development on the site and that it had been refused on appeal. It
was explained that the application in question (3/18/384E) was an application
for outline permission for the development of the entire field as a residential
development. At the time, the policy considerations were different to the
existing ones and the policies did not release land outside the development
boundaries to provide affordable housing as rural exception sites.
In the
context of infrastructure matters, it was highlighted that policies B32, B29
and CH18 were relevant to the aspects of flooding, surface water management and
ensuring a sufficient provision of infrastructure for the development.
Objections had been received highlighting concerns about flooding, surface
water problems and problems with the main sewer. An amended plan was submitted showing a
detailed land drainage plan and a greenfield assessment of the existing surface
water situation and the situation after developing the site. It was reported
that the surface water would be disposed of through Welsh Water's systems to a
pipe which discharged into the river Cadnant. To ensure that the development
would not have a detrimental impact further down the river, the proposal included
two attenuation systems (one would be adopted by Welsh Water) and a hydro-brake
which would limit the surface water flow to 51/e. The greenfield assessment
showed that the development would reduce the surface water flow from the site
and the surface water deriving from the development would be managed through an
appropriate system.
Welsh Water did not have an objection to the amended drainage plan. It
was considered that the proposal was acceptable subject to relevant conditions
and the completion of a 106 agreement to ensure that the houses were
transferred to a housing association and to relevant conditions.
(b) Taking
advantage of the right to speak, an objector to the application noted the
following main points:-
·
A number of planning applications had been refused
on the site over the past 35 years.
·
The reasons for refusal had not changed - if
anything, they were worse.
·
Flood risk was likely to increase - the area has suffered an increased risk of
flooding over the years
·
The improvements proposed were insufficient
·
As the land was sloped, the surface water would
flow off the land and down to Tan y Buarth and Pen y Buarth
·
Water stagnated in the field following rainfall
·
The overflow of River Cadnant was a constant concern
c)
Taking advantage of the right to speak,
the applicant’s agent noted the following main points:-
·
That the
report had provided clear guidance in relation to the criteria
·
That the proposal was a logical
extension to the village
·
That the
access plan had been amended
·
Solutions to the surface water and
flooding concerns had been submitted
·
Welsh Government needed to meet
affordable housing targets
·
No social housing had been built in
Bethel for 35 years
·
It was intended to transfer the houses
to Grŵp Cynefin housing association
(ch) The local member (not a member of this Planning Committee) objected
to the application and he made the following main points:-
·
Previous applications had been refused by Gwynedd Council,
on appeal and by the Community Council
·
That the site was outside the development boundary
and the land had not been included within the LDP due to the observations of
the Planning Service - there were other undeveloped sites within the boundary
·
Local concerns in terms of access to the site,
sewerage and land drainage
·
No assurance that Welsh Water's surface water plan
would work
·
That he had received a second opinion regarding the
sewerage solution which highlighted that the plan was impractical and placed
additional pressure on the current system
·
That there was a need for affordable housing, but
in the right location
·
That the parking assessment had been carried out
during the day rather than in the evening when the situation was at its worst
·
That there was a need to adhere to the local
development plan - approving would be irresponsible
d)
In response to the observations, the Senior
Planning Service Manager noted that he accepted the concerns, but the previous
applications could not be compared with the current application due to the
difference in scale. It was also noted, although the proposal was outside the
development boundary, that policy CH7 dealt with exceptions to the policy
should the proposal be a logical extension.
In terms of flooding concerns, it was noted that additional information
had been submitted by Welsh Water, Natural Resources Wales and the Drainage
Unit in response to those concerns.
dd) In
response to the observations regarding parking, the Senior Development Control
Officer - Transportation highlighted that the assessment had been carried out
during working hours, but that this assessment was one that considered the
situation at its worst. With an extension to the access, it was noted that the
situation would undoubtedly get worse.
e)
It was proposed and seconded to approve the
application.
f)
During the ensuing discussion, the
following main observations were noted by members:
·
That the houses were affordable houses and
therefore there was no doubt that they were needed - led to possibilities for
the village
·
That the extension was logical - if it
would have been peripheral, there would be no exigency for affordable housing
·
That a response had been submitted in
relation to the concerns
·
That it was intended to transfer the
houses to Grŵp Cynefin housing association
·
There was a need to consider a traffic
management plan and restrict construction hours
·
That the land was wet
·
There was a need to consider that the
Community Council had refused the application
·
That there was a need to consider the
reasons for refusing the previous applications
In response to an observation regarding
Gwynedd Council adopting the road and painting double yellow lines, it was
noted that it was not customary to paint double yellow lines as no problems
were being anticipated.
RESOLVED to delegate the powers to approve the application
subject to signing a 106 affordable housing agreement to ensure that the houses
are transferred to a housing association and to relevant planning conditions
involving:
1. Time
2. In accordance with plans
3. Materials
4. Landscaping including boundary treatments
5. Biodiversity management plan
6. Transport (complete the estate road, parking spaces etc)
7. Welsh Water
8.
Complete the land drainage plan before occupying
the houses.
9.
Restrict the surface water to 51/s.
10. Withdrawal of permitted rights
11. Lighting plan.
12. Construction work hours (8am to 6pm Monday to Friday, 8am to 1pm on
Saturdays, with no building work on Sunday or Bank Holidays)
13. Submit land levels as it is and as proposed.
Supporting documents: