P/2016/0043 Great Cantal Farm, Llanbister Road, Llandrindod Wells

Planning, Taxi Licensing and Rights of Way Committee Report

Application No: P/2016/0043 Grid Ref: 315386.59 272991.41

Community Llanbister Valid Date: Officer: Council: 08/01/2016 Holly-ann Hobbs/Tamsin Law Applicant: Mr W Bowen, Great Cantal Farm, Llanbister Road, Llandrindod Wells, LD1 6UD.

Location: Great Cantal Farm, Llanbister Road, Llandrindod Wells, LD1 6UD.

Proposal: Erection of agricultural building to house 32000 hens, provision of effluent tank, four no feed silos and all associated works (Resubmission of P/2015/0935)

Application Application for Full Planning Permission Type:

The reason for Committee determination

The application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement.

Site Location and Description

Great Cantal is located within the open countryside, approximately 4.5 miles east of Llanbister and approximately 8.8 miles south east of Llanbadarn Fynydd. The proposed site of development occupies an area of agricultural land located approximately 40 metres to the west of the existing agricultural complex. The site is bound by agricultural land to the north and west. Located to the south is the River Arran.

Consent is sought in full for the erection of an agricultural building to house 32,000 hens, provision of effluent tank, erection of four feed silos and associated works. The proposed building will operate as a free range poultry unit for egg production. The hens will be brought to site at 16 weeks old and remain until they are 72 weeks. A 28 day cleaning period will follow prior to the next flock arriving at Great Cantal Farm.

The proposed poultry building measures approximately 138 metres in length by 20 metres in width, the ridge and eaves height measure 9 metres (excluding vents) and 6 metres respectively. The proposed feed silos will be located to the south of the building and measure approximately 7.6 metres above ground level. The proposed building will be clad in sheeted steel (Juniper Green).

Access to the application site will be facilitated via the C1081 whilst parking and turning provision will be provided within the application site. Highway improvements comprising of the relocation of approximately 70 metres length of hedgerow are proposed at the junction of the C1081 and B4356 (easterly direction).

Consultee Response

Llanbister Community Council

No Community Council comments received at the time of writing this report.

Highway Authority

Correspondence received 26th January 2016 –

The County Council as Highway Authority for the County Class III Highway, C1081 wish the following recommendations/observations be applied.

The following conditions should be included on any permission granted;

Prior to any works being commenced on the development site the visibility improvement at the junction of the C1081 and B4356 shall be fully completed to provide clear visibility from a point 1.05 metres above ground level at the centre of the access and 2.4 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway, to points 0.60 metres above ground level at the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 70 metres distant in each direction measured from the centre of the access along the edge of the adjoining carriageway. Nothing shall be planted, erected or allowed to grow on the area(s) of land so formed that would obstruct the visibility and the visibilty shall be maintained free from obstruction for as long as the development hereby permitted remains in existence.

Prior to any works being commenced on the development site the applicant shall construct 2 passing bays in locations to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The passing bays shall be constructed up to an adoptable standard prior to any works being commenced on the development site.

Correspondence received 24th August 2016 –

I refer to the amended plans relating to the above site and have no further comments to make.

Correspondence received 14th September 2016 –

The application of appropriate access visibility standards is determined by the known or estimated speeds of traffic travelling along the major link, in this case the B4356. Known as stopping sight distance, it is defined as the minimum distance that drivers need to see ahead of themselves in order to stop if confronted by a hazard. Speeds of traffic travelling along the major link are influenced by the available forward visibility afforded them (alignment of the road), which differs considerably along a route, so it is common for varying standards to applied along a stretch of the same highway.

The suggested access visibility standards conditioned on application P/2016/0766 are 2.4metres x120 metres in both directions, as the alignment of the carriageway at that particular location is relatively straight.

In this particular instance (P/2016/0043) access visibility of 120metres has again been conditioned in a westerly direction, due to the relatively straight alignment of the road, but has been adjusted to 70m in an easterly direction, to take into account the more restricted alignment of the carriageway and hence the lower speeds expected from that direction. Whilst 70 metres may appear to be a reduced standard, it is in fact the correct standard for the projected speed of traffic in that direction and represents a significant improvement over the current levels of visibility available at the access in that direction.

It is also important to appreciate that application P/2016/0043 is served from an existing access; hence the significant access visibility improvement secured at the applicants’ expense, will benefit safety for all existing road users that routinely use the access and or travel this length of highway.

Correspondence received 17th October 2016 –

I refer to the amended plans relating to the above site and have no further comments to make.

Wales and West Utilities

According to our main records Wales and West Utilities has no apparatus in the area of your enquiry. However gas pipes owned by other GT’s and also privately owned may be present in this area. Information with regard to such pipes should be obtained from the owners.

Environmental Health

Noise impact assessment

I have the following comments to make regarding the noise assessment:

A background noise survey was undertaken to establish the existing noise environment at the site of the nearest noise-sensitive receptors. However, the chosen monitoring location was in close proximity to a stream which in late November 2015 was obviously flowing very quickly which has inflated the background noise significantly. The report states that the noise levels (LA9015min) did not drop below 56dB during the daytime and 55dB at night during the time of the survey. I visited the site yesterday (21st September 2016), at a time when the weather has been mostly dry for a number of days, and recorded noise levels in the garden of Great Cantal Farmhouse of 42dB and in the garden of Great Cantal Mill of 36dB. My measurements were taken just before midday, so it can be reasonably assumed that lower levels than this should be expected at night time. Therefore I have to disagree with the report that the results provided amount to a ‘representative’ sample. A difference of up to 20dB (perceived as being 4-times louder) amounts to a gross over-estimation of the existing background noise level.

In addition to the difference in results due to the stream level, I also disagree that the chosen location for the background survey constitutes a ‘representative’ location. The selected location, as well as being further away from the proposed development site, was also situated in close proximity to a part of the stream where there are a number of waterfalls which obviously has the effect of increasing the level of noise. A little further downstream, outside the front of the properties (Great Cantal Farmhouse and Great Cantal Mill), the stream flattens out and the sound of trickling water in this location is much reduced when compared to the crashing water a little further upstream. The chosen monitoring location should have reflected this difference in order to attempt to establish a representative background noise level.

The subsequent noise prediction modelling carried out in the report is therefore invalid because all of the impact assessments have been based on a comparison with erroneous background noise levels.

Also, in case the applicant/consultant intends to re-run the modelling, I would like to comment that the distances used in the sound propagation calculations over-estimate the actual separation distances between the development and the nearest neighbouring properties. This is because the report uses the distance to the centre of the development, whereas it is good practice to measure to the closest point of the development. Therefore the quoted distances of 180m to Great Cantal Farmhouse and 190m to Great Cantal Mill should have been 110m and 120m respectively.

I would also question the extent of the acoustic screening effect that has been estimated in the report. The screening effect of intervening buildings has been estimated as providing a 10dB noise reduction at Great Cantal Farmhouse, and a partial screening effect has been estimated for Great Cantal Mill. I disagree with this estimation as I am not of the opinion that the intervening buildings provide the complete line-of-sight barrier that this effect assumes, and I would request the applicant/consultant to justify their assumptions.

I would also note it is stated in the report that the noise from the roof fans is considered not to be tonal (and therefore not subject to a tonal noise penalty in the noise assessment), however no information is provided to justify this statement.

Odour impact assessment

I am satisfied that the odour impact assessment demonstrates there will be no predicted effect on amenity at nearby residential properties caused by odour from the farm buildings.

Manure management

The supporting documentation states that manure will be removed from the sheds twice a week onto sheeted trailers prior to removal off-site for spreading. In reality there are a number of potential scenarios whereby it may not be possible to spread the manure immediately on to the land (waterlogging, frozen ground etc.), which may lead to manure being stored at the application site for considerable periods of time. On-site manure storage is a potential source of odour and fly problems, so requires careful management. I would recommend that the applicant provides further information with regard to the on-site manure storage provision (including location), which could then be incorporated into a planning suitable condition.

In summary, due to a lack of adequate information with which to properly assess the potential noise and odour impact of the proposed development, I must object to the application in its current form.

Correspondence received 10th October 2016 –

Having received an updated noise impact assessment I can respond as follows:

Plant (fan) noise

A new background noise survey has been undertaken at an agreed monitoring location. It has been demonstrated that the impact of plant noise from the development should be well below the existing background noise levels at the nearest noise sensitive receptors.

HGV/delivery noise

The report predicts that the noise from feed deliveries will have a significant impact. Chapter 8 of the report lists a number of recommended mitigation options for the developer to consider. I would be satisfied that the impact would not be unreasonable if the hours of delivery were restricted by condition as follows:

“The loading and unloading of service and delivery vehicles together with their arrival and departure from the site shall only take place within the hours of 0800 to 1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 to 1300 hours on Saturdays and not at any time on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays (this condition excludes bird movements only).”

Correspondence received 27th October 2016 –

In order to ensure that the manure is dealt with as proposed, for the protection of amenity against odour and other nuisances, I would recommend the following planning condition:

No manure from the development shall be stored on the farm. If it is not possible for manure to be immediately transported off the farm, it shall be held within sheeted trailers for a maximum period of up to five days.

Built Heritage Officer

Thank you for consulting me on the above application.

I note the listed building Great Cantal Farmhouse (Cadw ID 9366)

I am mindful of the advise in Sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation areas) Act 1990, and paragraph 11 of Welsh Office Circular 61/96 which states “Sections 16 and 66 of the Act require authorities considering applications for planning permission or listed building consent for works which affect a listed building to have special regard to certain matters, including the desirability of preserving the setting of the building. The setting is often an essential part of a building's character especially if a park, garden or grounds have been laid out to complement its design or function. Also, the economic viability as well as the character of historic buildings may suffer and they can be robbed of much of their interest and of the contribution they make to townscape or the countryside if they become isolated from their surroundings, e.g. by new traffic routes, car parks, or other development.”

However, I would also refer to more recent guidance in paragraph 6.5.9 of Planning Policy Wales 8th edition 2016 which states, “Where a development proposal affects a listed building or its setting, the primary material consideration is the statutory requirement to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building, or its setting, or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.”

I would also draw your attention to the recent document from Cadw document “Conservation Principles” which has recently been adopted.

Paragraph .5.4 states when considering change, public authorities will give due importance of the heritage values of a site when considering the sustainability of proposals submitted to them.

The document continues with the following advice on page 15.

“Every reasonable effort should be made to eliminate or minimize adverse impacts on historic assets. Ultimately, however, it may be necessary to balance the benefit of the proposed change against the harm to the asset. If so, the weight given to heritage values should be proportionate to the importance of the assets and the impact of the change upon them. The historic environment is constantly changing, but each significant part of it represents a finite resource. If it is not sustained, its heritage values will be eroded or lost. In addition, its potential to give distinctiveness, meaning and quality to the places in which people live, and provide people with a sense of continuity and a source of identity will be diminished. The historic environment is a social and economic asset and a cultural resource for learning and enjoyment”.

“Conservation principles” establishes Values which should be attributed to heritage assets including;

 Evidential Value,  Historical Value,  Aesthetic Value,  Communal value.

Conservation Principles identifies principles that have to be addressed when considering the above values.

Evidential Value

Great Cantal Farmhouse is a grade ll listed building (Cadw ID 9366) included on the statutory list on 16th September 1991

Historical Value,

Great Cantal is a late medieval cruck framed hall house, which was converted to a storeyed house in the C17th, and enlarged in the C18th. The building is included on the statutory list as a multi-period farmhouse retaining vernacular character with good interior detail.

Aesthetic Value

The aesthetic value of the site is that of the countryside and farmland that contributes towards the setting of the listed building. It is noted that there will still be a field between the listed building and the development, and that the character of the immediate area is that of a linear development along the historic road.

Communal Value

The third principle contained within Conservation Principles is that heritage assets are a shared resource, valued by people as part of their cultural and natural heritage, and gives distinctiveness, meaning and quality to the places where we live providing a sense of continuity and a source of identity.

It is noted that Great Cantal farmhouse and attached barnis included on the statutory list of buildings of historic and architectural interest, and the value placed on the setting of listed buildings in terms of national legislation and guidance.

Paragraph 5.4 of Conservation Principles states when considering change, public authorities will give due importance of the heritage values of a site when considering the sustainability of proposals submitted to them.

The document continues with the following advice on page 15.

Analysis of the site

The location of Great Cantal is interesting, sited in a small valley of the River Aran, which presumably served the mill at Great Cantal. This small valley has produced a farmstead that is not readily visible from outside the site including the B4356.

The earlier barns to the farmstead have been replaced by a large range of modern agricultural buildings sited to the west and south west of the listed farmhouse, and between the farmhouse and the proposed poultry unit. I note that the proposed poultry unit is very long and of a different footprint in shape and scale than the neighbouring modern farm buildings.

I note that there are public footpaths that litter the hillside presumably historically serving the farms on the hillsides. Whilst it is possible that there may be some locations on the hillside where the proposed poultry unit and the listed farmhouse could be seen together, I am aware of the large existing farm ranges, and as such I would not consider that the proposed poultry unit would have an adverse impact on the setting of Great Cantal Farmhouse and attached barn.

I note the proposed tree planting and would welcome additional appropriate planting to aid the assimilation of the building into the farmholding, and would request that appropriate conditions in this regard be imposed.

Whilst the requirement for the proposed alterations to the highway are understood, there is the potential for the visibility splays to look raw, and I would request that a condition be imposed to secure the replacement hedge planting at the earliest opportunity.

Land Drainage

No comments received at the time of writing this report.

County Ecologist

Correspondence received 12th February 2016 –

Correspondence received 6th September 2016 -

Correspondence received 8th November 2016

Correspondence received 8th November 2016 –

The HRA can be completed on the understanding that the MMP and construction phase pollution control plan are approved prior to the commencement of works.

Natural Resources Wales

Correspondence received 24th February 2016 –

Thank you for consulting Natural Resources Wales (NRW) about the above application.

Natural Resources Wales brings together the work of the Countryside Council for Wales, Environment Agency Wales and Forestry Commission Wales, as well as some functions of Welsh Government. Our purpose is to ensure that the natural resources of Wales are sustainably maintained, used and enhanced, now and in the future.

NRW continue to object to this planning application until information can be presented which demonstrates that the proposed development will not have a significant adverse impact on flood risk protected sites (see previous response to P/2015/0935).

NRW objects to the proposal as the submission fails to demonstrate that all parties are aware of the flood risks of the development or demonstrates that practicable and appropriate controls can be incorporated into any planning permission to manage the flood consequences.

NRW also objects to the issue of consent for this proposal before completion of satisfactory assessment under the Conservation of Habitats & Species Regulations 2010 (as amended). Further details regarding this requirement is provided below.

Flood risk

NRW’s response to P/2015/0935 (ref CAS-11623-J6Q0 dated 18th November 2015) explained in detail, what level of flood risk assessment would help inform the Planning Authority.

As part of the resubmission, an annotated plan (4528/1B) has simply aligned the DAM C2 outline onto the proposed layout.

Section 7.3 of the amended Design & Access Statement, dated January 2015 (assume this should be January 2016) states;

‘The application site lies adjacent to a C2 flood zone and falls towards the watercourse and no hens will be allowed access to the south of the building. A drainage/surface ditch will be provided the full length of the poultry unit to catch any run off water from the range area and surround. The ditch will be lined with a geotextile membrane and formed with clean stone below to assist in percolation the invert level of the ditch, building and surroundings will be set above the levels of the adjacent C2 flood zone.

Surface water from the roof of the building will be extended via drains to soakaways located to the west and east of the building away from any conflict with the range area and mixing of septic water run off.’

There appears to be no further supporting information to address the points raised in our letter.

Based on this resubmission we can only advise that betterment has been provided in terms of the built development being moved slightly to the east, outside of the indicative C2 extent but no detailed analysis has been provided to corroborate the inference that all development will now be free from flooding.

The following comments in bold below relate to whether points raised (italic text) in our previous response letter have been adequately addressed:

‘The south western corner of the proposed poultry unit lies within Zone C2 of the Development Advice Map (DAM) contained in TAN15: Development and Flood Risk. Our flood map information which is updated on a quarterly basis, confirms that this part of the site is location within 1% (1 in 100) and 0.1% (1 in 1000 year) annual probability fluvial flood outlines of the River Aran, a designated non-main river.

TAN15 requires your Authority to justify the location of development within Zone C2 of the DAM contained in TAN15. We refer you to section 6 of TAN15. At its nearest point, the proposed poultry unit is to be located approximately 25 metres from the River Aran.’

It is acknowledged that the proposed unit has been relocated further east as part of the resubmission. It is not clear by how much but the inference is, on inspection of lidar levels that the proposed will now be at a greater elevation than the previous submission.

‘Because of the attendant risk to the water environment, we refer the Planning Authority and the applicant to section 7.8 of TAN15.

The Flood Map in this area consists of generalised JFLOW data. We are satisfied that the JFLOW outputs are representative without taking into account more detailed factors including channel capacity, floodplain roughness, updated hydrology and influential structures. The JFLOW Flood Map should be used as a trigger for further work.’

It is therefore too simplistic to just translate the C2 outline onto a plan intended for detailed design. However, with reference to the previous bullet point above, by default, the relocated unit will be at a slightly higher elevation.

‘The map is accurate for its intended purpose, that being National Flood Mapping. However, for a detailed project, the assumptions of the JFLOW data need to be accounted for by information including updated hydrology estimates and detailed modelling may be required to understand the level of flood risk posed to the site.

Our advice at this time is that on the basis of the JFLOW Flood Map only, the applicant needs to demonstrate the consequences of flooding can be managed over the lifetime of the development.

The proposed development has the potential to store pollutants (manure) which, if mobilised, have the potential to cause detriment to water quality. Therefore the proposal must demonstrate that flood water can be prevented from entering the building and ditch.’

A statement saying that ditch, building and surroundings will be set above the C2 zone, has not been substantiated other than relocating the proposed to outside the indicative C2 outline. This, however, complies with the letter of TAN15.

‘We therefore advise that as a minimum a Flood Consequence Assessment (FCA) should be submitted in support of the application, prior to the determination of the application to ensure that all parties are aware of the risks of the development, and ensure that if practicable, appropriate controls can be incorporated in a planning permission to manage the consequences.’

No FCA has been submitted.

