Agenda item

Members had driven past the site on the previous day.

The report was introduced by the Planning Officer who emphasised that the proposal to consolidate the two affordable homes would result in the loss of small, affordable housing stock.  The applicant had offered to sign a legal agreement to ensure that the building was converted back to two separate dwellings if they were to sell the home.

The following spoke under the public participation at meetings scheme:

·         Fiona Stephenson, Agent

Members noted the concerns of the Officers regarding the loss of the two small affordable homes but were satisfied that the accommodation would still meet a local need affordable housing given the circumstance of the applicants and that an agreement to change the accommodation back to two small homes if the applicants were to vacate the property was sufficient to ensure the Affordable Homes stock is maintained.

A question was raised regarding why the applicant needed Planning Permission to make the change as internal changes or amalgamation of two dwellings to one would not normally require permission.  The Head of Planning clarified that because the proposal would result in the loss of two affordable houses that satisfied adopted policies to one large and unaffordable property that would materially change the housing stock, as well as being contrary to policy.  Allied to this there were some minor external changes which would materially change the character and appearance from two smaller dwellings to one large dwelling. As such the merging of the two properties in this case amounted to a material change of use.

A motion to approve the application contrary to Officer recommendation was moved and seconded.

Members requested that the current plan to remove the second front door be changed to keep the door in place and maintain the symmetrical appearance of the building, also making it easier to convert back to two properties.  Officers agreed to add a condition to ensure that the front door was not converted to a window and also to put in place a new S106 Obligation to modify the current Obligation to enable the development to proceed and thereafter to return the homes to two smaller houses, upon cessation of occupation by the current owners.

A motion to approve the application and subject to the above condition to secure the other necessary conditions as determined by the Head of Planning and the legal agreement referred to above being in place.

RESOLVED:

The application was APPROVED contrary to Officer recommendation and subject to the necessary conditions including the provision of an alternative scheme for the second door which should remain and he entering into of a Section 106 legal agreement being in place to secure the development as a single dwelling until such time that it is disposed of by the current occupiers, at which point it is to be returned to two affordable dwellings, including the necessary legal agreements to secure them as such in perpetuity, and including a return to their previous layouts and designs.