Two one-bedroom flats at 10 Blake Street, Maerdy, Ferndale
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Rhondda Planning and Development Committee on 6 Nov 2025.
What was proposed
The application sought to convert the property internally into two one-bedroom flats, sharing the existing entrance and rear amenity space.
“Full planning permission is sought for the subdivision of property into 2.no one-bedroom flats at 10 Blake Street, Maerdy, Ferndale.”
“The proposal would be facilitated through internal conversion only with both flats accessed via the existing front entrance off Blake Street. The change of use would provide the following layout:”
Officer report
The site
The property is a traditional mid-terrace dwelling in a residential area, with a rear enclosed amenity space and surrounding terraced homes and flats.
“The application property is a traditional mid-terrace dwelling located within a residential area of Maerdy. The property directly fronts the highway at Blake Street and benefits from an enclosed amenity space to the rear which is bounded on both sides by the rear garden areas of the adjoining properties and to the rear by an access lane. The area surrounding the side slopes from south to north with the ground level increasing towards the rear of the property.”
“The surrounding area is residential in nature and characterised by traditional terraced dwellings along Blake Street and blocks of flats to the rear (south) along Maerdy Road.”
Officer report
Earlier applications
A previous five-bedroom HMO application was refused and dismissed on appeal, while a three-bedroom HMO application remained under consideration.
“Members will note that this application follows the refusal of application 24/1306/FUL, for the conversion of the property to a 5 Bedroom House of Multiple Occupation, which came before Committee on the 6 th March earlier this year and was recently dismissed at appeal on grounds of substandard living accommodation.”
“24/1306/FUL 5-bedroom House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) (Use Class C4) Decision: Refused, 09/04/25 Appeal: Dismissed, 01/10/25”
Officer report
What officers recommended
Officers recommended approval because the proposal was in a sustainable settlement location and was not expected to harm highway safety, neighbours or the area’s character.
“REASONS: The proposed development is acceptable in principle and involves the subdivision of an existing residential property to provide 2no. residential units in a sustainable location within settlement limits. In addition, the proposal is not considered to result in any adverse impact upon highway safety, the amenity of surrounding properties or the character and appearance of the area.”
Officer report
Officers’ assessment
The flats were considered acceptable in size, access and location, with no external alterations and reduced parking demand compared with the existing dwelling.
“The Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) for the Development of Flats – Conversions and New Build advises that flats are unlikely to be acceptable where they are located solely in basements, or where habitable rooms would only have roof light windows. It also requires flats to have easy and safe access for all users and advises that access through rear lanes and entrances around the backs of buildings should be avoided wherever possible.”
“The submitted information indicates 3 bedrooms in the existing dwelling. In accordance with the Council’s SPG governing off-street parking requirements, a 3+ bedroom dwelling within Parking Zone 3 has an off-street parking requirement of 3 spaces. There are currently no off-street parking spaces serving the dwelling, resulting in a shortfall of 3 spaces.”
Officer report
Residents’ concerns
A petition signed by 46 residents raised concerns about parking, noise, waste, living conditions, family housing and the effect on the community.
“The nature of the application which follows the refusal of a previous HMO application and appeal strongly suggest a speculative and profit driven approach, designed to maximise rental yield or resale value, rather than a proposal motivated by long-term needs of the local community. • The management doesn't live locally which could pose various problems in terms of managing the property.”
“Blake Street is home to a number of elderly residents and this proposal would significantly disrupt their lives. • Noise and Disturbance • Would create additional waste collection demands. • External alterations may detract from the properties façade and impact upon the character of the area. • Would result in the permanent loss of a family home.”
Officer report
The committee decision
The committee approved the application in line with the recommendation, subject to an additional condition requiring bin-storage details.
“The Head of Major Development and Investment presented the application to Committee and following consideration it was RESOLVED to approve the application in accordance with the recommendation of the Director, Prosperity and Development, subject to an additional condition requiring details of the bin storage to be submitted for approval by the local planning authority.”
Minutes
Sources
- Rhondda Planning and Development Committee minutes, 6 November 2025
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Rhondda's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Council
- Rhondda
- Date
- Thursday 6 November 2025
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- Rhondda committee decisions →
This committee's year
38 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 2 against officer advice.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.