Four two-bedroom houses at 21 Manley Close, Tonyrefail

What was proposed

The application proposed demolishing existing buildings and constructing four two-bedroom houses in two semi-detached pairs, with parking, landscaping and associated works.

“Full planning permission is sought for the demolition of the existing buildings and the development of residential dwellings and associated works at 21 Manley Close, Tonyrefail, CF39 8NS.”

“The dwellings would be arranged within 2 no. detached blocks, each containing a pair of semi‑detached units. Each building would measure approximately 7.3 metres in width and 13 metres in depth, with a hipped roof design reaching a maximum height of 9.5 metres, sloping to 6.7 metres at the eaves when measured from the front of the site.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site contained a detached two-storey dwelling, garden trees, a hedge and existing access, within a residential area bounded by roads and neighbouring homes.

“The application site relates to large residential plot which currently accommodates a two- storey dwelling with a gable end facing the street. The existing dwelling on site predates the surrounding residential development and its does not match other homes on the street which all share a similar architectural style and were constructed in the mid 20 th century.”

“The site is set back from the highway by a grassed highway verge with the site benefiting from an existing vehicular access providing direct access to a driveway and garage along the eastern boundary. Along the western boundary of the site, a tall hedge row runs parallel to the property, At the back of the site, there is a spacious garden which includes a row of trees along the northern boundary.”

Officer report

Planning history

There were no recent planning applications recorded for the site.

“There are no recent planning applications on record associated with this site.”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the housing principle, design, neighbour amenity, privacy and highway effects acceptable, subject to conditions and relevant planning policies.

“The principle of the development is therefore considered acceptable, and the proposed dwelling would comply with LDP Policies CS2, AW1, AW2 and SSA13, all of which support the provision of new housing on unallocated sites within settlement boundaries in the Southern Strategy area.”

Officer report

Objections and support

Objections concerned heritage, demolition, character, parking, access, construction, trees, biodiversity, drainage and other matters, while one letter supported modern housing.

“Building is a historic landmark in Tonyrefail which has stood for over 150 years. • Tonyrefail has been subject to large development pressures in recent years which have come at the expense of the community character and identity. • Existing site holds an important position in the agricultural history of our cultural heritage. • Should be retained as a heritage asset.”

“APPLICATION NUMBER – 25/0802/FUL REPORT • Demolishing a structurally sound building in favour of new construction undermines sustainability goals. • Refurbishment and reuse should be considered as environmentally responsible alternatives. • Proposal would exacerbate existing parking problems in the area. • Local people have expressed interest in purchasing the property. • There are many other sites which could be used to provide social housing.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The committee heard from the agent and a non-committee local councillor, who put forward objections to the development.

Committee discussion

Members considered concerns about public use of the footway and footpath during construction and amended the relevant construction condition.

“The Head of Planning presented the application to Committee and following consideration it was RESOLVED to approve the application in accordance with the recommendation of the Director, Housing and Regeneration subject to the amendment of condition 5 to address the concerns raised by Members in respect of the public use of the footway/footpath during construction.”

Minutes

The vote

The application was approved, with one councillor recording a vote against approval.

“(Note: County Borough Councillor D Grehan wished to have recorded that he voted against the approval of the above-mentioned application)”

Minutes