‘The criteria for the FCA, which should normally be undertaken by a suitably qualified person carrying an appropriate professional indemnity, are given in Section 7 and Appendix 1 of TAN15. The FCA should be appropriate to the scale and nature of the development. Consultation with the Lead Local Flood Authority is advised to source evidence of any localised flooding or drainage issues.’

No evidence of consultation.

‘Evidence of historic flood events/high flows are submitted. Ideally these should be photographic or annotated plan indicating levels to which river levels/flood waters have reached, particularly in relation to the proposed site and nearby controls, such as farm building/ bridges etc.’

No evidence submitted.

‘Inspection of ground lidar data indicates that any out of bank flow would be towards the proposed site. Our comments are based on desk top analysis only and so any further supporting evidence that the proposed, including landscaping and sediment ditch, is safe from theoretical flood risk should be submitted.’

No further supporting evidence provided.

‘To summarise, we object to the proposal as the submission fails to demonstrate that all parties are aware of the risks of the development or ensures that practicable and appropriate controls can be incorporated into any planning permission to manage the consequences.’

Betterment has been provided when compared to the previous submission and built development now appears to be nominally outside the theoretical C2 extent but no further information has been provided to corroborate this.

Protected Sites

In NRW’s response to P/2015/0935, NRW requested that Powys County Council (PCC) undertake a HRA assessment for the proposed development in relation to the River Wye SAC, the main concerns outlined in our response to P/2015/0935 related to surface water run off during construction and nutrient rich run off during operation.

It is not clear from the additional information submitted in support of this application that this has been done. Please can PCC confirm that this has been undertaken and also forward a copy of the assessment to NRW for information.

The applicant has submitted an ecological report with the current application, produced by Star Ecology and dated 30th November 2015. It appears that this report is very similar to the one submitted in support of an application made for a single turbine at Great Cantel in 2015 (see P/2015/0529). The contents of this report do not appear to address the issues in relation to the current objections to the proposed poultry unit.

To conclude, NRW would continue to object to issue of consent for this proposal unless additional information can be submitted to show that it would not have a significant adverse impact on any flood risk and European protected sites.

Please do not hesitate to contact us if you require further information or clarification on any of the above.

Correspondence received 5th May 2016 -

Thank you for consulting Natural Resources Wales (NRW) about the above application.

NRW continue to object to this planning application until the completion of a satisfactory assessment under the Conservation of Habitats & Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) is undertaken. Details in relation to this issue were provided in our response dated 23/2/16 (CAS-14698-S2M3).

Flood risk

NRW initially objected to the proposal as the submission failed to demonstrate that all parties were aware of the flood risks of the development or demonstrated that practicable and appropriate controls could be incorporated into any planning permission to manage the flood consequences.

However following the submission of additional information in relation to flood risk NRW is able to advise that relative to the scale and nature of the proposed and perceived flood risk, that the recommended mitigation of the raised slab level of 150mm is considered to be proportionate. The previously amended layout, lidar interrogation and site photos have helped inform this advice.

All vulnerable aspects of the development, including manure traps should be elevated to that level to avoid diffuse pollution. Ranging should be limited to land to the north as proposed. It is noted that landscaping/screening could have the added benefit of helping to intercept any overland run-off.

Suitability of the soakaways and any proposed discharge to the adjacent watercourse should be agreed with the Lead Local Flood Authority (Powys County Council).

Protected Sites

In NRW’s response to P/2015/0935 and also in our letter dated the 23/2/16 (response to P/2016/0043), NRW requested that Powys County Council (PCC) undertake a HRA assessment for the proposed development in relation to the River Wye SAC, the main concerns outlined in our response to P/2015/0935 related to surface water run off during construction and nutrient rich run off during operation.

It is still not clear if this has been done. Please can PCC confirm that this has been undertaken and also forward a copy of the assessment to NRW for information.

Please do not hesitate to contact us if you require further information or clarification on any of the above.

Correspondence received 19th September 2016 –

Thank you for consulting Natural Resources Wales (NRW) about the above application.

In our previous correspondence (4/5/16) NRW continued to object to this planning application until the completion of a satisfactory assessment under the Conservation of Habitats & Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) is undertaken. Details in relation to this issue were provided in our response dated 23/2/16 (CAS-14698-S2M3). The applicant has submitted an ES which concludes that the scheme will not adversely affect the water quality. It is not clear if a habitat regulations assessment has been undertaken.

We recommend that you should only grant planning permission for the scheme if it can meet the following requirement, to address significant concerns that we have identified previously. Provided this requirement is met, we would not object to the scheme.

Requirement

Requirement 1- Confirm that a Habitat Regulation Assessment has been undertaken and forward a copy to NRW for our information.

Protected Sites

In NRW’s response to P/2015/0935 (4/5/16) and also in our letter dated the 23/2/16 (response to P/2016/0043), NRW requested that Powys County Council (PCC) undertake a HRA assessment for the proposed development in relation to the River Wye SAC. NRW’s main concerns outlined in our response to P/2015/0935 related to surface water run off during construction and nutrient rich run off during operation.

The ES explains that the scheme will be cleaned out fully every 14 months and that the tiered system will be cleaned and emptied by a conveyor belt to a sheeted lorry twice a week. This should reduce the risk of being any surface water issues from the yard area. The applicant also explains that the shed will be drained to a sealed tank and that this water will be emptied intermittently. The supporting plan demonstrates that the tank is located to the east of the shed is 40m away from the watercourse and the location plan demonstrates that the range area will be to the north of the shed and will not be located within 10m of a watercourse/stream. It is also understood that there will be a drainage ditch which runs along the entire length of the shed to the south of the development and that this will catch any surface water run-off and sediment. It would be helpful to clarify whether the ditch is acting as a soakaway or if not where it discharges to. This additional information would help to demonstrate that the development would not cause water quality issues in the adjacent water course or affect the River Wye SAC.

It is still not clear from the additional submitted information whether a HRA of this development has been done. Please can PCC confirm that this has been undertaken and also forward a copy of the assessment to NRW for information.

Requirement 1- Confirm that a Habitat Regulation Assessment has been undertaken and forward a copy to NRW for our information.

To conclude, NRW recommend that you should only grant planning permission for the scheme if it can meet the requirement outlined above, to address significant concerns that we have identified previously. Provided this requirement is met, we would not object to the scheme.

Please do not hesitate to contact us if you require further information or clarification on any of the above.

