Amend condition 2 of planning permission ref. no. C09A/0396/18/AM for residential development so as to extend the period of 3 years to enable the submission of the approval of reserved matters application.
LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Elfed Williams
Minutes:
Change condition 2 of planning permission number
C09A/0396/18/AM for a residential development in order to extend the period
from three years to enable the submission of a reserved matters application.
(a)
The Senior Development Control Officer elaborated
on the background of the application, noting that the proposal continued to
involve developing the site for 27 houses (including five affordable houses for
general local need) along with the creation of a new access. The original application was subject to a
legal agreement under Section 106 in order to provide an element of affordable
housing. It was noted that the 106 agreement would need updating as its
contents continued to be valid despite the submission of this latest
application.
Attention was drawn to the additional observations
that had been received. Reference was made to the objections received following
the public consultation.
It was noted that the principle of developing the
site for a residential development had already been approved under outline
application ref C09A/0396/18/AM and there had been no change in terms of the
nature and details of the proposal or in the context of the local planning
policies and guidelines and, although the Local Development Plan was likely to
be adopted soon, the site would continue to be within the development boundary
of Deiniolen in addition to being designated for a
residential development within the plan.
It was explained that this latest application did
not involve any change to the plans that had already been approved.
It was noted that the objections to this current
application to extend the time in order to submit reserved matters had been
considered in full and based on the assessment in the report, it was believed
that the proposal continued to be acceptable, subject to including relevant
conditions as included within the previous outline permission.
(b) Taking advantage of the right to speak, the applicant’s agent
noted the following main points:-
·
It was not the principle of developing the site for
housing that was under consideration, the principle of extending the time to
submit a reserved matters application was relevant;
·
That improvements had been made to the path
already;
·
That the land had been designated in the GUDP and
LDP for residential development. Under the LDP, the proportion of affordable
housing included as part of the development could be less.
(c) The
local member (not a member of this Planning Committee) objected to the
application and he made the following main points:
·
The application did not respond to the demand for
housing, and another three sites that had been granted planning permission for
residential development had not been developed;
·
That the report gave much attention to the policies
of the GUDP but as the LDP was about to be adopted, there was a risk that the
report did not give sufficient consideration to the LDP's policies. That the
application should be deferred until the situation with the new plan became
clearer;
·
That Ysgol Gwaun Gynfi was almost at full capacity, did the Council have plans to extend the school if
houses would be built on each site that had been granted planning permission
already?
(ch) It was proposed and seconded to approve
the application.
During
the ensuing discussion, the following main observations were noted by members:
·
That the application
should be refused on the grounds of over-development and no evidence of local
need;
·
That the circumstances relating to lack of local
need had changed since the outline application had been approved;
·
Would the applicant be able to submit a further
application to extend the time allowed to submit a reserved matters application
for approval?
·
That the applicant's agent had noted that a reduced
proportion of affordable houses could be provided under the LDP. What was the
situation?
·
Would the number of affordable housing remain the
same?
(d) In response to the above observations, the officers noted:
·
That there was no change in the
planning situation with the site designated for a residential development in the
GUDP and LDP. It would be difficult to justify refusing the application. An
intention to refer the application to a cooling-off period, should the
application be refused, was noted;
·
A change would have had to occur in the
planning situation to refuse the application, there had been no change in local
or national policy. It was not possible
to evidence a refusal, therefore, there would
certainly be costs against the Council at an appeal. If refused, the members
would have to defend the decision at an appeal;
·
It would only be possible to justify
refusing a further application to extend the period to submit a reserved
matters application for approval, if a change had occurred in the policy
position;
·
The LDP noted a lower starting point in
terms of negotiating an affordable housing proportion in a residential
development;
·
That the provision of the same number
of affordable housing for general local need would be bound by means of a legal
agreement under Section 106.
RESOLVED to
approve the application.
Conditions:
1. 2/5 years to begin the work
2. Submitting reserved matters.
3. Materials and finishes (including natural
slate for the roofs).
4. Access and parking.
5. Landscaping.
6. Removal of permitted development rights for
the affordable houses.
7. Welsh Water conditions relating to
safeguarding the sewers.
8. Conditions of Natural Resources Wales
regarding land and surface water draining.
9. Update the conditions regarding mitigation
measures of the ecological
assessment.
Supporting documents: