Siting of wooden cabin to accommodate needs of disabled person.

Ward: Hagley

Siting of wooden cabin to accommodate needs of disabled person.

Referring to the Schedule of Committee Updates/Additional Representations that was circulated at the meeting, the Senior Planning Officer reported that:

§                An additional letter had been received from the occupants of The Old Vicarage, Preston Wynne and the comments were summarised.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mrs. Fletcher spoke on behalf of Preston Wynne Parish Council and Miss Davies spoke in support of the application.

Councillor DW Greenow, the Local Ward Member, commented on a number of issues, including: the individual needs and wish of the applicant to achieve independence yet remain within the local community; that the temporary nature of the wooden cabin should overcome previous concerns about a permanent structure in this location; he considered the design and scale of the proposed development to be acceptable; no objections had been received from local residents and there was significant support from the parish council and villagers; no objections had been received from statutory consultees, the Traffic Manager or the Public Rights of Way Manager; and the applicant’s doctor supported the proposal.  Given these considerations, he felt that the exceptional circumstances of the applicant were such that they should override the planning policy objections, particularly if planning permission was restricted to the lifetime of the applicant and a spouse or dependents.

Councillor MD Lloyd-Hayes supported the application, felt that there were contradictions in the Unitary Development Plan and the report, considered that the proposal was backed by community strategy and housing needs objectives, and the personal restriction would control the future use of the site.

Councillor PJ Edwards noted that the dimensions of the development would exceed those given in the definition of a caravan and would be larger than what would be permissible as a three-bedroom dwelling in a smaller settlement.  He commented that there were thousands of people in the county who would want a similar dwelling and felt that the Sub-Committee should focus on the national and local planning policy issues.  Whilst acknowledging the specific needs of the applicant, he noted that the application did not meet the relevant criteria and supported the officer’s recommendation of refusal.

Councillor MAF Hubbard suggested that, if planning permission was granted, the temporary nature of the proposal had to ensured and suggested conditions preventing connection to mains drainage, requiring overhead connection to main services and restricting the permission to the lifetime of the applicant only and not to a spouse or dependents.

RESOLVED:

That  

(i)      The Central Area Planning Sub-Committee was minded to approve the application subject to conditions felt to be necessary by the Head of Planning Services provided that the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee.

(ii)     If the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee, officers named in the Scheme of Delegation to Officers be instructed to approve the application, subject to such conditions referred to above.

[Note:

Following the vote on this application, the Development Control Manager advised that, as the resolution was contrary to the officers’ recommendation and there were crucial policy issues at stake, he was minded to refer the matter to the Head of Planning Services.]