Representations

At the time of writing this report, three letters of objection have been received by Development Management. The concerns expressed therein can be summarised as follows;

. Noise – proposed hours of operation not in keeping with conditions imposed on similar developments consented by the Local Planning Authority; . Validity of Noise Impact Assessment; . Ecological Assessment – dubious quality; . Highway Safety – Visibility requirements differ from conditions imposed on similar developments consented by the Local Planning Authority; . Flood Risk – potential impact on listed building; . Water supply – no explanation regarding source of water supply; . Inaccuracies relating to distances between proposed development and sensitive properties. . Insufficient time to review amended and submitted information

Planning History

P/2014/0271 – Full: Erection of a 100kw wind turbine measuring 39.65 metres to blade tip and 29.33 metres to hub at Great Cantal, Llanbister Rd, Llandrindod Wells, LD1 6UD. Application withdrawn.

P/2015/0529 - Full: Construction os a single 85kw wind turbine with hub height of 24.8m and overall tip height of 36.6m and all associated works Great Cantal, Llanbister Rd, Llandrindod Wells, LD1 6UD. Consented Granted.

P/2015/0935 - Full: Erection of agricultural building to house 32,000 hens for free range egg laying unit and associated works at Great Cantal, Llanbister Rd, Llandrindod Wells, LD1 6UD. Application withdrawn.

Principal Planning Constraints

- Flood Zone - Close Proximity to Grade II Listed Building - Close proximity to River Arran, River Ithon SSSI and River Wye SAC

Principal Planning Policies

National Planning Policy

- Planning Policy Wales (8th Edition, 2016)

- Technical Advice Note 5 – Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) - Technical Advice Note 6 – Planning for Sustainable Rural Communities (2010) - Technical Advice Note 11 – Noise (1997) - Technical Advice Note 12 – Design (2016) - Technical Advice Note 13 – Tourism (1997) - Technical Advice Note 15 – Development and Flood Risk (2004) - Technical Advice Note 16 – Sport, Recreation and Open Space (2009) - Technical Advice Note 18 – Transport (2007) - Technical Advice Note 23 – Economic Development (2014)

- Welsh Office Circular 11/99 – Environmental Impact Assessment - Welsh Office Circular 61/96 -– Planning and the Historic Environment

- Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006)

Local Planning Policy

- Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010)

SP3 – Natural, Historic and Built Heritage SP4 – Economic and Employment Developments GP1 – Development Control GP3 – Design and Energy Conservation GP4 – Highway and Parking Requirements ENV1 – Agricultural Land ENV2 – Safeguarding the Landscape ENV3 – Safeguarding Biodiversity and Natural Habitats ENV4 – Internationally Important Sites ENV5 – Nationally Important Sites ENV6 – Sites of Regional and Local Importance ENV7 – Protected Species EC1 – Business, Industrial and Commercial Developments EC7 – Farm/Forestry Diversification for Employment purposes in the Open Countryside EC9 – Agricultural Development EC10 – Intensive Livestock Units RL6 - Rights of Way and Access to the Countryside TR2 – Tourist Attractions and Development Areas DC3 – External Lighting DC9 – Protection of Water Resources DC13 – Surface Water Drainage DC14 – Development and Flood Risk

RDG=Powys Residential Design Guide NAW=National Assembly for Wales TAN= Technical Advice Note UDP=Powys Unitary Development Plan, MIPPS=Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement

Officer Appraisal

Introduction

Members are advised to consider this application in accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, which requires that, if regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 2016

Part 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2016 details development proposals and associated thresholds defining where a development proposal constitutes EIA development. These are contained in Schedule 1 and 2 of the Regulations. Schedule 1 of the regulations lists those developments where EIA is mandatory and Schedule 2 where the development must be screened to determine if it is EIA development.

Schedule 1 of the Regulations states that the threshold for the “intensive rearing of poultry is 85,000 places for broilers or 60,000 for hens”. Whilst an Environmental Impact Assessment is not a mandatory requirement for the proposed development, the floor area of the proposed building exceeds the applicable threshold of 500 square metres and therefore for the purposes of the regulations is Schedule 2 development requiring a screening opinion to be issued by the Local Planning Authority.

Members are advised that the proposed poultry development was assessed against the selection criteria contained within Schedule 3 of the Regulations, with the opinion being that the development was EIA development by virtue of its scale, location specifically its proximity to designated watercourses including the River Wye SAC.

On the basis of the above, the planning application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement.

Article 3 (3) of The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Wales) Regulations 2016, states:

“The relevant planning authority or the Welsh Minister or an inspector must not grant planning permission or subsequent consent pursuant to an application to which this regulation applies unless they have taken the environmental information into consideration, and they must state in their decision that they have done so”.

Principal of Development

Policies EC1, EC7, EC9 and EC10 accept the principle of appropriate agricultural development within the open countryside. In light of the above, Officers are satisfied that the principle of the proposed development at this location is generally supported by planning policy.

Farm Diversification

Great Cantal is an extensive mixed farm enterprise (cattle and sheep) extending to 270 acres. The applicants are now considering diversifying into egg production in order to supplement the current farm income and enhance future sustainability.

Planning policy acknowledges that rural enterprises play a vital role in promoting healthy economic activity within rural areas. Planning Policy Wales (2016) and Technical Advice Note 23 (2014) emphasises the need to support diversification and sustainability in such areas, recognising that new businesses are key to this objective and essential to sustain rural communities therefore encouraging Local Authorities to facilitate appropriate rural development.

Notwithstanding the policy presumption in favour of appropriate rural development, support needs to be balanced against other material considerations including landscape and visual impact, highway safety implications, ecology together with the potential impact on local amenity. Consideration of such matters is duly given below.

Landscape and Visual Impact

Guidance within the Powys Unitary Development Plan indicates that development proposals will only be permitted where they would not have an unacceptable impact on the environment and would be sited and designed to be sympathetic to the character and appearance of its surroundings.

The application site is located within the Rolling Hills, Central Southeast aspect area which is characterised as generally peaceful, settled farmland with pleasant views comprising of rolling hills and valleys with strong pastoral field patterns, wooded watercourses and scattered trees and small woodlands. Whilst LANDMAP recognises the scenic value of the landscape and high degree of coherence, there is only a moderate degree of rarity and as such, it overall visual and sensory value is defined as moderate.

