Six letting bedrooms at 90 Springfield Street, Morriston, Swansea

What was proposed

The application sought to convert a residential dwelling into six individual letting bedrooms and add a ground-floor window.

“Change of use from a residential dwelling to six individual letting bedrooms, with a new window is proposed on the right (south) elevation at ground floor level…”

Officer report

Earlier committee consideration

The application was deferred for a site visit, then deferred again so members could receive advice on potential refusal reasons.

“This application was previously referred to Committee on 7 th October 2025. It was deferred by Committee for a site visit. This site visit was carried out on 2 nd…”

“February 2026. The application was reported to Committee on 3 rd February with Officer recommendation that planning permission be granted subject to conditions. Members of the Committee did not accept the recommendation but instead resolved that the application be deferred under the two stage voting process so that further advice could be provided on a reason(s) for refusal.”

Officer report

Officers advised approval

Officers advised granting planning permission in accordance with the recommendation previously presented to committee.

“Officers advise that the application be approved in accordance with the recommendation set out in the original planning report presented to February Committee meeting, attached as Appendix A to this item.”

Officer report

The main concern

Members identified insufficient car parking as causing substandard development, indiscriminate parking and harm to highway and pedestrian safety.

“Following consideration of the evidence presented and heard at the Committee meeting and that obtained during the site visit on 2 nd February 2026, Members of the Planning Committee identified one area as grounds for refusal, namely that there is insufficient car parking available to serve the development, resulting in a substandard form of development that would lead to indiscriminate parking and detriment to highway/pedestrian safety.”

Officer report

Who spoke

An objector and the local member addressed the committee and spoke against the application.

Members considered parking safety

The potential refusal reason raised previously concerned highway and pedestrian safety, while officer advice remained approval.

“The application had been deferred under the two stage voting process at the Planning Committee held on 3 March 2026 so that further advice could be provided with regard to the potential reason for refusal raised by Members at that meeting.”

“The potential reason for refusal highlighted by members at the previous meeting was outlined and detailed in the report and related to highway/pedestrian safety…”

Minutes

The application was refused

The committee refused the application for insufficient parking and inaccessible cycle storage, and nominated a councillor to defend the decision at appeal.

“Resolved that 1) the application be refused for the following reasons: a) There would be insufficient off-street parking to accommodate the proposed development and the spaces cannot be accommodated in an on-street manner since parking is at a premium in the locality.”

Minutes