Treehouse-style hut approved

A TREEHOUSE-STYLE hut for an autistic child has been given retrospective planning approval despite opposition from some neighbours who were worried about overlooking.

Carmarthenshire Council’s planning committee visited the hut after hearing about the application at a meeting last month. Cllr Steve Williams said he’d been able to see a woman sat at her computer in a nearby property from it.

Convening at County Hall on September 23, councillors said the site visit had been worthwhile. The deferral had also allowed a further letter of support from a social worker helping the child, who said the raised structure was better off in the front rather than rear garden of the detached property in Five Roads, near Llanelli.

A committee report said a front garden hut of its scale, visible from various points on Rehoboth Road, would not normally be permitted but that in this instance the garden was large and generally well-enclosed.

It added that the child had previously been involved in a collision on the road because of his tendency to climb the front wall of the property. The meeting also heard he had also fallen from a first floor window and had been taken to hospital.

Council planning officer John Thomas said the hut was substantially completed and that applicant Jonathan Wilshire hadn’t realised permission was needed.

Mr Thomas said officers had considered the child’s specific needs when assessing the application and recommended approval on the basis that the hut was only used by the family, meaning it would be taken down when the home was sold. “This is a personal consent to meet those needs,” he said.

Another condition is that Mr Wilshire will need to plant more greenery along the boundary with a neighbouring property.

The social worker helping the child sent a second letter of support this month explaining that the front garden was covered by CCTV and that looking out from the hut or decking allowed him to connect to the outside world “without the overwhelming pressures of direct interaction”.

The social worker added that the child’s glances towards nearby homes and cars were “brief and exploratory” and that he had difficulty sustaining focus. The back garden, she said, had an open pond and led directly onto fields.

The back garden also has a swimming pool – covered when not in use – but a letter from the child’s parents said only the pond was covered by CCTV cameras due to technical and wi-fi signal limitations. The parents added that their son had extremely sensitive skin and that the back garden had direct sunlight most of the day whereas the front one, where the hut was, had shade.

There were four objections to the application, including from ward councillor Alex Evans, mainly on the grounds of loss of privacy. One resident’s letter to the planning department said: “The erection is opposite my property and raised enough to have an unwanted view into my bedroom.”

Addressing the committee, Cllr Evans said he completely sympathised with the parents’ efforts to support their child and that the letter from the social worker had been very helpful. But he wondered how well screened the hut would be by bushes in the front garden during winter. “We want to safeguard everyone’s interest,” he said.

Cllr Williams also sympathised with the situation but said he’d been able to see a woman at her computer in a nearby house from the hut. “To me that’s an immediate invasion of privacy,” he said.

He added that the social worker had been remiss in his view in not pointing out there was a pond in the front garden as well a larger one at the rear. He said that speaking as a former police officer a child who went missing from a front garden was in more danger than one who escaped from a back garden leading onto fields.

Mr Thomas said planning officers considered the front garden to be less of a safety risk in this case and that the child, who had attention deficit, was more interested in people moving about than someone sat at their computer.

Cllr Dorian Phillips said he wasn’t against the application but, speaking as someone with building experience, made several safety observations which he hoped the parents would take note of.

Before the committee voted on the application, Cllr Terry Davies described it as a difficult case and that a lot of the safety issues were outside the committee’s scope. “After a lot of thinking I’m in support of the officers’ recommendation (of approval),” he said.