The proposed building will be located approximately 40 metres to the west of the existing agricultural complex. The application site comprises of an area of agricultural land, the topography of which is relatively flat. Existing site boundaries comprise of mature trees and hedgerows to the north, west and south. The application is accompanied by a landscaping scheme which details the retention of existing hedgerows together with the implementation of additional landscaping along the southern site boundary to enhance and supplement the established boundaries.

The Powys Unitary Development Plan through policy EC9 seeks to ensure that the harm from new agricultural buildings is minimised through sensitive design and siting. Guidance within EC9 suggests that wherever possible, new buildings should be grouped with existing buildings and utilise materials which are sympathetic to the site’s surroundings. Whilst Officers acknowledge that the proposed poultry development represents a substantial addition to the rural landscape, given the proposed grouping, it is considered that the proposed unit would be viewed as integral to the existing farm complex within the wider landscape. Furthermore, given the limited visibility of the application site together with existing and proposed landscaping, it is considered by Officers that the proposal is capable of being accommodated without causing unacceptable harm to existing character and appearance.

In light of the above observations and notwithstanding the scale of the proposed development, given the proposed grouping together with existing and proposed landscaping, it is considered that the proposed development is broadly in accordance with planning policy. Should Members be minded to grant planning permission it is recommended that any consent is subject to appropriate conditions restricting materials and securing the implementation and retention of existing and proposed landscaping. Subject to the above, Officers consider that the visual and landscape impact associated with the proposed poultry development can be appropriately managed thereby safeguard the Powys landscape in accordance with policies SP3, ENV2, EC1, EC9 and EC10 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan.

Transport Impacts

Policy GP4 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan indicates that development proposals will only be permitted where appropriate highway provision is incorporated in terms of a safe access, adequate visibility, turning and parking.

Access to the application site will be provided via the existing junction of the B4356 and C1081, the visibility of which is to be improved by the translocation of approximately 70 metres of hedgerow in an easterly direction (towards Llangunllo). Two passing bays will also be provided along the C1081. Parking and turning provision for associated vehicles will be provided within the application site boundary.

Following consultation with the Highway Authority, a response has been received which confirms that Highway Officers are satisfied that adequate highway provision can be secured subject to the imposition of suitable conditions.

In light of the above and notwithstanding the third party concerns expressed, Officers consider the proposed development to be in accordance with planning policy, particularly policies GP4 of the Powys UDP, Technical Advice Note 18 and Planning Policy Wales.

Biodiversity and Ecology

SSSI’s and River Wye SAC

Policies ENV4, ENV5 and ENV6 indicates that development proposals should preserve and enhance biodiversity and features of ecological interest. Specific guidance within UDP policy ENV4 confirms that development proposals should not significantly affect the achievement of the conservation objectives for which a SAC is designated either individually or in combination with other proposals. In addition to the above, policy ENV5 confirms that there will be a presumption against proposals for development likely to damage either directly or indirectly, the nature conservation interest of national nature reserves or sites of special scientific interest.

The proposed site of development is located within approximately 40 metres of the River Aran which forms part of the River Ithon Site of Special Scientific Interested (SSSI) and River Wye Special Area of Conservation (SAC). It is understood that this site has been designated due to the presence of various water-crowfoot species and associated invertebrate, fish and otter presence. It is considered that the key impacts associated with the proposed development include impacts to water quality through surface water run-off and manure spreading together with possible disturbance to key features associated with the SAC during construction and operation of the site.

According to the findings of the Ammonia Modelling Report, no impacts upon the features of this site are expected as a result of ammonia levels or nitrogen and acid deposition rate, either alone or in combination with other similar installations. Measures to prevent surface water pollution of the River Arran are detailed within the submission and include the implementation of a 3 metre wide drainage/sediment ditch which will span the full length of the building (south) to intercept potentially polluted surface water entering the River, installation of an effluent tank and appropriate management of manure.

Given the noted proximity and potential impacts, the County Ecologist has undertaken a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) in order to determine the ‘Likely Significant Effects’ on the SAC in accordance with the requirements of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulation. The Ecologist has concluded in their HRA that the proposed development would not have a likely significant effect on the River Wye SAC.

In light of the above and subject to the recommendations, it is considered that the proposed development is in accordance with policies ENV4, ENV 5 and ENV 6 of the Powys UDP, Technical Advice Note 5 and Planning Policy Wales.

Protected Species

Policy ENV7 of the Powys UDP, TAN5 and PPW seek to safeguard protected species and their habitats.

An Ecological Survey prepared by Star Ecology dated November 2015 supports the planning application. The report notes that there are no records of protected flora or fauna within the proposed development site but that there are records of various protected species within 2km of the application site. Notwithstanding the above, as confirmed by the County Ecologist, it is not considered that the proposed development would negatively affect the conservation status of protected fauna or flora recorded within the vicinity subject to the recommended mitigation measures being secured by condition.

In light of the above and subject to the recommendations, it is considered that the proposed development is in accordance with policies SP3, ENV3 and ENV7 of the Powys UDP, Technical Advice Note 5 and Planning Policy Wales.

Built Heritage Impact – Listed Building

Planning Policy Wales states that where a development proposal affects a listed building or its setting, the primary material consideration is the statutory requirement to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building, or its setting, or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.

Great Cantal Farmhouse is grade II listed farmhouse located within approximately 120 metres of the proposed poultry development. As noted within the Built Heritage Officers’ response, the earlier barns to the farmstead have been replaced by a large range of modern agricultural building sited to the south west of the listed farmhouse which separate the historic building and application site.

Whilst acknowledging the scale of the proposed poultry unit, given the modern agricultural complex and proposed landscaping, the Built Heritage Officer indicates that the proposed development would not have an adverse impact on the setting of Great Cantal Farmhouse and attached barn. In light of the comments received, Officers consider that the proposed development is in accordance with planning policy, particularly policies SP3 and ENV14 of the Powys UDP, Welsh Officer Circular 61/96 and Planning Policy Wales.

Residential Amenity

Intensive livestock units have the potential to impact on the living conditions of residents living nearby through a number of factors, in particular emissions of noise and odour, concerns relating to which have been expressed within third party representations received.

