15 hours ago
Four sisters told they can't build £400k 'affordable' houses next to each other
Four sisters told they can't build £400k 'affordable' houses next to each other
The scheme for four affordable homes on the edge of Cardigan, to all be occupied by members of the same family, have been refused again
The entrance to Cae Morgan Road, Cardigan
(Image: Local Democracy Reporting Service)
Proposals for four affordable houses on Cardigan's outskirts, all intended to be lived in by members of the same family, have been rejected for the second time, though officials hope the applicants will submit fresh plans.
Sisters Ms Celyn, Sara and Carys Jukes, alongside their sibling Mandy Jones, had their application for four discounted bungalows at Drws Y Coed, Cae Morgan Road turned down by Ceredigion Council planners at the August 13 development management committee. Three of the sisters currently reside at Drws Y Coed with their parents.
Last August, the same applicants saw their earlier proposal for four detached three and four-bedroom properties worth £400,000 each rejected by county planners. For our free daily briefing on the biggest issues facing the nation, sign up to the Wales Matters newsletter here .
Ceredigion's head of planning Russell Hughes-Pickering had expressed significant reservations about the scale and size of the original application, branding the £400,000 houses as "blatantly not affordable".
A supporting document for the revised scheme, submitted via agent Harries Planning Design Management, stated the proposed dwellings had been scaled back following the previous rejection and were "honest in their intentions, to provide long-term family homes which will be of an appropriate scale to serve their needs, whilst respecting the wider landscape context and neighbouring amenity levels".
Article continues below
The most recent proposal was earmarked for rejection at the July meeting, given that the location sits within open countryside beyond any established settlement, where new housing developments face a general presumption against approval, the site falls well short of the required housing density outlined in policy, and it would cause substantial harm to the surrounding landscape.
The decision was postponed at that meeting awaiting a Site Inspection Panel visit, but rejection was again recommended, with the panel voicing "significant concern with regards to the layout of the proposed development and the siting of the dwellinghouses," according to a report for members.
At the August meeting, Russell Hughes-Pickering stated that whilst the proposal itself had broad backing, the positioning remained problematic, with concerns that any consent could risk being "called in".
Article continues below
The refusal recommendation was supported by members, with eight voting in favour and two against.
Committee chairman councillor Ifan Davies expressed hope that applicants would consider putting forward a revised proposal in the coming months.
