Decision over ‘bijou’ King Street flats deferred amid criticism over a lack of windows

A decision over plans to convert former town centre office space into flats has been deferred amid criticism that one of the properties didn’t have a bedroom window.

The plans for 43 King Street include turning the vacant space into five flats – with three one bedroom flats on the ground floor, along with one two bedroom flat and a one bedroom flat on the first floor.

However concerns had been raised by Wrexham Civic Society, which has described the application as “yet another of several substandard ones for domestic conversion of former retail premises in the town centre.”

In their comments the society also criticised the lack of window in the one of the bedrooms – whilst two other rooms have windows that open out over bin storage

Speaking at last night’s meeting, planning officer David Williams said the recommendation was to approve the development and later described the development as “bijou.”

He added: “When we apply the normal standards for new residential developments which are covered in LPG 21, there are obviously going to be certain compromises,

“It’s very difficult to apply those standards rigidly to conversion schemes, especially when you’re looking at buildings within the town centre.

“So clearly that there is a need to be flexible and to adapt our position to allow these buildings to become occupied and have a positive use in future. If we were apply it to restrictively then we’d end up with vacant premises throughout the town centre unfortunately.”

Grosvenor councillor Marc Jones said that the town centre is undergoing a “transformation” with more vacant space being turned into accommodation.

But this needs to be done in a “way that enhances the town provides good quality accommodation for people to live in”, he added.

Cllr Jones said: “I’ve got to ask whether living in a flat with no bedroom window, where some windows open out above bins and another window looks out on a wall less than three meters away, is good quality accommodation.

“I’m concerned at some of the comments in the report, I’ll read one out – it is likely that those who wish to live in a town center location would appreciate the available accommodation offers a different standard of amenity to a property in a more suburban location.

“I live in a town centre location about 100 meters from this site, as the crow flies and I don’t see why people living in the town center should accept a different standard, a lower standard of amenity.

“I think we should all be seeking the best possible quality of accommodation, especially when we have that gift afforded to us, because it’s come to planning.

“We shouldn’t be tossing aside guidelines casually and I do think that this gives the appearance that this council is turning a blind eye to permit what I would consider to be substandard accommodation.”

“I wouldn’t want to live in a bedroom with no window, I don’t think that’s good for anybody’s mental health or wellbeing.”

Concerns about the lack of window and size of the property was also raised by Ponciau councillor Paul Pemberton, who added that: “I think there should be a certain amount of flexibility by the developers as well

“Is there in anyway that the actual configuration of the interior could be a tweaked – ie. put a bedroom at the front instead of the back to obtain a window?

“I certainly wouldn’t like to sleep in the bedrooms got no windows, I’d be fearful if there was ever a fire.

Mr Williams noted that in terms of fire safety, that would be “a matter that will be dealt with through the building regulation application.”

He also warned the committee to be “careful with the use of words like inferior or inadequate”, adding: “I think we’re making a judgement based on our own standards of accommodation.

“I think there’s a difference because it’s small, because it’s bijou, then is automatically substandard or doesn’t meet the requirements of someone who wants to live in that location and within that building.

“But I think we’ve got to be mindful of the fact that if we want to see these buildings used for some purpose and another, you know, we’ve got to be adaptable, we’ve got to be flexible and we’ve got to apply a little bit of common sense in terms of the approach that we take.”

However proposals to defer the a decision over approving the plans and instead requesting the applicants to amend the plans, was backed by a majority of councillors.

A decision will be made at a later date.