Members are advised that the application is supported by an Environmental Statement which contains chapters assessing the significant likely impacts on amenity and the living conditions of neighbouring properties. Consideration of the aforementioned impacts is duly given below;

Noise

UDP policy GP1 states that development proposals will only be permitted where the amenities enjoyed by the occupants of nearby or proposed properties shall not be unacceptably affected by levels of noise. Officers acknowledge that intensive livestock units have potential to generate noise impact from plant/equipment (roof mounted extractor fans) and general operational activities.

The application is accompanied by a Noise Impact Assessment. Members are advised that the closest non-associated residential property (Great Cantal Farmhouse) is located approximately 120 metres to the south west of the proposed poultry unit.

Following consultation, Members are advised that the validity of the Noise Impact Assessment had been challenged by the Councils’ Environmental Health Officer. Given the location of the monitoring equipment, adjacent to a stream and survey timing (November 2015), it is considered that the background noise levels are significantly inflated. The report stated that the noise levels (LA9015min) did not drop below 56dB during the daytime and 55dB at night during the time of the survey however having visited the site, it is understood that the Environmental Health Officer recorded noise levels of 42dB at midday whilst expected night time levels are assumed to be even lower. On this basis, the Environmental Health Officer indicated that a difference of up to 20dB (perceived as being 4-times louder) amounts to a gross over-estimation of the existing background noise level thus affecting the results of the assessment.

In addition to the above, Environmental Health disagreed with the chosen location of the background survey constitutes a ‘representative’ location. It is noted that the selected location, as well as being further away from the proposed development site, was also situated in close proximity to a part of the stream where there are a number of waterfalls which obviously has the effect of increasing the level of noise. As observed by Environmental Health on site, a little further downstream, outside the front of the properties (Great Cantal Farmhouse and Great Cantal Mill), the stream flattens out and the sound of trickling water in this location is much reduced when compared to the crashing water a little further upstream. In light of the above, it is advised that the chosen monitoring location should have reflected this difference in order to attempt to establish a representative background noise level.

In light of the above an amended noise assessment was submitted. Following consultation with Environmental Health it was confirmed that the new noise survey was undertaken at an agreed locations and it had been demonstrated that the impact of plant noise from the proposed development should be well below the existing background noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptors. The report did however predict that noise from feed deliveries could have a significant impact. As such Environmental Health have requested that a condition restricting the hours of delivery is attached to any consent.

On the basis of the comments received, Officers consider that sufficient information has now been submitted to demonstrate that the proposed poultry development will not have an unacceptable adverse impact on the amenities enjoyed by occupants of neighbouring properties by reasons of noise. As such, the proposed development is considered to fundamentally comply with UDP policies GP1, EC1 and EC10, Technical Advice Note 11 and Planning Policy Wales.

Odour

In terms of odour, odour levels can be assessed using odour dispersal model based on standardised values. Odour concentrations are expressed as European odour units per cubic metre (ouE/m3). The Environment Agency (EA) has published guidance for the objective assessment of odour impacts: How to Comply with Your Permit- H4 Odour Management. It recommends the use of 98th percentile of hourly average odour concentrations modelled over a year. Appendix 3 of this document provides a benchmark of 3.0 ouE/m3 for moderately offensive odours. Moderately offensive odours are identified as including those associated with intensive livestock rearing. It is noted that the use of this threshold has been supported by Inspectors in planning appeal decisions.

The application is supported by an “Odour Dispersion Modelling Study” prepared by AS Modelling & Data, dated 26th August 2014. This assessment uses the standardised approach to odour assessment and the results of the model runs are presented in a report. The conclusion states the following: “The modelling predicts that should the development of free range egg laying chicken unit at Great Cantal proceed, at all of the residential receptors considered, odour exposure would be below the Environment Agency’s benchmark for moderately offensive odours, a 98th percentile hourly mean of 3 ouE/m3” over a one year period.

On the basis of the information submitted, it is considered unlikely that the proposed development will have an unacceptable adverse impact on the amenities enjoyed by occupants of neighbouring properties by reasons of odour. Following consultation, it is noted that no concerns have been offered by the Environmental Health Department in this respect provided a condition is attached to any consent regarding the storage of manure. Therefore, notwithstanding the concerns expressed, Development Management considers the proposal to be in accordance with planning policy, in particular UDP policy GP1.

Flood Risk

UDP policy SP14 confirms that highly vulnerable development will not be permitted in a C2 flood zone. No other development will be permitted within an area of high risk of flooding unless it can be demonstrates that the development is of strategic importance and that the consequences of any flooding would be acceptable for the development proposed and that it would not give rise to any unacceptable flooding impacts elsewhere. For such developments to be permitted, they must ensure the provision of appropriate and environmentally sympathetic flood mitigation and/or compensatory measures.

The application is accompanied by a Flood Consequence Assessment (FCA) dated April 2016 which confirms that the proposed development is located on the edge of the C2 flood zone (outside of designated area).

Following consultation, Natural Resources Wales has confirmed that the proposed mitigation including the raising of the finished slab level by 150mm and planting of additional landscaping, it is considered that the consequences and risks of flooding at this location can be managed. In light of the comments received and notwithstanding the third party concerns expressed, subject to appropriate conditions being attached to any grant of consent, Officers consider that the proposed development is in accordance with policies SP14 and DC14 of the Powys UDP, Technical Advice Note 15 and Planning Policy Wales.

RECOMMENDATION

After carefully considering the planning application, Development Management considers that the proposed poultry development is compliant with planning policy. On this basis, the recommendation is one of conditional consent.

The Environmental Information has been taken into account in reaching the above recommendation.

Conditions

1. The development to which this permission relates shall be begun no later than the expiration of five years from the date of this permission.

2. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the documents received (Design & Access Statement dated January 2015, Environmental Statement dated July 2016, Ecological Assessment dated 30th November 2015), plans received 8th January 2016 (drawing no’s 4528/1B and 4528/2A).

3. Notwithstanding the details submitted, a detailed landscaping scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. The submitted landscaping scheme shall include a scaled drawing and a written specification clearly describing the species, sizes, densities and planting numbers proposed. Drawings must include accurate details of all existing trees and hedgerows to be retained with their location, species, size and condition.

4. A landscape phasing scheme (implementation scheme) for the landscaping scheme as approved (condition 3) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. The landscaping scheme shall thereafter be fully implemented in accordance with the phasing scheme (implementation scheme) so approved.

5. The approved landscaping scheme as implemented by the landscape phasing scheme (condition 4) shall thereafter be maintained for a period of five years. Such maintenance is to include the replacement of any plant/tree/shrub/hedge that is removed, significantly damaged, diseased or dying, with plants/trees/shrubs/hedges of the same species and size within the next planting season, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

6. Prior to the commencement of building works full details of the colour of the external materials proposed in the construction of the application buildings and feed bins shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be fully implemented in accordance with the details so approved. 7. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no extensions or alterations to the unit shall be erected without the consent of the Local Planning Authority.

8. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 and the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 as amended or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification, the premises shall not be used for any purpose other than that hereby authorised. 9. All emissions to air arising from the units hereby approved shall be free from odours at levels that are likely to be offensive or cause serious detriment to the amenity of the locality outside the site boundary of the holdings, as perceived by an authorised officer of the local planning authority by olfactory means. 10. . Prior to first installation, details of all external lighting shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include location of lighting, size, projection and level of illumination. Thereafter, the external lighting shall be implemented strictly in accordance with the details so approved.

11. Prior to any works being commenced on the development site the visibility improvement at the junction of the C1081 and B4356 shall be fully completed to provide clear visibility from a point 1.05 metres above ground level at the centre of the access and 2.4 metres distant from the edge of the adjoining carriageway, to points 0.60 metres above ground level at the edge of the adjoining carriageway and 70 metres distant in each direction measured from the centre of the access along the edge of the adjoining carriageway. Nothing shall be planted, erected or allowed to grow on the area(s) of land so formed that would obstruct the visibility and the visibility shall be maintained free from obstruction for as long as the development hereby permitted remains in existence.

12. Prior to any works being commenced on the development site the applicant shall construct 2 passing bays in locations to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The passing bays shall be constructed up to an adoptable standard prior to any works being commenced on the development site.

13. The loading and unloading of service and delivery vehicles together with their arrival and departure from the site shall only take place within the hours of 0800 to 1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 to 1300 hours on Saturdays and not at any time on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays (this condition excludes bird movements only)

14. No manure from the development shall be stored on the farm. If it is not possible for manure to be immediately transported off the farm, it shall be held within sheeted trailers for a maximum period of up to five days.

15. No manure from the egg laying unit shall be spread on the holding without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

16. The storage and spreading of manure shall be undertaken in accordance with the DEFRA Code of Good Agricultural Practice for the Protection of Air, Water and Soil. 17. Vehicles used for the movement of manure shall be sheeted to prevent spillage of manure.

18. Prior to commencement of development a pollution management/mitigation scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and implemented as approved and maintained thereafter. . 19. Prior to commencement of development a Tree and Hedgerow Protection Plan in accordance with BS:5837:2012 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and implemented as approved and maintained thereafter.

20. New planted trees, hedgerows, translocated hedgerows or retained hedgerows (within the site or associated with the site boundaries, including the ranging area) shall be double fenced within a 3m buffer zone to prevent livestock grazing the hedgerows and to allow regeneration of the hedgerow ground flora.

21. Newly planted/translocated trees and hedgerows shall be watered during any prolonged dry spells within the first year (except winter) to aid establishment.

22. Any loss of 10% or more of new or translocated plants within the first year after planting shall be replaced.

23. The recommendations regarding bats, badgers, otters, hedgehogs, curlews and breeding birds identified in Section 11 of the Ecological Report by Star Ecology dated November 2015 shall be adhered to and implemented in full.

Reasons 1. Required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2. To ensure adherence to the plans stamped as approved in the interests of clarity and a satisfactory development.

3. To ensure that the application site is adequately landscaped in the interests of the amenity of the area, in accordance with policies GP1, ENV2, ENV3 and EC9 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010), Technical Advice Note 5 – Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) and Planning Policy Wales (2016).

4. To ensure that the application site is adequately landscaped in the interests of the amenity of the area, in accordance with policies GP1, ENV2, ENV3 and EC9 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010), Technical Advice Note 5 – Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) and Planning Policy Wales (2016).

5. To ensure that the application site is adequately landscaped in the interests of the amenity of the area, in accordance with policies GP1, ENV2, ENV3 and EC9 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010), Technical Advice Note 5 – Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) and Planning Policy Wales (2016).

6. To safeguard the character and appearance of the area in accordance with policy GP1 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (March 2010).

7. In order to control development which has the potential to have adversely affect the amenity of the area in contradiction to policy GP1 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (March 2010) and Planning Policy Wales (2016).

8. In order that the Local Planning Authority may control the use of the premises in the interests of the protection and preservation of the amenity of the area in accordance with policies GP1, EC1, EC9 and EC10 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010) and Planning Policy Wales (2016).

9. To protect the local amenities of the local residents from the excess of mal-odorous emissions in accordance with policies GP1, EC1 and EC10 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010) and Planning Policy Wales (2016).

10. To protect the local amenities of the local residents from the excess of illuminance in accordance with policies GP1, EC1 and EC10 of the Powys Unitary Development Plan (2010) and Planning Policy Wales (2016).

11. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies GP1 in relation to noise.

12. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies GP1 in relation to noise.

13. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies GP4 in relation to highway safety and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, July 2016) and TAN 18: Transport.

14. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies GP4 in relation to highway safety and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, July 2016) and TAN 18: Transport.

15. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies ENV3 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, July 2016) and TAN 18: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

16. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies ENV3 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, July 2016) and TAN 18: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

17. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies ENV3 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, July 2016) and TAN 18: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

18. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies ENV3 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, July 2016) and TAN 18: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

19. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies ENV3 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, July 2016) and TAN 18: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

20. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies ENV3 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, July 2016) and TAN 18: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

21. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies ENV3 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, July 2016) and TAN 18: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

22. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies ENV3 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, July 2016) and TAN 18: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

23. To comply with Powys County Council’s UDP Policies ENV3 in relation to The Natural Environment and to meet the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 8, July 2016) and TAN 18: Nature Conservation and Planning and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016.

______Case Officer: Tamsin Law / Holly-ann Hobbs- Principal Planning Officer Tel: 01597 827319 E-mail: [email protected]